What's wrong with linear?

So, a common moan I hear about new maps these days, be they /newstuff or otherwise is, "Oh, they're good, but they're pretty linear."

My guess is half the people who use this word don't know what it actually means, but nevermind.

What, pray tell, is so wrong about a map being linear? It's seen as a bad comment, but surely it depends on the context of the level? If you are makeing a network of underground caverns, using a lot of brown and water, then fine, it may not be a great idea to make a map too linear.

But what if you are makeing a security base or space station or prison or something? When did you see real life examples of these things that weren't constructed in a linear way?

Doom largely takes place in such places, and I happen to enjoy linear levels. They make sense, they are often the strongest levels defensively, requiring you to kill virtually every baddie. They give me a sense of true satisfaction. Ok, they might not be the most original ideas ever, but this is a shoot 'em-up after all, and you can still work very clever traps in to linear levels.

What do you think?

Non-linearity gives more freedom in getting through the map - which quite definitely is one of the main factors in "replay value". It also makes the level feel more dynamic. Movies have to have a linear pace of action, in a game you don't have to lay things out on a line. You can give the player options, which makes gameplay more entertaining. Of course, non-linearity also adds the challenge of navigating the map, which was a key element already in the original levels.

pritch said:

What do you think?

I hear you!

That's not to say I want exclusively linear levels, but if I just want a quick doom fix, loading up a level with a clear logical path through is ideal. Nice when you just want to kill some hellspawn and don't want to have to bend your head round the layout of the map. Linear maps can offer some of the best doom fun.

Non linearity has its place too though. A complex labyrinth with convoluted logic can be great fun, and entirely appropriate for certain level themes, but the point is well made: linear certainly does not have to mean bad.

Edit: Fredrik's post wasn't there when I started typing. He makes some good points. Linearity isn't simply about not being maze like, and non linearity isn't simply being a maze. Options and alternative paths do indeed increase the replayability and open the map up by reducing the linearity.

Interestingly the first time I played Vrack (1), I fell in love with the level and its very logical logic. Although the map was fairly big, there was never a point where I wasn't sure what to do. Mind you, there aren't too many different routes through Vrack either. Whatever, it remains one of my favourite maps and has massive replay value for me.

Linearity is not necessarily a bad thing unless you are planning multiplayer support. Many really great maps are rather linear.


Non-linearity can, however, be the thing that makes a decent map really special. Just take a look at the original E3M3 for example.

linear levels are really great if you're just playing through them. If you want replay value and more depth in a level, non-linear is the way to go. Personally I like linear more most of the time as they tend to be less confusing.

Little Faith said:

Just take a look at the original E3M3 for example.

That'll be a good example of "each to their own" then. I can still get lost in E3M3 and find it confusing and dissatisfying as a result. In fact it's probably worse these days because after all this time, I should know the way through, and can mentally picture the exit but still can't find the bloody thing!

The logic of that map and the logic of E3M5 have always bugged the snot out of me, despite the maps having some cool features too.

the original E3M3 is non-linear in a very cool way imo while E3M5 is in the annoying and confusing category, mainly due to the symmetric central room.

I don't mind linear maps. What it generally means is that there one, or possibly two ways out, and you always know the way out. This is good, because I hate having to figure the way out of a non-linear map that has several ways out, and always having to remember where the heck I'm going.

Basically, most of the maps in E1 are all linear, aren't they worth to be replayed again and again? Aren't those people's all-time favorite maps for SP? Have people ever forgotten how exciting it is to be playing DM on Doom2 map01 even though it's just simply linear?

Non-linear maps are okay in particular cases, however, don't cross the line to multi-layered level, otherwise, we'd be talking Quake here :p

Linear maps are good to develope a level that gets harder and harder toward the end, in non linear maps it is very hard to do so, but my advise for linear map makers is to make a levels that open a door to the past eras when each section is complete, thus the liniearity would not be so bothering to the ones that do not like it.

an example wad is here:

http://public.ftp.planetmirror.com/pub/idgames/levels/doom2/0-9/0bloodr.zip

Four ASCII characters:

E1M7

The reason I mentioned it in the newstuff chronicles #96 is because I was trying to be fair and neutral towards the maps, and trying to imagine how other DooMers might feel about the gameplay in Alien 3, as it was a case of going into a series of similar-looking rooms and pressing switches, and there was only one route you could take through each huge map. I don't mind that (especially in challenging, nice-looking tech maps), but others (eg. Liam, given his reviews of Alien 1 and 2) don't like that sort of gameplay, so I was trying to warn those people that they might not like Alien 3 as much.

