How you define "non-linearity"

[Antroid]

40oz said:
...This type of gameplay forces the player to have to become familiar with the map before he can win it right away. He has to learn where the ammo and health are stored and create the quickest route to getting the weapons he needs to kill the monsters...[/B]

It's probably just me, but i really don't like this type of maps. Nonlinear maps can be fun first time too, the options just have to be balanced well enough so there are no difficulty-breaking path choices. And that can be really hard to do.
Traps that almost certainly can't be survived unless the player knows about them are relly bad in my book for the same reason: there are far too many maps out there, and i usually want to play through a map in one sitting and not have to return to it and memorize it. If i'm killed really unfairly a couple of times i just quit the game, because it feels like a waste of time.

The only maps that i like to return to and try again and again are usually really hard slaughter maps (hard for me, anyway), because i feel that only this type of gameplay justifies more than a couple of retries.

[40oz]

then just bring the shotgun/ammo a little closer to the player start, or have less monsters the player has to run past.

[The_MártonJános]

Nonlinearity can also be measured in dead ends which are containing stuff more than a simple alcove. For example:
- E2M3, the room with all STARTAN*
- E2M4, the hi-tech room with crusher
- various E2M5 places (due to being a keyless level)
- E2M6's areas, especially the ones containing light amplification visors
- several places from E2M7
- E3M2's ASHWALL caves, the ones without an association to the blue key
- E3M3's bigger part
- E3M4's entire roundabout behind the blue door
- etc.

[b0rsuk]

40oz said:

but if you've played those maps as much as I have, you know the most linear way to get the keys and to the required doors and to the exit in the most linear way possible, which kinda defeats the learning experience.

Very much true. But this is no longer true if you play a level randomly generated with Oblige. I had a lot of fun with generated levels. I quit the game when I die, and generate another level.

Randomly generated levels are interesting because you always see them for the first time. Interestingly, this makes Spectres (invisible Demons) more dangerous, especially in Vavoom which has predator-like transparency instead of translucency many source ports use. Spectres are hard to see in Vavoom.

However, in my attempts to create gameplay that is more lively, ala Doom 2 or TNT Evilution, I've found that being more unfriendly to the player as far thing placement goes can make the gameplay much more lively.

It's certainly something new. Most WADs can bore you by giving you weapons in exactly the same order official WADs do. Shotgun, (Super Shotgun), Chaingun, Rocket Launcher, Plasma Gun, BFG.

Oblige can do this to you on default settings, a lot :-). Sometimes you start near a plasma gun. You open the door and there's a sea of hell knights. You have to swim in it to collect cell packs. If you stay in the doorway, they will group at the door and block the path to ammo. You're dead.

Sometimes you start with just berserk pack or chainsaw.

This type of gameplay forces the player to have to become familiar with the map before he can win it right away. He has to learn where the ammo and health are stored and create the quickest route to getting the weapons he needs to kill the monsters, unlike what most linear maps do

True, but with some caveats. DooM is notable among FPS games because most monsters have very low lethality. Especially in open areas, they deal no damage to a skilled and aware player. There are few exceptions - the hitscan weapons and Arch Vile. So, DooM allows for more flexibility in playing because it has bad monster balance, they just aren't appropriate for a modern player unless space is limited.

3. Player should rarely be provided with anything in the starting room. Maybe a chainsaw or some bullets but nothing else. Don't reward the player for being in the starting room. It's like giving a dog treats for being bad.

It's like rewarding player for not making choices, for being lazy. I'll keep you in mind when I'll be looking for new WADs to play.

4. Ammo for weapons should be in different places than where the weapon is found. Getting to the weapon one task, but getting the ammo to use the weapon is another task which makes gameplay a little more lively, also the player has to decide whats more important, getting the ammo and then the weapon, or weapon then ammo. (nonlinearity)

I perceive this a bit differently: ammo is meaningless unless you can run out of it. When you run out of ammo, you have to make decisions. Keep using the weapon ? Switch weapon ? Run past monsters ? I used this idea in my Hexen mod. One ranged weapon has basically unlimited ammo: uses 40 per shot, and spawns 40 where it hits. But maximum ammo capacity is 200. So while ammo is technically unlimited, you can only shoot 5 times before you have to get closer to monsters. I made it that way because I wanted the Fighter class to play differently, not just stand back and keep shooting enemies.

