There shouldn't be an objective marker

[FortressOfDoom]

One of the core components of Doom was key hunting. Searching and backtracking the levels and discovering the whereabouts the red/blue/yellow keys was a great compliment to the normally action heavy gameplay, and it also served as the game's objective system, i.e. getting all 3 keys to find the exit.

 

Doom 2016 and DE also have a key based objective system in the sense that you need keys to progress through the level. However I feel it is somewhat diluted by the fact that there is always an objective marker on the screen telling you exactly where to go. So the objective system becomes less about discovering the keys and more about simply following the compass. This way of managing level objectives was first introduced by Medal of Honor, taking away the autonomy from the player of deciding where to go next, which made sense for MoH and the plethora of on-rails shooters that followed.

 

But imo it doesn't make sense for Doom. From what I can see in the previews, the level design in DE is pretty decent and layered - why doesn't the game simply let the player discover where to go next? Wouldn't it be a better way to show off the levels? The player will discover the correct path eventually, and the upside is they will also get that good feeling of 'discovering' the key locations for themselves rather than being spoon-fed. Also they will naturally stumble upon more secrets.

 

I know some folks are going to tell me there is an option in the UI to switch off the objective marker, but my point is it shouldn't be there at all as a design choice because it takes away player autonomy to hunt for objectives themselves.

 

 

Edited February 26, 2020 by FortressOfDoom

[BabyGiggles]

there's an option to turn that off

[doomsucksass]

1 minute ago, OneDoomedSpaceMarine said:

there's an option to turn that off

Though i'm pretty sure it's on by default, and that's why OP is complaining.

[Linguica]

26 minutes ago, FortressOfDoom said:

it shouldn't be there at all as a design choice

 

i too hate choices

[jazzmaster9]

33 minutes ago, FortressOfDoom said:

but my point is it shouldn't be there at all as a design choice because it takes away player autonomy to hunt for objectives themselves.

How dare other people play differently than you 

[FortressOfDoom]

3 minutes ago, jazzmaster9 said:

How dare other people play differently than you 

 

You're missing the point. It's not about the style of play, or the cosmetics. It's about game design i.e. forcing the level progression to be 'on-rails' vs giving the player the autonomy to discover the level. A level designed knowing that the player will always have an objective marker to guide them would be fundamentally different to a level design relying on the player's intelligence to discover where to go next.

[Edward850]

A bit of insight: Of our ports of Strife: Veteran Edition and Turok2, one of the most key praises was the objective markers. It's easy to think that games are being simplified, but frankly what was actually happening instead was the level design was becoming more and more obscure, and concepts that a designer might see as straightforward can actually become come out really obscure.

 

They do not simplify the game with any on rails concept, rather what objective markers actually do is enforce a safety net so that you can make targets wherever necessary without having to do a shitzillion hours of user testing to make sure what you just made is actually findable. It allows the level designer to do just that, focus on level design.

[Bauul]

Exploration in the modern Doom games is defocused in favor of focus on the combat, and given they made that decision then a waypoint marker makes sense for players that have no interest in going off the beaten track. However, credit to id, that exploration is there for those who want it, and there's far more than most modern AAA games.  I personally turned off the waypoint market straight away, but I don't object to its presence.

 

I'd rather they kept it and were therefore able to make super high-fidelity levels than remove it and have to simply the visuals to aid navigation for less navigationaly capable players.

[jazzmaster9]

2 hours ago, FortressOfDoom said:

 

You're missing the point. It's not about the style of play, or the cosmetics. It's about game design i.e. forcing the level progression to be 'on-rails' vs giving the player the autonomy to discover the level. A level designed knowing that the player will always have an objective marker to guide them would be fundamentally different to a level design relying on the player's intelligence to discover where to go next.

I underatand it completely. So a level designed for exploration also cannot have indicators as an option all of a suddden?

If you dont like it. Turn it off. 

