I think part of the problem is an adherance to a sense of "reality". Doom2 had monsters morphing in all the time. But as games "become more realistic" ... which has partly been just to show off new GPU's ... morphing enemy, and silly backtracking environments, are harder to reconcile, leading to a more linear experience. 

getting lost in doom2 was not fun. It was not good design that led you to being lost but the fact that things just looked the same. Your goal was still iinear (find the corridor with the right door for the button you just pushed).

But it worked to an extent. Why? Because the game had atmosphere so that you were involved in being lost because you wanted to get the hell out of an area before something else happened.

The same applied to something like Undying which had a fair bit of backtracking that was not always clear. Some of that lack of clarity was because of design choice, some of it because of things looking the same. But like Doom2, it worked to an extent.

In most new games, there is the rails factor but there is also the lack of atmosphere factor. It's a hard concept to pin down but it is not the same as realism. You are not more involved just because something looks more realistic. The best description I can come up with is that atmosphere makes you feel some emotion. 

I think Doom3 had atmosphere, which is why I can forgive its many flaws. 

The more abstract the game is, the more your own imagination and fantasy are able to (and have to) fill in the blanks. Thus making a deeper immersion possible. At least for me. 

Fully agreed ! 

I rarely start a new game... reassons! lack of time and after some games I get bored!

Quake never been bored, at least at the moment! 

I partially agree, but maybe it's more of a sweet spot in the middle of a spectrum between ultra-abstract and ultra-realistic.

I'm not a big fan of card games (regular playing cards, at least). They're better than no game at all, but cards are so abstract that there are no blanks to fill in; there's no starting point to create a story to get immersed in. Same with other super-abstract games (chess, minesweeper, etc.) 

Minecraft is a great example of that, and Quake also, the graphics are very basic so you fill in the missing pieces with your mind.

If minecraft had a mega-budget and "better" realistic graphics I think it would lose a lot of its personality and charm. Things you build would start looking incorrect if you used the wrong building blocks, etc. Where as now you really chose what block to use because you like the colour or texture of it, and your mind fills in the rest. 

I could just as easily montage a 320x200 DOOM screen next to a 1920x1280 Brink/Rage/Singularity screen and say "See?"

Having worked on Singularity, I can say with utmost confidence that most of the level design was exactly that second picture. 

but just showing a top down of a doom map and saying 'see how complex this is' is stupid. 

This seems to be bubbling nicely but think I'll give it a stir -

I think it was mexx8 that was completely lineal - no loops or backtracking at all for an entire episode but was so clear in its gameplay style I enjoyed it more than many other maps that do have exploration.

It all depends on what the designer wanted to achieve, and how closely they held themselves to their vision. 

http://hexenmod.com/ 

 

I was sure that was dead a long time ago 

It's time to buy Doom 3. 

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/11/11/reich-here-reich-now-reich-footage/

Shame its been cancelled, that looks sooooooo fun!

Just check video 2 and 3 if your pressed for time. 

Daaaaaamn :( Awesome videos there! 

That looks completely ridiculous. And pretty good.

Maybe a bit too close to Singularity + Timeshift + Painkiller tho. 

That first video looks like Nazis meets tron, but also there's lots of Quake symbols and a Shambler.

Video 2 they released to reassure players that the story and characters are pig-fuckingly bad. Rebel leader girl with strategically ripped shirt, who sounds like she's ordering a burrito, CHECK. Dickhead protagonist, saying self-righteous, and also retarded things very loud, check. WHY STOP THE SPACE-NAZIS, PEOPLE ARE JUST INHERENTLY BAD.

Still would probably play it. Gameplay looks suitably destructive, looks like they possibly have some sort of destrucable scenery tech in there, maybe. Not sure. 

http://www.pcauthority.com.au/News/170181,top-10-computer-games-of-all-time.aspx 

list inaccurate,
end of line 

Speak of subjectivity. However, I think if I had to make a Top10 of video games, I wouldn't include Quake, either. 

The problem is that linear is cheapest.

That's wrong. What I see is that lineal is just easier to understand. Management decides what game you're making, and they don't want the stress of thinking of complicated ones.

The cost is the immaterial - they can spend as much money as they want, basically. But most anyone who reaches a level of control where they can decide the direction of a company really doesn't give a flying fuck about quality, just getting it over with and advancing to the next one. 

Not having a pop at you Tronyn - but as you can read, I've been in the industry too long. But to be honest, maybe a year is too long. 

I just meant that if the game is single player, and the player's expecting maybe 20 hours of SP gameplay, making one 20 hour game is easier than making more than one, which would be the result of having branching episodes, more player control, etc. I guess this relates more to game design than level design, but I think a similar principle applies. The other classic flaw of Doom3 was that they wanted to maximize detail, so the map design couldn't be interwoven with lots of areas visible from each other.