[Mordeth]

Main objective of a mapper should be to make his level fun to play. Granted, what 'fun' exactly entails differs from one person to the next, but gameflow has a lot to do with it. Using or avoiding linearity is not a design goal, but a tool a mapper uses to give players a good gameflow. Both designs can be fun, provided you manage to avoid the pitfalls of that type of design.

A linear map has only 1 route available from start to finish, a railshooter since you're following only one track. Creating optional rooms to visit does not make a linear map suddenly non-linear. MAP01 is still linear, despite the (dead-end) green armor room. Linear maps in general take less time to make, and can be tuned to perfection. There's no risk of a player getting lost, and all battles can be set up exactly as you intended to. The downside is no replayability... your map plays out the same way everytime. There's also the risk of overtuning things, so players might get frustrated if they're being cockblocked in their progression, dying the same way over and over with no opportunity to do things a different way.

A non-linear map has no main route, but two or more alternative routes leading to a chokepoint (eg, a keyed door) before branching off again. Most 'city' type maps (like MAP16) are like that. Other types are 'hub'-like maps, where the different wings to the main hub are still mandatory but can be completed in any order. This types of map appeal to players who like to explore, and doing things differently when replaying levels. The pitfall is having these alternative routes, but with vastly different difficulties... eg one route has much less health/ammo but much more monsters compared to the other route.... making only one route survivable. So the player still has no choice, and worse: has to engage in trial-and-error to find out what to do. The other obvious pitfall is making objectives too obscure to find, leaving the player wandering around already-emptied rooms with no idea where to go.

Most maps have a mix of linear and non-linear parts, to combine the best of both worlds.

[magicsofa]

b0rsuk said:

True, but with some caveats. DooM is notable among FPS games because most monsters have very low lethality. Especially in open areas, they deal no damage to a skilled and aware player. There are few exceptions - the hitscan weapons and Arch Vile.

I would have do disagree. If your imps aren't dealing damage, you didn't place them very well.


I've begun to try and include at least two pathways in all of my maps. Or, at least two paths through an area of the map. However, I once started this map that had multiple paths and you couldn't revisit them (via large drops into the next areas). It was cool but it got so tedious, keeping track of what items the player had encountered on each possible path (which sometimes intersected....agh!)

[BlueEagle]

magicsofa said:

I've begun to try and include at least two pathways in all of my maps. Or, at least two paths through an area of the map. However, I once started this map that had multiple paths and you couldn't revisit them (via large drops into the next areas). It was cool but it got so tedious, keeping track of what items the player had encountered on each possible path (which sometimes intersected....agh!)

Which leads to the question of why have two paths for the player in the first place. Giving the player one longer path in a linear fashion is the much better choice. In reality, most players only want to beat a level once. So the majority would only see one of your two paths anyway. If you've spent equal amounts of time for both paths to design and polish, you've wasted 50% of your total mapping time for a minor group of players who want to play the map two times to see everything. I think it's not worth it.

BTW all your ideas are kinda linear, no matter how many branching paths you include in the map. Because all paths lead from the same start to the same exit switch/line. If you really wanna go non-linear, you have to have multiple start zones and exit areas as well. Maybe add a randomizer of what key spawns at which position. Actually I would really like to play a map like this :)

[Stupid Bunny]

In my latest mapping project (which has been stalled for a while but certainly isn't dead) I've been trying to accomplish greater nonlinearity through greater connectivity. The problem with my first map is that it was huge and, while there was a little bit of nonlinearity in certain areas, it basically amounted to a multitude of small maps connected by teleporters or corridors, making previous areas irrelevant later on. My second map was an improvement in that it was more coherent and more open, but generally there was still only one way to get from one area to the next, and only one way to complete the map.

