1. Natty's theory about level design, EA applies it, and FH2 revamps it.
what "theory"? Levedesign is a highly practical job. I dont "theorize" in anything.
also, I didnt make totalize, Fenring did. By adapting one of the best heightmaps that DICE has done. We could never create such a perfect heightmap for tank battle, it's ingenious, it's forged to support tankbattle, while many of our realistic maps are static, and we try to make the fights support the maps.
Two very different approaches to making maps. Both can lead to great results, both can fall on their asses. It all depends on how observative you are to problems. A realistic map can fail horribly in gameplay if it sticks too much to realism, a made-up map can fail too much in bringing a "story" or "purpose" to players who expects both of that, and more.
Personally I think Totalize can provide epic moments, but the moments dont belong to any larger context, so I don't get much out of playing the map, where as in Port-en-Bessin, I do. In Ramelle I do as well, because I know what context it puts me in. Crete is the same, allthough being a very unrealistic map (unless we pretend to be 100 feet giants), it has a compelling design and story attached to it.