Do you prefer huge non-linear maps or smaller ones?

[Juza]

Small maps with branching paths and linear progression.

[Deadwing]

For me, a series of smaller non-linear maps, ones that take 10 to 20 minutes to finish.

A larger map once in a while is great, though.

[Phobus]

An episode of short maps is great for me, but I’m really fond of some of the huge maps I’ve played. I think the requirement for a huge map to be non-linear isn’t much good, though. A linear progression through non-linear areas is much better, with some nice optional secrets and other things, with perhaps the odd reward for backtracking or remembering something significant that you’ve seen earlier in the map.

 

I suppose the bigger consideration is that a huge map is more impressive, in isolation, if it’s really enjoyable, than a collection of small maps, even if the regular dopamine hits of the intermission screens are taken into account. Much easier to just play a couple of 5-10 minute blasts then commit an hour or two of play time, though.

 

Having reasoned this out with myself over a couple of paragraphs, I’ll vote small maps, but any map that I enjoy is the best map.

[Biodegradable]

It's no secret at this point that MASSIVE maps tend to overwhelm me as I easily feel lost and can't make heads or tails of the progression, so small to medium-sized maps are definitely preferable for me. I hate feeling lost in giant maps, does my head in. That being said, I have been playing some slightly larger maps more and more so it's a feeling that's likely to change in time.

[MFG38]

I like both types equally. Generally, though, I prefer megawads to have small or medium-sized maps for the most part. A huge map in a megawad can begin to outstay its welcome once I've wandered in it for long enough. I find huge maps to be more tolerable if they're single maps or part of a smaller mapset.

[Clippy]

I don't often have time to play huge maps so I often seek out and find smaller maps more appealing - it's def more inviting if it can be beaten in 20 mins or so

[purist]

I personally prefer small maps but my advice to a mapper is to make the map as long as the concept suits. If you have more ideas don't cut a map short for the sake of brevity and certainly don't drag a map out just to give it a more epic scale.

[Steve D]

I've played and made my share of big maps, but I prefer them to be linear rather than nonlinear, for ease of progression. I'd characterize my own big maps as having some non-linear areas but overall they are more "interconnected" than non-linear. By that, I mean you can go in several directions at the start, but some of those directions end in key doors, forcing you to go and find the keys that unlock the interconnected paths.

 

My maps also tend to have large secret side quests. One can wonder if it's a good idea to make these, because up to a third of the map may be comprised of secret areas. Why not make them part of the normal progression? I think it's partly a tendency I have for sneakiness in Doom. Also, when players reach the end and see that 30% of the monsters are still alive, it serves as replay-bait. Even so, a lot of players won't bother. They've reached the end, they're satisfied, so they'll move on to the next map. With so much wonderful content popping up on Doomworld every week, the incentive to play new stuff rather than replay maps is very strong. Thus, the secret side quests are there for players who enjoy them, and can also actually find them. :D

 

I still like playing big maps, even though I moved to making small, non-linear maps starting in 2013. My last new big map was probably Dynamo Hum for Deadly Standards 2, which I made back in 2015. The last huge map I played was Roofi's Ventose for Deadly Standards 3. I was completely lost and frustrated on my first try at this magnum opus, but on my second go, to my astonishment, I UVMaxed it and it felt great to have solved the puzzle of this monster. And for the record, I'm currently playing an even bigger map, the stunnungly beautiful Lullaby, by Danlex. I'm a third of the way through it on UV, but I haven't been able to play it in over a week. :(

 

That highlights an advantage of small maps -- you can actually finish them in one sitting. 

 

As a mapper, I can tell you that a primary inspiration to make the small-map switch is that big maps take so loooonnnnng to playtest and polish. You ask yourself whether it's better to invest your time in massive maps that will take a month or so to build, and then months to polish, or whether you should concentrate on small maps that take 3 - 8 days to build and a month or so to finish. You can easily prep a minisode of small maps in the time it takes to finish a big one. And if one or two of your small maps is a bit meh, but the others are strong, the minisode as a whole will fare better than a big map that's a droning slog.

Edited March 3, 2021 by Steve D

[Dimon12321]

The only thing about huge maps that bugs me is "Where the hell am I supposed to go now?" feeling. Huge maps are typically maze-like maps and the need to run around a half of the map to finally discover which obscure door has opened really tires me out.