What I've been going for with my current mapset, and I think succeeding at, is giving the player no obvious route to take at the beginning; there are multiple paths available at the start, requiring the player to explore a bit to figure out where things are. Of course, the maps are still fundamentally linear in that the player will have to find the one spot where a yellow key is in order to open the yellow door(s), and as the maps progress they generally become more linear as the player finds more of the goals necessary to reach the exit (I could probably keep the maps nonlinear almost to the end, but I don't want the maps to drag on too long and I'm probably not that clever anyway.) I've tried to minimize dead-ends, and while there are obviously rooms with only one entrance or exit I've avoided forcing the player to backtrack over very long distances. This should make playing the maps more fluid as well as more well-suited to deathmatching. I've also tried to create a more open feel in general with an abundance of windows, doors and the like, while still keeping some areas isolated from others to keep an element of surprise and not wake the monsters inside.

tl;dr: In my opinion good nonlinearity is much more about interconnectivity and fluidity than it is about simply branching off into different areas, and maps should have at least a little bit of direction to prevent them from simply being a confusing free-for-all (although somebody clever could definitely make a completely directionless map that was still fun to play and not overly confusing.)

[TropicalDeathPunch]

Here's my 2c on this subject.

1. Choice. I personally think that it all boils down to giving a few more options to the player to generate potential replay value. Balancing this in a manner that is neither a "facing overwhelming odds" kind of map or a "where am I and what do I do" map. I think COD-MW was a good example of this because of the sniper missions. In that instance it definitely was not a time to fight, you had to wait and hope that one of the troops didn't trip on your soon to be Swiss cheese corpse. Another example would be in Doom itself. All monsters, or on par?
2. The objectives. This (IMO) is the true culprit of a linear map.
"Well what would be the point if there was no goal, no objective?"
True. For me this is where 1 & 2 fall into place. Offering a "few" more relevant and equally or more challenging choices. Putting the obvious limitations one has to work with in Doom, it then boils down to manipulation of both strengths and weaknesses.

I have a couple of links, here and here that may assist in this issue. And even if it's a redundancy for some of you, I don't think a little polish has hurt some dull silver.

[Optimus]

I prefer entirely linear or A rather than B. I can't get lost into mazes. But that's maybe not the case for most of the people.

[magicsofa]

BlueEagle said:

Which leads to the question of why have two paths for the player in the first place.

First of all, I don't mean two paths as in two completely separate areas that lead to the same exit/objective. Just that in general, there are multiple ways to get around the map.

Second, I do this because I enjoy it. I like levels where you feel like you are exploring rather than just walking a set path.

If players only want to play once, that is their problem, not mine. I often play wads never to return, but this is more my reaction to the level itself than my preference. If a level was really fun and there were things that I missed, I would be happy to go back. But, this complaint isn't even relevant because the player can easily visit all areas of a non-linear map. They just can't necessarily do it in a linear fashion and may have to backtrack a little bit.

Maybe you got confused because of the experiment I was doing with super non-linear mapping (many pathways that are often separate). That was just an experiment. I should post it so y'all can look at it

[C30N9]

Non-Linear means to me that you arrive at an area then you find 2 or more areas seen at a time. This confuses which area you should take, if you take one you would find a dead end optional area, or a keyed door that you don't have, or the area where you should visit first in progress.

Now you entered another area, you would see another opening, shall I take it first or no? This makes me hungry for exploring. Also sometimes when you take a key there are 2 doors which need that, one which leads further in progress but you would find closed bars, the other door has the switch to open those.

Also, when making levels with non-linearity make sure that every area has a special thing to have, not just corridors with ammo. MAP10 from Doom 2: the area with fuels, the green tech station area, the rocky area, the cement area, these all have a special atmosphere, which I like. MAP24 is another one: the area where you lower green pillars, the area with brown tech textures which is accessed by raising stairs, the area with very thin floors all have special types.

Key hunting for all 3 is another strong example, where you are given 3 choices in order, every key has a special area, challenge and atmosphere. If you played Plutonia Revisited MAP27 is one of those, I liked that very much (but the map was easy). If you look at MAP28 from TNT, the yellow key has an atmosphere that is completely different from the other 2, the blue key has a special maze area, however the red key area was... meh.

