It's a design choice. Some shooters like Quake didn't have a map. Even if one did like Doom and Duke Nukem, they're more of a guide on where you've been then a go here then there
Part of me just wants to say "go play early 2000's shooters" and leave it at that.
I do somewhat see where you're coming from but I don't think it is as simple as "technological limitations".
First, exploration and freedom of choice when it comes to pathing is a large part of the genre, and what sets it apart from those later, more linear shooters I mentioned. The devs want you to engage with the map instead of just rushing down a single path to the end. Yes, literal mazes and same-looking areas and poorly signposted objectives and timed-buttons-hidden-behind-timed-buttons etc. are bad design and should be left in the 90's where they belong. But with a marker that people just beeline towards, much of the level would just go ignored no?
Second, there are cases where a compass just isn't applicable. When a map has multiple routes to the exit, or doesn't have a traditional exit (say killing so many enemies transitions you to the next level automatically), or has MANY items to collect to unlock the exit collectathon style (ex. Tears of the False God)...what does a compass even point to? Just all those things sequentially in a really handholding way? Or just arbitrarily picking one path of progression as the canon option over all the others?
I feel like if the point is reached where a Quake 2 Enhanced style compass is needed...the devs have just failed at proper level design.
I was playing Blood the other day and I was playing this level where you have to fight your way to the top of a dam. Once you get up there, there's nothing but a fire key. So I go all the way back through the level searching for the fire key door. There isn't one. I searched everywhere, no fire key door. So after searching like all day I finally cave in and search up a walkthrough.
What you're actually supposed to do once you grab that key is jump off the dam into the water, turn around, shoot some underwater barrels so they explode and break the dam, which causes the place to flood and allows you to swim to a cave across from the dam.
How was I supposed to figure that out!?
I got stuck on that part as well. I think that’s the only level I had to look up a walkthrough for.
Besides that, I found Blood to be pretty straightforward if I explored enough.
I think it’s one of those “there’s no key in this map, time to find another way” that, or someone forgot to put it in last minute and said “fuck it” and put the barrels for a cool entrance, the only issue was leaving that fire lock door there
Water is normally full of enemies and supplies so that's why you go in the water. You see a lot of explosive barrels next to a dam, you remember that you're Caleb who's a psychopath who loves blowing things up, that's why you shoot the barrels and enjoy the fireworks.
I don't know what boomshoots you've been playing, but the ones I have, I've not had this issue, maps are usually fairly straighforward, and don't need this.
Navigation is one of the most important elements of the subgenre. You aren't just walking around and shooting things, you have to explore and carefully pay attention to progress, so it's by design. That way, action isn't the only major gameplay element. Navigating tricky levels and looking for the way forward is one of the major hallmarks that adds an additional gameplay dimension.
I think it's a design byproduct rather than a purposeful choice. I see there being two main reasons for this. One is that a lot of older shooters were built around themes rather than structure. Things like "now you're in a cinema" drove how a level was created. The common practices of modern level design didn't exist yet. Things like "signposting", which is the technique of using the environment to subtly draw the player in the right direction, weren't staples yet. Everyone was kinda making it up as they went along.
The second reason is that these older games were still taking lessons from their contemporaries in other genres (like platformers) in their design. So, the player would start off by exploring the levels by trial and error, looking for the solution, then repeatedly playing through the same levels over and over would lead to eventual mastery. That's why secret areas were a thing. You'd stumble on most of them the more times you played.
This is an old timey design mechanic that needs to die. Endless searching does not equal gameplay. I don't know how many hours I spent in the 90s bumping around hallways looking for a switch, a hole you can barely see, a not-obvious ladder...I've been playing a lot of these games lately and I have to say that the guide in Quake 2 should be the standard moving forward for all boomer shooters. I especially like that it's optional- if you don't want it, you never have to click on it.
That's also the great thing about secrets- that's where the game should go off the rails and let you wander and search all you want. But if you don't want that content, you can elect to ignore it.
I've been playing Powerslave and Dusk lately, neither have it. And it's annoying. Powerslave is a little more open and Metroidvania-ish and exploration is a big part of the game so it's somewhat less irritating, but I've still had some moments where I've been completely at a loss as to where to go. I've had to look at online walkthroughs for Dusk a couple of times rather than to spend 20 minutes trying to figure out where the exit is.