[baja blast rd.]

3 hours ago, Phobus said:

An episode of short maps is great for me, but I’m really fond of some of the huge maps I’ve played. I think the requirement for a huge map to be non-linear isn’t much good, though. A linear progression through non-linear areas is much better, with some nice optional secrets and other things, with perhaps the odd reward for backtracking or remembering something significant that you’ve seen earlier in the map.

 

This description fits Aurelius's Remnant, which also shows another way to give longer maps replayability. 

 

The main progression points are laid out in a fairly linear way, with a point of bifurcation that isn't a big shift from linearity ("grab one key first or another key first, but you need both and your resources aren't much different either way"). But that core line of progression is filigreed with all sorts of optionality, with secrets and sidequests. There are a lot of little nooks, cliffs, and streams you can freely poke around in, even if they don't all amount to much. Some regions are isolated chunks of non-linearity: one field has four separate fights set loose independently, and you have the option to tackle them all one by one or blend most of them into one bigger stew (handy because a cyberdemon is involved). 

 

So despite the linearity of the core progression, the experience can unfold in a variety of ways, and you can hit many different benchmarks during playing -- I imagine most people won't find all the goods the first time. 

Edited March 3, 2021 by rd.

[magicsofa]

I like smaller maps in general. I don't usually have (or want) 2 hours to spend on a level. Plus, new soundtrack, sense of completion, and resetting the weapon progression all contribute to that good fuzzy feeling.

That said, huge maps can be impressive when done right. I'd say if you're using UDMF, put in the time to take advantage of things like music changes to help keep the player awake and engaged. I would also encourage not forcing the player to visit every corner and find every switch - a sprawling map is more palatable to me if there's plenty of optional areas and the path to the exit isn't too obscure. It shouldn't feel like homework. But you should really be asking yourself, what do I gain from the size of the map? Is it really contributing to the experience? If you split it into four small maps, would they really suffer? If not, maybe the massive size isn't really justified...

[Mystic 256]

Lately I've been leaning more towards long/huge maps

[seed]

Shorter and more linear for me, don't particularly enjoy overly non-linear maps tbh.

[ReaperAA]

9 hours ago, Juza said:

Small maps with branching paths and linear progression.

 

^This.

 

Though of course there are some exceptions.

[mxrgan]

I usually like shorter maps in general. And for a non linear experience, you cna use a hub world in gzdoom to accomplish what youre looking for. I really like a mod called Keeper Of The Seven Keys 3. Though I never played through the mod in its entirety, it has a great example of a hub world and multiple levels that you can go to in any order you like.

[erzboesewicht]

I think if you already have created a structural concept for your big nonlinear, replayable map - just go for it, and I would love playing it!

 

Just a couple of days ago I played one of these big nonlinear beasts ("The Citadel" from Enigma), and it had an awesome, interconnected concept. It was a fortress map which had basically a way to enter it "normally" via a 3 key sequence, and secret passages which allowed you to explore almost the whole fortress without any key (the exit, however, required all 3), but with much less firepower. In theory, each key section could have been put in a separate map but then they would have been fairly normal maps without much of the "nonlinear" appeal.

 

But without such a structural concept - where one must take care the player cannot get stuck if he misses a key for example -, it may be better to divide the map into several maps. I think the potential audience for smaller maps is larger, as the popularity of Scythe shows.

[Cruduxy Pegg]

I only like huge non-linear maps if there is very few of them. They overstay their welcome very quickly and it is very hard to balance the amount of linear and non-linear.

[joepallai]

I love the sense of adventure a large non-linear map provides, but I like short punchy levels too.    It all depends on my mood that day.

[smeghammer]

Looking back at my go-to maps/wads, they do seem to be larger ones. These are mostly older ones, but hey, I'm an old crusty and set in me ways... So I guess I prefer the bigger ones -

 

Single maps:

Corrupt Priest

VRack 2

Firetop Mountain

Breach

 

Megawads:

Phobos: Anomaly Reborn

Dark7/MP1

Armadosia

2002 ADO (Doom1)

 

As others have said above, the sense of exploration and immersion is what does it for me in the bigger maps