[StoneMason]

If the game is perfectly playable with objective markers disabled, why is it a problem that they're optional? Some people aren't as observant as others, and may need something to help nudge them in the right direction.

[FortressOfDoom]

1 hour ago, jazzmaster9 said:

I underatand it completely. So a level designed for exploration also cannot have indicators as an option all of a suddden?

If you dont like it. Turn it off. 

 

That's a contradiction in terms though isn't it?  A level designed for 'exploration' that can also be played 'on-rails'? That's two opposing design objectives and I think it would be incredibly difficult to execute without sacrificing one or the other. I think Bauul said it right that modern Doom games have defocused the exploration in favor of combat, and a waypoint marker makes more sense if the goal is to keep the player moving towards the next combat experience. All I'm saying is that there is some merit in also having a 'level puzzle' to complement the 'combat puzzle'. The building blocks of the 'level puzzle' are the locations of the key cards. The automap is the shortcut to the level puzzle, just like firing a grenade into a Caco's mouth is the shortcut to it's combat puzzle. Adding an objective marker dilutes the importance of both the key cards and the automap, i.e. there is effectively no level puzzle. Switching the waypoint marker off doesn't solve the problem, because the level was never designed as a 'puzzle' to be solved in the first place.

[jazzmaster9]

6 minutes ago, FortressOfDoom said:

 

That's a contradiction in terms though isn't it?  A level designed for 'exploration' that can also be played 'on-rails'? That's two opposing design objectives and I think it would be incredibly difficult to execute without sacrificing one or the other. 

It really isn't the player can choose to play it without markers ans explore or play it with markers and go from fight to fight. You are really over complicating this issue for the sake of "its not like the classic games"

[Castelia]

Playing Doom 2016 for the first time, the objective marker is a huge help for me personally. I'm not very experienced with modern-day FPS titles, and for some reason, it's harder for me to find where to go in them than the classic Doom games, for example. I also enjoy going off the beaten path and looking for stuff, and the marker helps me get back on track. You could argue that it should be off by default and beginners should have to turn it on if they need it, but maybe the game was designed for newcomers (after all, the title is just "Doom", and you don't need to play the classics to understand what's going on).

 

In addition, sometimes the objective marker will point behind a locked door (if I remember correctly), and the player will still have to go and look for the key or whatever's required to open it. There's still that element of exploration, since I don't believe keys are always on the map without an upgrade.

 

I also think it's perfectly possible to have a game with both exploration and "on-rails" aspects. You can easily just follow one path or go off and do your own thing. But that's just me.

[Super Mighty G]

4 hours ago, doomsucksass said:

Though i'm pretty sure it's on by default, and that's why OP is complaining.

That is irrelevant, you can turn it off. The complaint is invalid unless you are going to make the argument that having options is a bad thing, which is totally idiotic. I would kill for most games to have as many options as Eternal does. 

[Maggle]

When I was playing Eternal Doom, I was practically begging for objective markers. So it's good news that Doom Eternal has them.

 

In all seriousness, I disagree with the framing about objective markers in games that it's just "hand-holding". It's not the devs trying to railroad the player to the end, it's just the devs not having naked contempt for those in the audience who have a poor sense of direction or get distracted easily. I can forgive old games not having these, because the technology just wasn't there yet, and level design was pretty simple back then, but nowadays, there's no excuse. Honestly, if there's an option to turn it off so you, personally, don't have to see it if you don't need/want it is the best case scenario. A lot of games don't even have that, it's just on. Pretty much all modern games have markers, waypoints, compass, etc. and will continue to have them, and it's more necessary than ever nowadays when levels get more and more detailed. There's no putting that genie back in the bottle, so I'd take the option if I were you.

[Capellan]

Some people want objective markers.  Games want to appeal to the widest possible audience.  So markers are available as an option for those who want them, and can be turned off for those who don't.

 

This should not actually be hard to understand, and if it is, you're the one with the problem, not the game.