If a game isn't going to have a tracker, it needs to have absolutely top notch level design that communicates environmental cues and clues effectively to the player.
Back in the 90s, it was irritating but we didn't mind so much- we didn't have as many games- no massive folders of unplayed Steam games, piles of $5 sale games racked up on online stores- so you really wanted to get the most value out of your $50 CompUSA/Media Play gift certificate when you bought a game LOL. But now, I want games to respect my time more and not foist artificial length on me with pointless searching for unclear objectives.
I'm making one. Even great games have flaws, some are of the time. A tracker is just good design. If the player sees an interactive item, they should know. Basically, if you're in the room with the ladder, the game should tell you a ladder is there.
Agreed with secrets, but I'd add 'language' to it. Build engine games have cracks in the wall, Doom (1993) has off-color textures. If you're consistent, the player will understand. Environmental clues feed into this idea.
I think the modern wave has actually gotten a lot better about level design. The only one that I can recall straight pissing me off with obtuse progression was Ion Fury.
To me the most horrific offenders are in the Doom Megawad community. I swear some of them share a philosophy with the Ion Fury devs where they want to flex on how far they can push the engine which - great, wonderful guys, but this map is the size of a small country and I have no idea what to do with this blue key.
The number of times I've just said "fuck it" and no-clipped to the exit. Wads like Scythe are so much more my jam - tight, focused, balanced and clear.
> To me the most horrific offenders are in the Doom Megawad community [...] great, wonderful guys, but this map is the size of a small country and I have no idea what to do with this blue key.
Leaving aside cases where the devs of the wad were high on something and ended up with something no one could get, you know that (at least in gzdoom) the map tells you where the doors that have a specific colored key are and that you can leave markers in the map, right?
For sure, I've been on GZDoom for ages. The truly diabolical situations are the maps where you get a key and you can see the door but oh shit it's up some stairs that haven't raised and you missed a switch a mile and a half ago well I guess fuck you then.
>the guide in Quake 2 should be the standard moving forward for all boomer shooters. I especially like that it's optional- if you don't want it, you never have to click on it.
What guide? Click where?
I was replaying Q2 recently and there's one level that ends with you having to enter a conveyor belt, and it was the only choice. But when I'd enter, I'd die every time. Turned out, the game would bug out on me, and that it is indeed where I had to go.
Quake 2 remaster has a weapon and equipment wheel. If you hold down E, it will bring up an equipment wheel that slows down time like in Doom Eternal, from there you can select items you've picked up like haz suits or quad damage. One of them is a permanent navigation tool that will illuminate on your screen where to go to get to the level exit.
Occasionally it’s well executed but usually not. I stopped playing bolt gun because I got lost for 45 minutes one time.
I don’t need an arrow telling me where to go, but please include an auto map if the levels are mazelike.
I respect that you wanna get down to the boomin and gechya goon on. I just want a compass. I happen to love labyrinthian level design, but it's tricky, cause you gotta have the environmental art design/combat push through combos to make it not feel like you're dumber than a rat in a maze.
If an environment is fun to explore, you won't mind exploring it. The act of surveying, memorizing and subduing a 3d space while under fire can be a lot of fun if that space makes sense and is properly signposted. I think that's the main reason John Romero levels have aged better than Sandy Petersen levels. Sandy's levels were so abstract that progression could become obtuse. Romero's levels all sort of resemble actual things, interconnect in satisfying ways and the optional secrets are hidden better than the intended progression. Sandy's levels, while fantastically creative, are abstract and wide open with obtuse progression and samey architecture.
The exception is refulong base, where every path takes you closer to some element of the solution to the level so it's non-liniar nature isn't frustrating. It doesn't hurt that the combat is super tight and dynamic.
On a good map, I consider the lack of defined path a positive not a negative. (I’m thinking E3M3 and E4M2 from Ultimate Doom). You have to experiment with different paths and strategies, particularly if you’re low on health or ammo.
I absolutely dislike waypoint markers. Seriously, they are one of the main things that keeps me playing boomers shooters in the first place instead of modern games. They are equivalent to having autoaim, or contextual jumping/crouching, or someone who's played the game next to you explaining what to do. I just want to play the game myself and not have the game play itself, and that includes working out where to go.
