Depends. Sometimes getting lost in maze like levels sucks ass and you wonder for hours just to find some small item or place the developer hid on the far edge of the map.
That's the risk though. Sometimes someone will have a brainfart and it ruins the game for them but the majority of people who don't will have a better experience for it. If you try and select for every possible point where someone could frick up you end up with a game that won't be a bad experience for anybody but it won't be a great experience for anybody either.
A nonlinear map shouldn't require you to backtrack. The best doom maps were still mazes, but once you got the required key, there was a door that would drop you somewhere new or back near the beginning so you didn't have to run backwards for 3 minutes. The OP 1993 image shows this perfectly; except for what looks like the ending arena in the top left, every room has multiple ways in and out so you never have to just turn around and go backwards through the level. This should also apply to secrets ideally. Hollywood Holocaust follows this perfectly too.
Backtracking can be fine too as long as the devs switch it up a little, like adding new enemies to previously explored areas (like Doom's monster closets) or slightly changing the layout.
No as long as the moment to moment gameplay is fun and has lots of player options.
RE4 is a linear game but no two playthroughs will look the same. The arenas are all decently sized with lots of weapon options and routes.
"old" fps design is for moronic boomer morons, run around same looking corridors looking for keys so you can open the door and leave. Wow old games were so much soul, why did we ever move on.
M8 why’d you reply? I was going to delete my messages but for some reason Ganker is running on >joke code
Where I cannot bring my (You)s >down with me.
I was going to re-roll and (You) the Original Post with >What’s the satisfying answer to your reply OP?
I remember when linearity was the big fear. Then Skyrim happened and has made it seem quite hard to believe that everyone thought every game would become super linear.
Does anyone have the screencap of that old thread where some anon claimed to be going to a game design school and everyone treated him like he was strange because he was exploring in a video game? Obviously a bullshit story trying to point to "new gamers literally don't understand anything but linear games!" but interesting in retrospect since it didn't turn out that way at all.
I believe its better to have a linear game, but with a lot of ways of progressing through it. Different builds and play stiles can spice up something linearly designed.
linear level designs exist because players suck ass at orienting themselves and also because developers dont know how to make an intricate level that is not a confusing maze with no way to find the correct path
"linearity" is not a design
it's just a general concept, and obviously can either be a good or a bad thing
devs should just make fun games instead of fitting meme stereotypes
A nonlinear map is better only when the way to progress through it is actually nonlinear.
It's the worst when you have a "nonlinear" map with only one critical path which makes you end up just needlessly searching every room for the key you need or the door you missed.
Linearity isn't inherently bad in the slightest. A platformer that's just a linear series of levels, for instance, is fine. The issue is when you have free movement but the only thing to do with it is progress forward from one objective to the next.
I'd argue that an aversion to linearity is actually worse on average.
Depends on how nonlinear you want to go.
Do you want it to be 100% nonlinear, as in you can ignore almost the entire game? Then frick no. Not only does that cheapen what little platforming remains, it encourages the devs to fill the game with samey retreads of any one mechanic or challenge, in the hopes that you'll do at least one or two of them.
Do you just want to add a few different progressions through the game, maybe with some adaptive difficulty to them? Then sure.
Is Metroid linear? You can explore and backtrack looking for secrets for hours, but ultimately there's a single target via a single route you need to head towards to advance the game. Same with the 1993 FPS map. Sure, it sprawls and can let you get lost, but ultimately there's only one key to open one door to fight one level boss.
More elaborate games will have mechanics to give you multiple routes to complete an objective (Deus Ex comes to mind), either Ramboing through the enemies or sneaking through vents and hacking security. But ultimately all the paths narrow down to one cutscene.
The Mega Man series seems like a good example for non-linearity; you have 8 bosses to defeat, and you can do them in any order. But the order can make certain bosses or sections easier (or harder) because you've got the right rock-paper-scissor weapon to trivialize a fight or beating one boss changes the environment in a different level. But for all that branching, it still comes down to one linear Final Boss level.
Even with games with multiple endings, it's still pretty linear, because the game plays out the same way, except it gives one of two cutscenes depending on whether you were nice to NPCs or a dick.
I don't think we can escape 'linear', all games need at least some of it to force us forward. It's also needed to tell a good story; disjointed Choose Your Own Adventure scrapbooking rarely works well.
The 2010 map is perhaps bettered classed as a 'rail shooter'.
That's why i think Hollow Knight is one of the few metroidvanias to actually do the genre justice, since there are a lot of progression paths you can take to ultimately end up where you have to be, at least for the normal playtrough.
The Dreamnail which is the essential key to finish the game can be reached through like 4 different routes.