[Szuran]

This being an option is actually just a pretence of this being an option. If it's on by default, it's how the game was designed in the first place.

 

Markers = no environmental direction, and that's the sad truth.

 

When I turned off the marker, I couldn't for the life of me find one of the necessary pickups in Doom 2016. It was in a medium size room, the room was marked on the map, but I was looking for it for a LONG time. Because the art direction didn't think to make it stand out visually. Why do so when it's gonna have an objective marker?

 

It's the same with so many games. I turned the marker off in Thief 4, and it makes the game UNPLAYABLE. Everything looks the exact same. No light sources to subtly guide you, nothing clever to show you what to do or where to go.

 

Really, try to disable the marker in pretty much any modern game on you FIRST playthrough and tell me this is really AN OPTION. "You really don't have to use the break in a car, no one's pushing your leg, so just don't use it, it's an option."

[jazzmaster9]

Thats just seems like you have poor sense of direction and blaming "bad level designers". I Had no trouble mavigating maps in Doom 2016

Which his why the option for makers are needed.

 

Its absolutely silly to think a game cant have both markers and clear visual directions.

[Szuran]

5 minutes ago, jazzmaster9 said:

Its absolutely silly to think a game cant have both markers and clear visual directions.

 

Then tell me, why have both?

 

Markers were introduced when visuals in games ecame so detailed it became harder to make interactive things stand out. At the same time, game started to get made by various teams, or even outsourced, so there wasn't a clear and tight vision, which led to corners getting cut.

 

Left 4 Dead famously resigned from markers and instead used light to guide players. But that game was cleverly designed and made by a relatively small team without unchangeable deadlines. Most aren't. Doom 2016 isn't a particurarly well designed game. It's OUTSTANDING by today's standards, but these are set by abysmal Call of Duty and Battlefield games.

[NoXion]

No environmental direction in Doom 2016? Was I wrong in following those green lights?

[FortressOfDoom]

To reiterate, this is not about the cosmetic choice of turning the HUD on or off. Also, this is not about classic doom vs new doom. I'm pretty sure most people here, myself included, are pretty stoked about DE. This is about whether it makes sense for Doom to have level navigation and progression designed from the ground up as 'puzzles' to be solved by the player. The fact is that the Automap and Keycard systems are more or less redundant right now because the levels are designed on the premise that an objective marker will tell the player exactly what to do. Switching the marker off is merely cosmetic because the level was never designed as a 'puzzle' in the first place. I'd rather just play with the marker on since that is how the designers intended for the game to be played. To Szuran's point, it's just the pretense of the option in a level that is fundamentally designed to be 'on-rails'. 

 

I agree that the game should not punish players who don't have a good sense of direction. The solution is simple: the player opens the Automap, and sets a marker for where they want to go themselves. But what I don't agree with is the game telling you exactly where to go to achieve your objective. That part you should have to figure out yourself. And once you've done that, open the Automap, place a marker on it on where you think the solution lies, and then go.

[Szuran]

1 hour ago, NoXion said:

No environmental direction in Doom 2016? Was I wrong in following those green lights?

 

Green lights only showed climbable surfaces.

[seed]

18 minutes ago, Szuran said:

Green lights only showed climbable surfaces.

 

Which were exactly where you were supposed to go. Wow, such a coincidence!

 

But seriously now, some people just want to play, not spend most of their time trying to find what they're supposed to do. I want to sit down and play for a first playthrough, and if I want to discover more, I'll do that in future playthroughs. It's there as an option, and there's no need for nonsensical talk that it gives the illusion of choice. In D2016 you could also disable the HUD and all its related effects completely, we gonna start an argument about how "this is not actually how you're supposed to play the game" too?

 

I mean, of course we are, it's naive to believe this, it's a forum after all, where all kinds of discussions can take place, no matter how absurd or ridiculous.

 

1 hour ago, Szuran said:

Left 4 Dead famously resigned from markers and instead used light to guide players.