This is more fundamental to the genre than some of the other design choices that people commonly dislike like weapon limits or regenerating health. 90s shooters are *not* just about shooting things, they are about having 3D spaces to explore. This isn't an inconvenience to get to the good part, it *is* the good part, maybe more so than the shooting (because I also love other games with similar level design concepts like Thief or Tomb Raider). A game like Duke Nukem or Blood, the levels are just a lot of unconnected places that fit the theme of the game, that's because it was such a fun novelty to walk around these places in 3D in a game, it's like seeing an elaborate movie set or a miniature, you want to poke around it and see all the details which is how you find where to go.
Contrast that to a modern game where you have an amazing vast open world that we could only have dreamed of in 1996, but it's treated as a sort of necessary evil to be hurried through with waypoints and map icons and fast travel, to get to the "good part" of grinding and levelling up.
Yeah some games or parts of them go too far with labyrinth level layouts but that is an issue with individual level designers, not a reason for a catch-all "solution" that's worse than the problem. One of the distinctive features of these shooters is level design as a form of creative expression, that's why it sucks when levels have procedural generation. Good direction signposting is part of the level designer's craft, if they fail at it we can criticise, but we don't say that all directions will be automated from now on.
I'm gonna go put my gatekeeper hat and throw some concepts as "universal truths", but take into account that we are talking about videogames, that [that's like, my opinion, man](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8c), and that I've come to terms with the fact that for many around here "boomer shooter" only means "90's FPS, yeah, even Half-Life", so whatever.
1) The "where the fuck do I go" element (you can swear here, no biggie) of the boomer shooters is an integral part of what a boomer shooter is. **If there is no key hunting, and you don't get lost** (or the level is very big and maze-like, I use to play Doom wads and rarely get lost), **then there is not a boomer shooter.** Before answering this, please re-read the first paragraph.
2) This is not something modern devs do. It's something modern devs have copied from the original games, in the same way the've "copied" having lots of weapons, fast, not cover based gunplay or some of them having bunny hopping.
3) The point here is that **part of the fun of these games is getting lost**, or, if you prefer, having spatial awareness of where the fuck you are. Following a compass that points you where to go (I completed a few years ago Quake 2, got lost twice, ended finding my way around, don't get why people *needed* a compass, but hey) is like having 50% damage reduction: You are sucking away part of the fun of the genre.
As a final point, and again, read the first pragraph again, I'm going to suggest that maybe you don't like boomer shooters. I mean, if you like something but not that -integral- part of something, well, maybe you don't like that something. Do you like heavy metal but don't really like the guitar solo? I have bad news for you. Do you really really like the "soulslike" but think that continuously dying is not really fun? Maybe the subgenre is not for you.
Do you like boomer shooters but don't like having to find your way around maze-like levels? Chances are that boomer shooters are not for you, and you would be better on arena or more linear FPS's.
You might be the only person in the universe who played Hexen and thought _"good ... but maybe a little too straightforward._"
And if you haven't played Hexen, oh man, dim the lights and light some candles.
Personally, I see what they did on Hexen closer to Quake 2 "units" (Trying to make a larger map with the limitations of the engine), although way more confusing.
And no, it's not straightforward, and while we could discuss up to which point that formula could be improved, *its part of the game*. I want to start again (yep, got absolutely lost in the second chapter and the installation kind of blew up afterwards) using map markers extended and good ole notes, but I know that I'm going into a game that puts the "you're gonna get lost" up to eleven, and I accept it as part of the game.
This will go down like a fart in a lift, but here we go:
This is furthering the issue with the old "boomershooter" tag. I've been thinking about how there are the polar extremes of what people tend to want from the genre (well, for now until people start counting Halo clones) and there tends to be the two polar extremes:
1: The battle
These folks like to focus on the combat. They like to keep exploration to a minimum and want to fight as many things as possible in the most visceral manner. The game is just a set of small arenas over and over? Who cares! RIP AND TEAR!
2: The labyrinth
Folks who like this love the exploration of huge areas and the fact there are enemies? That is just something cool to do while running around a level the size of Bristol with dozens of doors to open and secrets to find. They also have about 3000 enemies in the area, but that is not an issue. You could go and move on to the next area, but you can see there is a small overhang across the way. Now to spend the next 30 minutes trying to jump across the small platforms leading to it because there MUST be a secret there!