I got horribly lost and took a massive detour through deepnest, ended up getting the tram ticket and going all the way to kingdoms edge, climbing up to loop me back to the resting grounds. I basically took the most out there path and still ended up where i had to be.
There are a lot of areas you can enter through different upgrades so you aren't forced into a specific path
I played a lot of metroidvanias and i think it fully deserves its status. However i can definitely see how its not for everyone, especially since it doesn't really bring anything new to the table
all game maps are linear because your character can only follow one path. even a map that appears non-linear just means the path becomes many times longer from having to backtrack everywhere.
>you don't have to see every corner of the map
frick you I paid for the game so I'm going to see all of it >just go a different way in another playthrough
frick you I'm a busy adult I don't have time to play games multiple times just to find out that some room I didn't enter had some bullshit item I probably didn't even need
everyone moaning about non-linear maps is stuck as a mental 10 year old who just stumbled through maps and thought it was amazing when timmy at school told you about some amazing thing that you completely missed just because you went right instead of left one time and also your mom would only buy you 3 games a year so you had to make them last as long as possible. literally grow up.
>inherently
Of course not. Depends of the game and how well it's done. A more focused experience is often better. We have plenty of examples of bad open-worlds that it seems that that is almost inherently the bad idea..
The important thing is that you don't feel like you're on rails as it was the case with a lot of cutscene-heavy military FPS from 10/15 years ago like in your pic. Things like slowly walking while listening to a NPC waiting for him to open the door to be able to go to the next linear sequence.
When you think about a classic 'adventure' feel, you don't imagine yourself exploring every nook and cranny of a big region with a check-list of tasks in your head. You imagine yourself going from point A to point B to point C in an essentially linear way. If it's done well it's good game design.
Depends. Sometimes getting lost in maze like levels sucks ass and you wonder for hours just to find some small item or place the developer hid on the far edge of the map.
That's the risk though. Sometimes someone will have a brainfart and it ruins the game for them but the majority of people who don't will have a better experience for it. If you try and select for every possible point where someone could frick up you end up with a game that won't be a bad experience for anybody but it won't be a great experience for anybody either.
the best doom maps had the least backtracking
A nonlinear map shouldn't require you to backtrack. The best doom maps were still mazes, but once you got the required key, there was a door that would drop you somewhere new or back near the beginning so you didn't have to run backwards for 3 minutes. The OP 1993 image shows this perfectly; except for what looks like the ending arena in the top left, every room has multiple ways in and out so you never have to just turn around and go backwards through the level. This should also apply to secrets ideally. Hollywood Holocaust follows this perfectly too.
yeah and 95% of Doom/DN3D maps weren't like that
Wrong
Backtracking can be fine too as long as the devs switch it up a little, like adding new enemies to previously explored areas (like Doom's monster closets) or slightly changing the layout.
No as long as the moment to moment gameplay is fun and has lots of player options.
RE4 is a linear game but no two playthroughs will look the same. The arenas are all decently sized with lots of weapon options and routes.
"old" fps design is for moronic boomer morons, run around same looking corridors looking for keys so you can open the door and leave. Wow old games were so much soul, why did we ever move on.
>template thread
This green text was used for criticism.
This green text was used as a
>general
Quote
This is just same template thread you make almost every day. I can copy paste post from archive. This thread is meaningless and can be botted
M8 why’d you reply? I was going to delete my messages but for some reason Ganker is running on
>joke code
Where I cannot bring my (You)s
>down with me.
I was going to re-roll and (You) the Original Post with
>What’s the satisfying answer to your reply OP?
>inb4 gibberish text warning
I remember when linearity was the big fear. Then Skyrim happened and has made it seem quite hard to believe that everyone thought every game would become super linear.
Does anyone have the screencap of that old thread where some anon claimed to be going to a game design school and everyone treated him like he was strange because he was exploring in a video game? Obviously a bullshit story trying to point to "new gamers literally don't understand anything but linear games!" but interesting in retrospect since it didn't turn out that way at all.
If it’s a sequel, I don’t think so. Pokémon could be linear but the
>role-playing
Is different
I believe its better to have a linear game, but with a lot of ways of progressing through it. Different builds and play stiles can spice up something linearly designed.
recently i played e1m6 map
nothing memorable but better than hall of cutscenes.
no but i always appreciate intricate level design.
You play a shooter to shoot things. Linearity keeps the attention on the action and less on the exploration and backtracking. Which is a good thing.
linear level designs exist because players suck ass at orienting themselves and also because developers dont know how to make an intricate level that is not a confusing maze with no way to find the correct path
The first dishonored was pretty good about it. Don't know about the shequels.
i dont want my hatsune miku project diva to be an immersive sim
yes
Most kino map in the game. Insanely sad how there's not many more like it.