 

And it didn't really need those either - it's a linear shooter at the end of the day, literally going from point A to point B. Hard to get lost in such levels even with an abysmal sense of direction, like I have.

 

1 hour ago, Szuran said:

It's OUTSTANDING by today's standards, but these are set by abysmal Call of Duty and Battlefield games.

 

Not really, you're looking in the wrong place if you believe that.

[Szuran]

@seed I may argue for the most absurd things from your point of view, but at least I say why I think so, while all you say is: no / not really / you're wrong just because. At this point, I'm out, this makes no sense.

 

BTW, green lights in Doom didn't tell you where you're supposed to go, they told you where you can go. Interactive switches etc. often were near impossible to spot without a marker hovering above them.

 

Have a good day.:)

[Redneckerz]

1 hour ago, FortressOfDoom said:

This is about whether it makes sense for Doom to have level navigation and progression designed from the ground up as 'puzzles' to be solved by the player.

 

It does. That's how the classics did it.

Ofcourse, i would be hard pressed to accept the *exact* same kind of mechanic today with over 25 years of gameplay evolution that came along with it.

 

1 hour ago, FortressOfDoom said:

The fact is that the Automap and Keycard systems are more or less redundant right now because the levels are designed on the premise that an objective marker will tell the player exactly what to do.

So you are saying DE takes notice of newer gameplay mechanics that have become standard these days but marries that with vastly expanded maps, so an automap makes actual sense? Noted.

 

1 hour ago, FortressOfDoom said:

To Szuran's point, it's just the pretense of the option in a level that is fundamentally designed to be 'on-rails'. 

If you geniunely think DE's levels are on-rails then you may need to look up the definition of the term. You may mean that the levels are linear.

 

[NoXion]

57 minutes ago, Szuran said:

 

Green lights only showed climbable surfaces.

I generally find that exploring all the places one can go helps with finding objectives and secrets. I didn't actually notice the markers when I started playing; it was only when I first started getting lost in the Foundry that I saw them at the top of the screen.

So rather than wasting ten minutes or so wandering around the level wondering where the fuck I'm supposed to go, like what happens for me in classic Doom WADs, I was able to crack on with actually playing the game.

[Szuran]

That's the point, if it was more clearly shown via the environmental design, you wouldn't need a marker.

[Gez]

The best IMO would be a hybrid system where the markers are disabled at start, but each one has a timer. If the player doesn't reach the waypoint by the time the timer runs out, then Vega helpfully says "I have detected an important-looking <insert gizmo here: key, switch, whatever> and will show its direction on your HUD" and then the objective marker is toggled on. Once you reach it, the timer for the next point starts running, and so on.

 

This reduces hand-holding and information overload, while still making sure (provided the timers are timed right) that players don't get lost running in circles.

[NoXion]

1 minute ago, Szuran said:

That's the point, if it was more clearly shown via the environmental design, you wouldn't need a marker.

I've seen people praise the Foundry level for its non-linearity. I don't think it's possible to improve the navigation of that level without taking that non-linearity away. At least not without environmental design that would be even more hand-holdy than objective markers, e.g. big neon signs saying "THIS WAY TO THE FINAL GORE NEST".

Or maybe I'm just crap at navigating. In which case I did need the markers, which helped me without overly impacting the environmental aesthetics.

[seed]

6 minutes ago, Gez said:

The best IMO would be a hybrid system where the markers are disabled at start, but each one has a timer. If the player doesn't reach the waypoint by the time the timer runs out, then Vega helpfully says "I have detected an important-looking <insert gizmo here: key, switch, whatever> and will show its direction on your HUD" and then the objective marker is toggled on. Once you reach it, the timer for the next point starts running, and so on.

 

This reduces hand-holding and information overload, while still making sure (provided the timers are timed right) that players don't get lost running in circles.

 

That actually sounds pretty good. And I think some games have done something similar to this too.