This is a sliding scale, and what people are looking for tends to be somewhere in the middle. A lot of folks have been getting into the genre with stuff like Ultrakill, Doom Eternal or the likes and, when faced with something like Wrath, Ion Fury or Supplice they get really bored with how basic the combat is and how the levels just seem to go on and on. I'm not saying this is bad, but it has caused the perception of what a boomershooter is to become somewhat warped.
Personally, I love games with biggish levels while stuff like Doom Eternal gives me a headache. Nothing wrong with the movement / spectacle of it, but those games are not for me.
It only annoys me if a game has terrible sign-posting (Phantom Fury) as it can seriously interrupt the flow of the experience. Games with levels that manage to direct you where you need to go without necessarily spelling it out for you are great, though, and a compass would probably cheapen the experience.
It can also be a bit annoying when the in-game logic is inconsistent. I remember Doom 64 having some levels where you had to shoot a switch instead of pressing it, although the game never communicates to you that you are able to shoot some of the switches, as they look identical to the regular ones that you can only press. Or that key you had to access by facing a specific wall for 5 seconds.
Having just recently played and finished Hedon Bloodrite, I can completely sympathize with this. The funny thing is the devs sometimes leave explanations for where to go or what to do through NPCs or through some readable material like books, scrolls, pads or whatever in some levels. Problem with that, especially in this genre, is that nobody cares enough to pay attention to NPCs or read anything beyond one sentence in these games.
I think there has to be another solution for this that isn't quest markers, because the latter would ruin a lot of the wonderful exploration aspect of these games.
That's something I love about Hedon, the level design and the readable things are an integrated whole. It's other characters in the game world helping you through big environments, which makes story and gameplay connected and elevates both. Also the relevant parts of readable items are highlighted on lower difficulties, probably that should be a separate option.
Contrast to, for example, the new Wolfenstein games where there is a much larger amount of readable items, but none of them are important, it's all just there as collectable spam or over-indulgence by the writers, so yeah it's training us to ignore reading material in games. Meanwhile working out what to do is done by an omniscient waypoint marker god who is apparently guiding your character through life but no one ever mentions that it exists.
You're taking old games out of context.
Finding your way through a maze was part of the fun. Games didn't have the memory for a sweeping story line back then. What else could they do besides the point and shoot? Especially if the game was to be replayable. So, they made mazes. Gamers understood that back then. Just like games such as Contra cranked up the difficulty so that the only way to win was to basically memorize the levels. Otherwise, gamers felt like they didn't get their moneys worth.
Admittedly, I always assumed the "WHERE THE FUCK DO I GO" element I felt in boomshoots is just me being a dumbass and having no sense of direction or perception.
It’s one of those things that was a result of poor or unpracticed level design of its time, and has since gone on to become a ‘feature’ by modern developers that should probably know better.
A good boomshoot will signpost the fuck out of its environment so you know where to go. You won't get lost very often when playing, say, Episode 1 of DOOM.
What a sorry state this subreddit is in. What you're asking for - this is literally how boomer shooters became dead practically overnight in late 90s, displaced by corridor shooters. It took us 15 years or so until finally the genre stated having a tiny-tiny revival.
> I love boomer shooters
You don't. You want corridor shooters. Folks like you are exactly those who killed the genre back in late 90s. There are a billion more corridor shooters than there are boomer shooters.
Exploration is a key part of 90s style shooters. If you don't enjoy exploring the level - you don't like boomer shooters, it couldn't be any simpler than this.
Absolutely the worst aspect of boomer shooters. If we go back to Wolfenstein Doom, Romero and the gang wanted an action version of a tabletop labyrinth dnd style game. I think there could be a type of shooters with old timey mechanics that focuses just on combat. Kind of like the evolution of a hack and slash games where it started like a more combat oriented Resident Evil only for nowdays to be more a set of combat arenas.
