Here is a question: how big should the "hero" character be in relation to the screen for an average side-scrolling type game? (think Super Mario Brothers, Metroid, or Sonic The Hedgehog). I know that some of it is going to be game specific, but if you could generalize it, do you think there is a "magic ratio" or is completely dependent on the game itself? If the hero is too big on the screen, you can''t see much of the world around you. But if he/she is too small, well... they''re too small!

I actually talked about this on my own message board a long time ago:

http://cb.signaldev.com/forums/invision/index.php?act=ST&f=22&t=156&hl=&s=655f06c771794db4ff9c6e18a2bc8251

Here is what I said:

quote:

---

Hey, has anyone else noticed that in Metroid Fusion, Samus is rather tall?

I looked at the screenshots and it looks like she is about 1/5 the size of the screen. Nintendo says the res of GBA is 240x160 and I estimate Samus to be about 32 pixels tall.

But I guess you have to with a GBA. In Metroid, Samus is two tiles tall.

If I were to make Samus 1/5 the size of the screen in MC, she would be 96 pixels tall instead of 64...or 3 tiles tall instead of two.

I think after I finish MC, I am going to start work on my own side-scroller....it used to be called 51-Pegasus but I think I will change the name....

-cb

---

-cb

~ c o l ec o ~

Rock the cradle of love!
You stupid WANKER!
S i g n a l D E V .com
Metroid Classic

The NES had a vertical screen resolution of about 224, and had an average character sized between 24 and 32 pixels, which leaves it between 10% and 15% of the screen.

Now, my advice, is to not neccessarily pay attention to what the magic ratio is, but rather to estimate how much the player needs to see. For example, 33% of the screen would be nifty if it was mostly running, but wouldn''t be all that great for jumping.

And as an aside, how much do we hate it when the camera gets way too close to the characters in a 3d game? It''s difficult to see and move around. Man, do a simple culling technique and let the camera float through walls, it worked for xenogears, even if they were sprites.

There is no magic ratio.

I have seen some games where a big character is good and others where small characters are better.

But to decide the what actual size of a character in relationship with the screen should be, you will have to take into account the amount of detail you need to see, and how much things around the player are happening, you shouldn''t have much empty space in the screen.

If a game implements pixel-level collision detection a bigger character is advisable. However if the character has things going behind and in front of him making him smaller helps.

Never noticed why fighting games have big characters? besides being useless having small characters because of all the empty space, the only thing you have to notice in the screen is your character and your opponent that in most fighting games you will always be facing.

And then again scrolling games with many levels and foes have smaller characters and show more around the player? There is not real empty space there because the player has to keep looking at all places... you never know where a badguy might be lurking.

I''d say just use your best judgement. I''ve played console platform games before where you take control of a large creature or object for a small period of time -- the level can feel very cramped and claustrophobic. But at some point this may be the precise feeling you''re going for. So it depends on the game, the level, and so on.

It seems like there was one game -- can''t remember which -- that actually zoomed in and out depending on factors like your current speed and whether you''re jumping a lot. When you''re standing still, the camera is zoomed in on your character fairly close -- maybe 1/5 of the screen. When you''re running and jumping tons, its zoomed way out so you don''t run into anything.

Oh wait -- that was Grand Theft Auto II. But the concept might still apply.