>Be on uncletopia
>steel gets voted as next map
>3/4 of the players leave
It's an overdesigned map.
>>Be on uncletopia
Found your problem.
>Uncletards can't handle cp_steel
Why am I not surprised?
>Most kino map in the game
That's not Hydro
"linearity" is not a design
it's just a general concept, and obviously can either be a good or a bad thing
devs should just make fun games instead of fitting meme stereotypes
A nonlinear map is better only when the way to progress through it is actually nonlinear.
It's the worst when you have a "nonlinear" map with only one critical path which makes you end up just needlessly searching every room for the key you need or the door you missed.
why does progress have to be tied to locations in the map anyway
>1994 FPS map design
Linearity isn't inherently bad in the slightest. A platformer that's just a linear series of levels, for instance, is fine. The issue is when you have free movement but the only thing to do with it is progress forward from one objective to the next.
I'd argue that an aversion to linearity is actually worse on average.
Would the platformer be better if it were a nonlinear experience as opposed to a series of levels?
Depends on how nonlinear you want to go.
Do you want it to be 100% nonlinear, as in you can ignore almost the entire game? Then frick no. Not only does that cheapen what little platforming remains, it encourages the devs to fill the game with samey retreads of any one mechanic or challenge, in the hopes that you'll do at least one or two of them.
Do you just want to add a few different progressions through the game, maybe with some adaptive difficulty to them? Then sure.
Thank you for elaborating
I'm not sure 'linear' is the best descriptor.
Is Metroid linear? You can explore and backtrack looking for secrets for hours, but ultimately there's a single target via a single route you need to head towards to advance the game. Same with the 1993 FPS map. Sure, it sprawls and can let you get lost, but ultimately there's only one key to open one door to fight one level boss.
More elaborate games will have mechanics to give you multiple routes to complete an objective (Deus Ex comes to mind), either Ramboing through the enemies or sneaking through vents and hacking security. But ultimately all the paths narrow down to one cutscene.
The Mega Man series seems like a good example for non-linearity; you have 8 bosses to defeat, and you can do them in any order. But the order can make certain bosses or sections easier (or harder) because you've got the right rock-paper-scissor weapon to trivialize a fight or beating one boss changes the environment in a different level. But for all that branching, it still comes down to one linear Final Boss level.
Even with games with multiple endings, it's still pretty linear, because the game plays out the same way, except it gives one of two cutscenes depending on whether you were nice to NPCs or a dick.
I don't think we can escape 'linear', all games need at least some of it to force us forward. It's also needed to tell a good story; disjointed Choose Your Own Adventure scrapbooking rarely works well.
The 2010 map is perhaps bettered classed as a 'rail shooter'.
That's why i think Hollow Knight is one of the few metroidvanias to actually do the genre justice, since there are a lot of progression paths you can take to ultimately end up where you have to be, at least for the normal playtrough.
The Dreamnail which is the essential key to finish the game can be reached through like 4 different routes.
I got horribly lost and took a massive detour through deepnest, ended up getting the tram ticket and going all the way to kingdoms edge, climbing up to loop me back to the resting grounds. I basically took the most out there path and still ended up where i had to be.
There are a lot of areas you can enter through different upgrades so you aren't forced into a specific path
HK is boring and repetitive.
I played a lot of metroidvanias and i think it fully deserves its status. However i can definitely see how its not for everyone, especially since it doesn't really bring anything new to the table
Of course not, do you get mad when you play Super Mario Bros and there's only one way to get to the end of the stage?
all game maps are linear because your character can only follow one path. even a map that appears non-linear just means the path becomes many times longer from having to backtrack everywhere.
>you don't have to see every corner of the map
frick you I paid for the game so I'm going to see all of it
>just go a different way in another playthrough
frick you I'm a busy adult I don't have time to play games multiple times just to find out that some room I didn't enter had some bullshit item I probably didn't even need
everyone moaning about non-linear maps is stuck as a mental 10 year old who just stumbled through maps and thought it was amazing when timmy at school told you about some amazing thing that you completely missed just because you went right instead of left one time and also your mom would only buy you 3 games a year so you had to make them last as long as possible. literally grow up.
>inherently
Of course not. Depends of the game and how well it's done. A more focused experience is often better. We have plenty of examples of bad open-worlds that it seems that that is almost inherently the bad idea..
The important thing is that you don't feel like you're on rails as it was the case with a lot of cutscene-heavy military FPS from 10/15 years ago like in your pic. Things like slowly walking while listening to a NPC waiting for him to open the door to be able to go to the next linear sequence.
When you think about a classic 'adventure' feel, you don't imagine yourself exploring every nook and cranny of a big region with a check-list of tasks in your head. You imagine yourself going from point A to point B to point C in an essentially linear way. If it's done well it's good game design.