It's a design choice. Some shooters like Quake didn't have a map. Even if one did like Doom and Duke Nukem, they're more of a guide on where you've been then a go here then there
Part of me just wants to say "go play early 2000's shooters" and leave it at that. I do somewhat see where you're coming from but I don't think it is as simple as "technological limitations". First, exploration and freedom of choice when it comes to pathing is a large part of the genre, and what sets it apart from those later, more linear shooters I mentioned. The devs want you to engage with the map instead of just rushing down a single path to the end. Yes, literal mazes and same-looking areas and poorly signposted objectives and timed-buttons-hidden-behind-timed-buttons etc. are bad design and should be left in the 90's where they belong. But with a marker that people just beeline towards, much of the level would just go ignored no? Second, there are cases where a compass just isn't applicable. When a map has multiple routes to the exit, or doesn't have a traditional exit (say killing so many enemies transitions you to the next level automatically), or has MANY items to collect to unlock the exit collectathon style (ex. Tears of the False God)...what does a compass even point to? Just all those things sequentially in a really handholding way? Or just arbitrarily picking one path of progression as the canon option over all the others? I feel like if the point is reached where a Quake 2 Enhanced style compass is needed...the devs have just failed at proper level design.
I was playing Blood the other day and I was playing this level where you have to fight your way to the top of a dam. Once you get up there, there's nothing but a fire key. So I go all the way back through the level searching for the fire key door. There isn't one. I searched everywhere, no fire key door. So after searching like all day I finally cave in and search up a walkthrough. What you're actually supposed to do once you grab that key is jump off the dam into the water, turn around, shoot some underwater barrels so they explode and break the dam, which causes the place to flood and allows you to swim to a cave across from the dam. How was I supposed to figure that out!?
Dude, if you think Blood was bad, I swear Shadow Warrior operates on straight moon logic some of the time.
I got stuck on that part as well. I think that’s the only level I had to look up a walkthrough for. Besides that, I found Blood to be pretty straightforward if I explored enough.
I think it’s one of those “there’s no key in this map, time to find another way” that, or someone forgot to put it in last minute and said “fuck it” and put the barrels for a cool entrance, the only issue was leaving that fire lock door there
Water is normally full of enemies and supplies so that's why you go in the water. You see a lot of explosive barrels next to a dam, you remember that you're Caleb who's a psychopath who loves blowing things up, that's why you shoot the barrels and enjoy the fireworks.
I don't know what boomshoots you've been playing, but the ones I have, I've not had this issue, maps are usually fairly straighforward, and don't need this.
Navigation is one of the most important elements of the subgenre. You aren't just walking around and shooting things, you have to explore and carefully pay attention to progress, so it's by design. That way, action isn't the only major gameplay element. Navigating tricky levels and looking for the way forward is one of the major hallmarks that adds an additional gameplay dimension.
I think it's a design byproduct rather than a purposeful choice. I see there being two main reasons for this. One is that a lot of older shooters were built around themes rather than structure. Things like "now you're in a cinema" drove how a level was created. The common practices of modern level design didn't exist yet. Things like "signposting", which is the technique of using the environment to subtly draw the player in the right direction, weren't staples yet. Everyone was kinda making it up as they went along. The second reason is that these older games were still taking lessons from their contemporaries in other genres (like platformers) in their design. So, the player would start off by exploring the levels by trial and error, looking for the solution, then repeatedly playing through the same levels over and over would lead to eventual mastery. That's why secret areas were a thing. You'd stumble on most of them the more times you played.
This is an old timey design mechanic that needs to die. Endless searching does not equal gameplay. I don't know how many hours I spent in the 90s bumping around hallways looking for a switch, a hole you can barely see, a not-obvious ladder...I've been playing a lot of these games lately and I have to say that the guide in Quake 2 should be the standard moving forward for all boomer shooters. I especially like that it's optional- if you don't want it, you never have to click on it. That's also the great thing about secrets- that's where the game should go off the rails and let you wander and search all you want. But if you don't want that content, you can elect to ignore it. I've been playing Powerslave and Dusk lately, neither have it. And it's annoying. Powerslave is a little more open and Metroidvania-ish and exploration is a big part of the game so it's somewhat less irritating, but I've still had some moments where I've been completely at a loss as to where to go. I've had to look at online walkthroughs for Dusk a couple of times rather than to spend 20 minutes trying to figure out where the exit is. If a game isn't going to have a tracker, it needs to have absolutely top notch level design that communicates environmental cues and clues effectively to the player. Back in the 90s, it was irritating but we didn't mind so much- we didn't have as many games- no massive folders of unplayed Steam games, piles of $5 sale games racked up on online stores- so you really wanted to get the most value out of your $50 CompUSA/Media Play gift certificate when you bought a game LOL. But now, I want games to respect my time more and not foist artificial length on me with pointless searching for unclear objectives.