[deathbringer]

Heh, I once created a level that I called "a triumph of nonlinearity" because it had a bit of backtracking to get a key from a previously-locked area.

I'm currently (very slowly) working on a level that I hope really will be a "triumph of nonlinearity". It's basically a gigantic E1-styled complex that's going to use all six keys, with the key rooms marked on the map so the player knows vaguely in what direction to head (but otherwise can take any route they please, and there's going to be masses of interconnectedness so they can jump to another route if they want). The blue keys will be "available" first, then these are used to get the yellows (the actual locked areas will also have lots of rooms and routes so the player only has to get to the actual key room and then leave again) and then the reds, finally the final boss battle area will require all six keys so the cards and skulls can be collected in "any" order.

There will also be a few other "boss arenas" scattered around the level that are totally optional, though they will be large so the player will be more likely to stumble into them.

Ammo and health balance will be difficult to get right, of course... so I'll probably just go for loads of it. Because killin' shit is fun.

[Phobus]

Apparantly my CC3MAP18 was a pretty good example of non-linearity done correctly, and much more recently my Doom the Way id Did contribution for E3M6 also qualifies. Likewise the major strength of Quicky4.wad (Claws of the Enraged Beast) was allegedly the non-linear layout and I'm fairly certain Quicky5.wad (Small Dark Twisted Computer Lab) was also somewhat praised for its non-linearity in /newstuff #382 (or whatever newstuff it was reviewed in).

Working from that I can presume a good method of acheiving non-linearity is to have a lot of the map open to the player at the start, with locked off areas or objectives that give the gameplay some semblance of sequence or purpose. You don't need to go everywhere, and generally the actual objectives are quite straightforward and form a linear path, but there's plenty of options of where to go and perhaps in what order some of the objectives can be acheived. A bit of backtracking at some point makes the whole thing feel very free-form too, I think.

Think of a sort of circle with tentacles sticking off the side... some of which can't be accessed straight away. That kind of form for a map and its progression. Examples I'd cite from Doom and Doom 2 would be E3M2, E3M6 and MAP11 for the sort of level layout and progression I'm talking about.

[Job]

I want to make a map where you're forced, assuming you don't cheat, to play through a level that doesn't require key cards/skull keys. For example, while you can head toward the exit switch/linedef, there's a formidable boss battle there. All of the tools necessary to get past that battle are scattered throughout the level, compelling you to play without requiring a single key card/skull key. Imagine...

[Chopkinsca]

A good example of non-linearity is Map08 (tricks and traps). From the start, the player has a few choices of which way to go. Some areas are just for supplies to conquer the rooms with keys, but it is still pretty non-linear.

The presence of choice is what makes things non-linear. "should I go into this room? Go down this hall? Or into this other room?". Always give the player choices on which way to proceed.

A more non-linear level is more difficult to develop in the way of making it not too maze-like. Constant dead ends and long switch hunts can annoy the player. With linear maps, there isn't much room to get lost. Problems with non-linear levels are keys which open doors that you forgot the location of, switch hunts, and a general "where do I go?". A well designed map will push the player to their goals, but give the player choices that don't distract them from reaching the end.

I prefer trying to make non-linear maps. I map for myself and I like exploring. I always get "If only there was a path between these two areas" thoughts which in the end make for more open ended exploration.

[Megamur]

Job said:

I want to make a map where you're forced, assuming you don't cheat, to play through a level that doesn't require key cards/skull keys. For example, while you can head toward the exit switch/linedef, there's a formidable boss battle there. All of the tools necessary to get past that battle are scattered throughout the level, compelling you to play without requiring a single key card/skull key. Imagine...

Then you just use a lot of switches instead. It's not as innovative as it sounds.

[Job]

Sure, but why can't it be both? Then you have something to look forward to. Either way, you have to fight through something to get to those switches.

[Mithran Denizen]

You could do that without using switches either. You could have the Cyberdemon guard the exit room, but put the plasmagun in one far corner, cell ammo in another, armor hidden somewhere else, a BFG in a secret room, etc. The rest of the map could have just enough shells/bullets to subsist on, but not to reasonably kill the boss. Giving the player a berserk pack, or the chainsaw could also allow you to minimize the amount of spare ammo without frustrating the player too much.