I try not to post opinionated reviews, (either by praising a wad that I liked but isn't that good, or by slating a good wad that I just got annoyed with) instead I try to say things like "if you like a certain type of level then you'll like this wad" or "some players would find this too hard".

I specialise in building realistic maps, so I know that they sometimes do end up being linear, as that's often how these places are built (either in films or real-life) so I don't mind, as it's in keeping with the theme. And also, I do prefer maps where you have to go everywhere cos I'm a 100%-everything player.

Whether or not linear is bad depends on the what the player thinks, and that's why I mentioned it. (I try to take all possible opinions on board when reviewing a map)

For single maps it's usually a lot easier to make it linear, its easier to guarantee the player has the right amount of ammo and proper weapons to fight the enemies he encounters.

Non-linear maps are imo easier to implement when part of a mini-episode, megawad etc as you can guarantee the player has the proper weapons and you can concentrate on making the map challenging. Of course you could just give the player the SSG and RL at the start :) Good Non-linear maps definately have better replay value, it's a pity commercial games don't do it more.

I'd rather have maps with a definite route to go that can be plainly seen, but with other areas you can explore and maybe collect a few items. A map that's too linear would have one or two ways through, but with no extra rooms, secrets, or whatever else. Those kind of maps get boring quickly. Maps that aren't linear enough can also get boring if you get lost and take hours to find the exit.

pritch said:

but this is a shoot 'em-up after all

It's not, actually. It's a shooter, not a shoot'em'up. The serious sam games are Shoot'em'ups as you have to kill everything to go on.

Not necessarily.


I would dare you to kill all enemies in Xenon 2.

I started playing FPSes with Wolfenstein 3-D, which had many linear levels (E4L5, E6L6, E6L7, and E6L8 are notable exceptions), and generaly had few puzzles except for that God-forsaken maze in E6L7. So a lot of the DOOM levels stumped me at first. I had problems with The Living End (DOOM II MAP29, which I IDCLEVed to just for fun) just a while ago. After disposing of the Hell Knights in that wooden room with the pillar, I couldn't find out where to go, so I checked my automap and one of the sides of the pillar was a door. Lo and behold, the side of the pillar with scratch marks on it was a door! (not being able to find a door was impossible in Wolfenstein because all doors looked alike and stuck out like a sore thumb from their surroundings). Because your first experience with a genre mold your playing style greatly molds your playing style, I generally try to follow a linear path and sometimes catch myself strafing past Imps to make their aim fall behind my movements as if they had hitscan weapons.

pritch said:
They make sense, they are often the strongest levels defensively, requiring you to kill virtually every baddie.

Average levels rely on linearity to make the player fight the whole level. Good levels don't need that. Take the COMPOHSO yellow-keyed area at Containment Area (Doom E2M2) for instance, it requires a keycard that isn't part of the main level progression, and it's miles off any route to complete the level, but it contains useful loot, looks interesting and has a good trap - it's worth going out of the way for.

It is true that having different routes around a level is not in itself much of an advantage, or at least it's a mixed blessing. Far more important is allowing the player a choice of tactics - particularly for challenging levels. Different routes around the level is one way of giving the player greater choice in how to approach each fight. E1M7 has already been mentioned and is a good example of other ways of doing this - it is not a maze of connected rooms and it does require the main areas to be taken in a given order, but it gives the player plenty of choice in how to fight each area.

Good comments. I agree linear and non-linear are both very important, as my main theory of Doom's persistant survival centre's on it's unique ability to take place in just about any setting you choose, each unique map requiring linear/non-linear design.

At this point I should probably mention that this thread wasn't a moan about Ultimate Doomer's reviews in any way, indeed kudos and gratis to him for stepping in so competently.

cph said:

It is true that having different routes around a level is not in itself much of an advantage, or at least it's a mixed blessing. Far more important is allowing the player a choice of tactics - particularly for challenging levels. Different routes around the level is one way of giving the player greater choice in how to approach each fight. E1M7 has already been mentioned and is a good example of other ways of doing this - it is not a maze of connected rooms and it does require the main areas to be taken in a given order, but it gives the player plenty of choice in how to fight each area.

Yeah, the second map of my Ultimate ZDoom episode is a bit like that. There's several shotguns which you can get to (you don't have one at the start, but you have a chaingun), and several different ways to approach their areas with the monsters defending them. The rest of the level is also nonlinear to a certain extent. (you can go anywhere except the parts that are locked or inaccessible until later on)