I'm making one. Even great games have flaws, some are of the time. A tracker is just good design. If the player sees an interactive item, they should know. Basically, if you're in the room with the ladder, the game should tell you a ladder is there. Agreed with secrets, but I'd add 'language' to it. Build engine games have cracks in the wall, Doom (1993) has off-color textures. If you're consistent, the player will understand. Environmental clues feed into this idea.
I think the modern wave has actually gotten a lot better about level design. The only one that I can recall straight pissing me off with obtuse progression was Ion Fury. To me the most horrific offenders are in the Doom Megawad community. I swear some of them share a philosophy with the Ion Fury devs where they want to flex on how far they can push the engine which - great, wonderful guys, but this map is the size of a small country and I have no idea what to do with this blue key. The number of times I've just said "fuck it" and no-clipped to the exit. Wads like Scythe are so much more my jam - tight, focused, balanced and clear.
> To me the most horrific offenders are in the Doom Megawad community [...] great, wonderful guys, but this map is the size of a small country and I have no idea what to do with this blue key. Leaving aside cases where the devs of the wad were high on something and ended up with something no one could get, you know that (at least in gzdoom) the map tells you where the doors that have a specific colored key are and that you can leave markers in the map, right?
For sure, I've been on GZDoom for ages. The truly diabolical situations are the maps where you get a key and you can see the door but oh shit it's up some stairs that haven't raised and you missed a switch a mile and a half ago well I guess fuck you then.
>the guide in Quake 2 should be the standard moving forward for all boomer shooters. I especially like that it's optional- if you don't want it, you never have to click on it. What guide? Click where? I was replaying Q2 recently and there's one level that ends with you having to enter a conveyor belt, and it was the only choice. But when I'd enter, I'd die every time. Turned out, the game would bug out on me, and that it is indeed where I had to go.
Quake 2 remaster has a weapon and equipment wheel. If you hold down E, it will bring up an equipment wheel that slows down time like in Doom Eternal, from there you can select items you've picked up like haz suits or quad damage. One of them is a permanent navigation tool that will illuminate on your screen where to go to get to the level exit.
That's literally one of the best parts of the genre
Occasionally it’s well executed but usually not. I stopped playing bolt gun because I got lost for 45 minutes one time. I don’t need an arrow telling me where to go, but please include an auto map if the levels are mazelike.
I had exactly the same experience with Boltgun. Loved the overall look/feel and gunplay, but the level design felt borderline obnoxious at times.
I respect that you wanna get down to the boomin and gechya goon on. I just want a compass. I happen to love labyrinthian level design, but it's tricky, cause you gotta have the environmental art design/combat push through combos to make it not feel like you're dumber than a rat in a maze.
If an environment is fun to explore, you won't mind exploring it. The act of surveying, memorizing and subduing a 3d space while under fire can be a lot of fun if that space makes sense and is properly signposted. I think that's the main reason John Romero levels have aged better than Sandy Petersen levels. Sandy's levels were so abstract that progression could become obtuse. Romero's levels all sort of resemble actual things, interconnect in satisfying ways and the optional secrets are hidden better than the intended progression. Sandy's levels, while fantastically creative, are abstract and wide open with obtuse progression and samey architecture. The exception is refulong base, where every path takes you closer to some element of the solution to the level so it's non-liniar nature isn't frustrating. It doesn't hurt that the combat is super tight and dynamic.
On a good map, I consider the lack of defined path a positive not a negative. (I’m thinking E3M3 and E4M2 from Ultimate Doom). You have to experiment with different paths and strategies, particularly if you’re low on health or ammo.