Still, the player would then have to scrounge supplies from the rest of the map in order to take on the boss, but they'd be free to decide how much they need to collect before trying, etc.

But I imagine that the 'doomgod' players would probably be able to reach the exit by dodging the boss, or kill it with only the berserk fist, or something like that, while people with less skill would be likely to run out of ammo too quickly for it to be any fun.

You could use the tag 666 effect to stop people from just skipping the boss entirely, but it would probably take a lot of playtesting attention for the other issues.

I assume this has been done before, but I actually got the general idea a few years ago, after reading the Doom comic. I've never acted on it, though.

[Job]

I think more levels should be like this, and what I alluded to earlier. Often times, I feel like a mouse looking for cheese in a maze when it comes to keys barring progress in a level (especially in a level I've played before).

[phobosdeimos1]

Phobus said:
Working from that I can presume a good method of acheiving non-linearity is to have a lot of the map open to the player at the start, with locked off areas or objectives that give the gameplay some semblance of sequence or purpose. You don't need to go everywhere, and generally the actual objectives are quite straightforward and form a linear path, but there's plenty of options of where to go and perhaps in what order some of the objectives can be acheived. A bit of backtracking at some point makes the whole thing feel very free-form too, I think.

Think of a sort of circle with tentacles sticking off the side... some of which can't be accessed straight away. That kind of form for a map and its progression.

Amen to that, bro

that's EXACTLY how I think of it doom's non-linearity as.

Well, now you've said that i'm inspired to play some of your WADS

[purist]

Job said:

I want to make a map where you're forced, assuming you don't cheat, to play through a level that doesn't require key cards/skull keys.

MAP05 of my Hell Bent Episode 1 is set out sort of how you describe. There is a red key door before the exit but it's open. Only problem is there is a mob of revenants behind it that the average player would not be equipped to deal with yet. Therefore the player is forced to close the door to block the revs then search for the red key and invulnerability sphere to take them on and proceed.

Non-linearity was the general theme for several of the maps in the wad, to varying degrees of success.

[Phobus]

Job said:

I want to make a map where you're forced, assuming you don't cheat, to play through a level that doesn't require key cards/skull keys. For example, while you can head toward the exit switch/linedef, there's a formidable boss battle there. All of the tools necessary to get past that battle are scattered throughout the level, compelling you to play without requiring a single key card/skull key. Imagine...

Sounds good to me, and its an idea I've toyed with a few times. Drip feed the player the tools he needs to kill the monsters who are blocking the way. I don't think I've ever actually made a map that does this though. Quite tempted to now, especially as making it in ZDoom would make it a bit easier to force the player to actually confront the beast/final battle and control how and when it's required. I'm thinking my final map for CC4 could do this to some degree actually...

@phobosdeimos1: If you're after that specific kind of gameplay I'd only really check out the ones I've mentioned to begin with. Maybe a few of my other maps fit that general description, but I've done quite a few more linear ones of varying quality and age as well.

[DeathevokatioN]

I remember cjwright did something like that with a boss room right around the corner, and you had to collect enough ammo to kill it.

I love non linear layouts, but to be honest at the end of the day it all depends on how the actual map is implemented, a linear map like Map27 from Alien Vendetta is alot more fun than 99% of non linear maps I've ever played, and the atmosphere and gameplay give this map replayability.

Just recently, Valkiriforce and I finished the layout for base map which is a triumph of non linearity. Although sadly I think it's a bit confusing, darkreaver got lost when he playtested it. :)

http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee101/NecroMolester/doom.jpg

Balancing all the possible routes and making sure that most of the fights can fight both ways since each room can be accessed from different points is proving challenging, but at the end I think it'll totally be worth it.

[Phobus]

That balancing is fairly difficult, but very worth-while as an end result. The amount of work and thinking a properly non-linear map requires is probably one of the main reason they're not made as often.

