Interconnected maps(need help)

To go straight to the point - how you mappers(level designers) do such nice and interconnected maps? Don't get me wrong, I played lots of maps(modern and classics) to get idea how they are done, but when I try make same interconnected, detailed and looping design ideas for my own mapping stuff, I can't bring myself to do that, it feels quite childish or even carbon copy of someone's map. I already did 5 maps for project, which should see light one day, but they are quite linear in nature. 

Share anything what could help to break chains and give insight about such design ideas/approaches. 

A simple technique I sometimes employ is to essentially make a deathmatch map and populate it with enemies. In deathmatch everything is linked and provides line of sight in various angles - if you try your hand mapping for deathmatch and learning what makes a decent DM map, you might then be able to translate those layout skills into a SP map. :)

Plan first, then map. Looping designs usually have one or several small intersections or even hubs. What is needed is essentially an objective for the player, at least one way to get there, and at least one way to get back a previous location. Looping designs that are supposed to be traversed one-way are, in fact, linear. If you want it "non linear" you need to have two access routes to an objective (or even more).

When you know what goes where, and how you can connect it, you can start thinking about how to open up space, and use stuff like windows, bridges, or large cracks in a wall to get some more value out the "route" you have plotted, and develop a sense of location. At that point you can concern yourself with basic detailing, lighting, etc...

41 minutes ago, Dragonfly said:

A simple technique I sometimes employ is to essentially make a deathmatch map and populate it with enemies. In deathmatch everything is linked and provides line of sight in various angles - if you try your hand mapping for deathmatch and learning what makes a decent DM map, you might then be able to translate those layout skills into a SP map. :)

Huh, interesting. I checked out some Doom wiki articles of some of the BTSX authors the other day and found out that they had a pretty extensive multiplayer catalog! Wonder if any of that helped their design? Pinging @Tango for answers!

One way i like to do this is to structure the map initially as one gigantic area and then build smaller areas within, only creating void areas as necessary within that space. Sometimes i draw a huge square/circle/whatever and then start mapping within that area.

Thank you all, who commented here. It really helps me to get insight about design ideas, I saved this thread for reference. I'll wait for responses in meantime. 

You can always create a linear path twice, and it doesn't feel too straightforward anymore.

Like this:

17 hours ago, Catpho said:

Huh, interesting. I checked out some Doom wiki articles of some of the BTSX authors the other day and found out that they had a pretty extensive multiplayer catalog! Wonder if any of that helped their design? Pinging @Tango for answers!

I actually remember talking to essel at some point (during BTSX E1's development I think?) about how incredibly interconnected all of Mechadon's maps are, and I'm pretty sure I remember her suggesting essentially what you have here: that Mechadon has made so many multiplayer maps that it's become second nature to make layouts like that, whether it's multiplayer or not. it's been a while since I was making multiplayer maps, and I was always far from an expert in multiplayer matters, so it's hard for me to say to what extent it had an impact on my non-multiplayer mapping. but I would bet all the mapping I did for 32in24, and creating open maps that feel kind of like doomguy playgrounds, did have an impact on all my singleplayer stuff too.

I've also done a bit of what Dragonfly suggested too, taking existing DM maps and trying to convert them into fully playable SP experiences, which was kind of eye-opening in that it showed me it's possible to make a really fun singleplayer experience out of a layout that has so much more interconnectivity than what I would otherwise make in a singleplayer map.

15 hours ago, boris said:

Lots of helpful stuff!

 

 

 

What an excellent and very helpful post!

Great post @boris. That's exactly the kind of map design I enjoy playing most.

In my opinion, when you get a key, the door or switch it needs should always be either in sight from the key or only a room away so you get nice flow from each room and get less backtracking and door hunting.

There's a lot that can be said about interconnecting maps but here are my two cents in this:

- I interconnect what makes sense to interconnect. I sure as hell don't want to interconnect the starting room straight to the map end in a hallway or two.

- Whenever I see a chance to interconnect two rooms that are practically close to eachother, I take them into consideration and make a mental note that it might be a good idea to interconnect those two rooms.

- One of my rules about interconnecting to a room is to have one path that's longer, but easier to navigate and the other path which is shorter but harder to navigate. I treat taking shorter paths as some kind of 'punishment' and I do that by placing more environmental hazards in the said shorter path, tougher monsters and sometimes I deny the players an access to a new gun or a powerup by taking the shorter path as well.

- There should definitely be secret parts that provide an alternative path to a room.

- I also interconnect maps by forcing the players to backtrack after obtaining a key or doing something else that's crucial for the map progression. It isn't a good idea to make the backtracking long or confusing, so avoid doing that.

- Another good idea for secret alternative paths is to offer the players a chance to access a room that requires a keycard without having one, but also to ensure that the secret is well hidden.