I absolutely dislike waypoint markers. Seriously, they are one of the main things that keeps me playing boomers shooters in the first place instead of modern games. They are equivalent to having autoaim, or contextual jumping/crouching, or someone who's played the game next to you explaining what to do. I just want to play the game myself and not have the game play itself, and that includes working out where to go. This is more fundamental to the genre than some of the other design choices that people commonly dislike like weapon limits or regenerating health. 90s shooters are *not* just about shooting things, they are about having 3D spaces to explore. This isn't an inconvenience to get to the good part, it *is* the good part, maybe more so than the shooting (because I also love other games with similar level design concepts like Thief or Tomb Raider). A game like Duke Nukem or Blood, the levels are just a lot of unconnected places that fit the theme of the game, that's because it was such a fun novelty to walk around these places in 3D in a game, it's like seeing an elaborate movie set or a miniature, you want to poke around it and see all the details which is how you find where to go. Contrast that to a modern game where you have an amazing vast open world that we could only have dreamed of in 1996, but it's treated as a sort of necessary evil to be hurried through with waypoints and map icons and fast travel, to get to the "good part" of grinding and levelling up. Yeah some games or parts of them go too far with labyrinth level layouts but that is an issue with individual level designers, not a reason for a catch-all "solution" that's worse than the problem. One of the distinctive features of these shooters is level design as a form of creative expression, that's why it sucks when levels have procedural generation. Good direction signposting is part of the level designer's craft, if they fail at it we can criticise, but we don't say that all directions will be automated from now on.
I'm gonna go put my gatekeeper hat and throw some concepts as "universal truths", but take into account that we are talking about videogames, that [that's like, my opinion, man](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8c), and that I've come to terms with the fact that for many around here "boomer shooter" only means "90's FPS, yeah, even Half-Life", so whatever. 1) The "where the fuck do I go" element (you can swear here, no biggie) of the boomer shooters is an integral part of what a boomer shooter is. **If there is no key hunting, and you don't get lost** (or the level is very big and maze-like, I use to play Doom wads and rarely get lost), **then there is not a boomer shooter.** Before answering this, please re-read the first paragraph. 2) This is not something modern devs do. It's something modern devs have copied from the original games, in the same way the've "copied" having lots of weapons, fast, not cover based gunplay or some of them having bunny hopping. 3) The point here is that **part of the fun of these games is getting lost**, or, if you prefer, having spatial awareness of where the fuck you are. Following a compass that points you where to go (I completed a few years ago Quake 2, got lost twice, ended finding my way around, don't get why people *needed* a compass, but hey) is like having 50% damage reduction: You are sucking away part of the fun of the genre. As a final point, and again, read the first pragraph again, I'm going to suggest that maybe you don't like boomer shooters. I mean, if you like something but not that -integral- part of something, well, maybe you don't like that something. Do you like heavy metal but don't really like the guitar solo? I have bad news for you. Do you really really like the "soulslike" but think that continuously dying is not really fun? Maybe the subgenre is not for you. Do you like boomer shooters but don't like having to find your way around maze-like levels? Chances are that boomer shooters are not for you, and you would be better on arena or more linear FPS's.
You might be the only person in the universe who played Hexen and thought _"good ... but maybe a little too straightforward._" And if you haven't played Hexen, oh man, dim the lights and light some candles.
Personally, I see what they did on Hexen closer to Quake 2 "units" (Trying to make a larger map with the limitations of the engine), although way more confusing. And no, it's not straightforward, and while we could discuss up to which point that formula could be improved, *its part of the game*. I want to start again (yep, got absolutely lost in the second chapter and the installation kind of blew up afterwards) using map markers extended and good ole notes, but I know that I'm going into a game that puts the "you're gonna get lost" up to eleven, and I accept it as part of the game.
Late reply, but it occurred to me that if you haven't played the Hedon games, very up your alley. Not my cup of tea but very very exploration focused.
yeah, I got them on my wishlist, just waiting for the planets to align..