[Optimus]

I was just playing a random WAD (must be this https://www.doomworld.com/idgames/levels/doom/d-f/faviae10 but also others from the same author) and realized he tried to go too far with non-linearity. A lot of the rooms are like windows looking over windows over windows and needless to see I was lost. While it was fun snipping far away enemies over windows, every level had me lost sometimes for 10 minutes wondering what is missing, not figuring out how to get a key or which switch I missed that opens something in the other side of the map.

And then it hit me, did we hold non-linearity as the holy grail such that we go to the extremes? Are even original Doom levels truly non-linear, as we praise them to be? When you look carefully, they are mostly linear paths with many side rooms and secrets, sometimes some secrets or paths interconnect to old rooms. They are open to exploration and at the same straightforward if you just want to reach the many exit and don't care about siderooms. That's how I like it.

I see my old reply where I simply say I prefer linear to confusing mazes. I would sound like a new gamer with this, while much later I lament the old times and how most modern FPS are too linear. But when I say too linear, I mean to the extreme, forcing you to go oneway, closing all other exits, having invisible walls, waypoints, or timed death if you stay back to explore because everything is blowing up and it's supposed to be like a movie. So, yeah.. when I thought of linearity I thought of that extreme.

But every Doom WAD, even those that try to be linear, they are better in that aspect, they have some interesting siderooms and secrets. So, the answer for me is not to be extremely non-linear like it's the holy grail (the WAD I linked, interesting case, more confusing that it needs to be) but have a nice path or two with side rooms and secrets and interesting environments.

Because of the extreme linearity of modern AAA (that never appear in any Doom WAD, except those Call of Doom parodies) we think extreme non-linear is the way to go. I generally want this but some of the most enjoyable maps in original Doom weren't as non-linear as we'd think and still gave a sense of exploration.

[scifista42]

Optimus said:

did we hold non-linearity as the holy grail such that we go to the extremes?

Are even original Doom levels truly non-linear, as we praise them to be?

Because of the extreme linearity of modern AAA (that never appear in any Doom WAD, except those Call of Doom parodies) we think extreme non-linear is the way to go.

I generally want this but some of the most enjoyable maps in original Doom weren't as non-linear as we'd think and still gave a sense of exploration.

Who exactly are these "we"? Name them, or speak for yourself.

[Deadwing]

For me non-linearity is just to allow players to approach encounters from different entry points and have some freedom to choose its order. Of course at some point the level will get linear, but I think it's fine.

IMO, a linear level is just:

Start -> A -> B -> C -> D -> End

You can add some optional encounters, which is generally interesting, but it will still keep the same base path. A non linear level allows the player to have some freedom at some point to where to go, example:

Start
/ | \
A-B-C
\ | /
D
|
End

In this structure you can easily ignore B or C if you go A, but you can't say they're optional. Also, you can go from the beginning to A -> D -> C, or A -> B -> C, or B -> C -> Start -> A. This makes the experience more interesting especially if you expect the player to play without checkpoints and die at some point, so he won't have the exact same experience again and get tired too fast.

[Jan]

40oz said:

3. Player should rarely be provided with anything in the starting room.

I disagree somewhat. Pecking away with the pistol at anything higher than shotgun sargeants is annoying, so you have to be careful with that because nobody likes to do that for too long. I prefer to give the player a little something at the starting room, or at least nearby enough so that they can make a run for it and don't have to go "peck-peck-peck" for too long. To keep the player on his toes, I prefer to hand out only just enough ammo at the beginning, so he has to make all his shots count.

Alternatively, I sometimes provide the player with strategically placed barrels or obvious infight opportunities as alternative ways of disposing with the first wave of enemies.

Edit: just realized I replied to a 5 year old comment :p

[Ribbiks]

Deadwing said:

Start
/ | \
A-B-C
\ | /
D
|
End

this is actually the same representation for how I discuss map progressions :). It gets a bit harder if they're are sandboxy or otherwise very interconnected, but for a map with a number of distinct goals and/or set-pieces it's nice and simple.

I don't have anything to add to the linearity conversation, seems to be a topic that's rather talked to death at this point. I don't mind linear map progressions, or backtracking, or whatever, but if that's the way the map is organized it's always nice if it's done in a way where the paths twists through the map in interesting ways, or revisited areas are different / have new traps / etc.