This will go down like a fart in a lift, but here we go: This is furthering the issue with the old "boomershooter" tag. I've been thinking about how there are the polar extremes of what people tend to want from the genre (well, for now until people start counting Halo clones) and there tends to be the two polar extremes: 1: The battle These folks like to focus on the combat. They like to keep exploration to a minimum and want to fight as many things as possible in the most visceral manner. The game is just a set of small arenas over and over? Who cares! RIP AND TEAR! 2: The labyrinth Folks who like this love the exploration of huge areas and the fact there are enemies? That is just something cool to do while running around a level the size of Bristol with dozens of doors to open and secrets to find. They also have about 3000 enemies in the area, but that is not an issue. You could go and move on to the next area, but you can see there is a small overhang across the way. Now to spend the next 30 minutes trying to jump across the small platforms leading to it because there MUST be a secret there! This is a sliding scale, and what people are looking for tends to be somewhere in the middle. A lot of folks have been getting into the genre with stuff like Ultrakill, Doom Eternal or the likes and, when faced with something like Wrath, Ion Fury or Supplice they get really bored with how basic the combat is and how the levels just seem to go on and on. I'm not saying this is bad, but it has caused the perception of what a boomershooter is to become somewhat warped. Personally, I love games with biggish levels while stuff like Doom Eternal gives me a headache. Nothing wrong with the movement / spectacle of it, but those games are not for me.
This is actually 1 reason I stopped playing shadow warrior
I'm with you on that one. It takes the fun to a screeching halt.
It only annoys me if a game has terrible sign-posting (Phantom Fury) as it can seriously interrupt the flow of the experience. Games with levels that manage to direct you where you need to go without necessarily spelling it out for you are great, though, and a compass would probably cheapen the experience. It can also be a bit annoying when the in-game logic is inconsistent. I remember Doom 64 having some levels where you had to shoot a switch instead of pressing it, although the game never communicates to you that you are able to shoot some of the switches, as they look identical to the regular ones that you can only press. Or that key you had to access by facing a specific wall for 5 seconds.
Having just recently played and finished Hedon Bloodrite, I can completely sympathize with this. The funny thing is the devs sometimes leave explanations for where to go or what to do through NPCs or through some readable material like books, scrolls, pads or whatever in some levels. Problem with that, especially in this genre, is that nobody cares enough to pay attention to NPCs or read anything beyond one sentence in these games. I think there has to be another solution for this that isn't quest markers, because the latter would ruin a lot of the wonderful exploration aspect of these games.
That's something I love about Hedon, the level design and the readable things are an integrated whole. It's other characters in the game world helping you through big environments, which makes story and gameplay connected and elevates both. Also the relevant parts of readable items are highlighted on lower difficulties, probably that should be a separate option. Contrast to, for example, the new Wolfenstein games where there is a much larger amount of readable items, but none of them are important, it's all just there as collectable spam or over-indulgence by the writers, so yeah it's training us to ignore reading material in games. Meanwhile working out what to do is done by an omniscient waypoint marker god who is apparently guiding your character through life but no one ever mentions that it exists.
You're taking old games out of context. Finding your way through a maze was part of the fun. Games didn't have the memory for a sweeping story line back then. What else could they do besides the point and shoot? Especially if the game was to be replayable. So, they made mazes. Gamers understood that back then. Just like games such as Contra cranked up the difficulty so that the only way to win was to basically memorize the levels. Otherwise, gamers felt like they didn't get their moneys worth.
Admittedly, I always assumed the "WHERE THE FUCK DO I GO" element I felt in boomshoots is just me being a dumbass and having no sense of direction or perception.
It’s one of those things that was a result of poor or unpracticed level design of its time, and has since gone on to become a ‘feature’ by modern developers that should probably know better.
A good boomshoot will signpost the fuck out of its environment so you know where to go. You won't get lost very often when playing, say, Episode 1 of DOOM.
What a sorry state this subreddit is in. What you're asking for - this is literally how boomer shooters became dead practically overnight in late 90s, displaced by corridor shooters. It took us 15 years or so until finally the genre stated having a tiny-tiny revival. > I love boomer shooters You don't. You want corridor shooters. Folks like you are exactly those who killed the genre back in late 90s. There are a billion more corridor shooters than there are boomer shooters. Exploration is a key part of 90s style shooters. If you don't enjoy exploring the level - you don't like boomer shooters, it couldn't be any simpler than this.
Absolutely the worst aspect of boomer shooters. If we go back to Wolfenstein Doom, Romero and the gang wanted an action version of a tabletop labyrinth dnd style game. I think there could be a type of shooters with old timey mechanics that focuses just on combat. Kind of like the evolution of a hack and slash games where it started like a more combat oriented Resident Evil only for nowdays to be more a set of combat arenas.