[Truck Stop Santa Claus]

Well
It's out guys, playing it on Switch myself

[Malgon]

[MusicallyInspired]

Nice video and very revealing. I didn't know General Arcade was in charge of the ports. Nice! He did say though that the music was natively OGG Vorbis on PC. Unless something's changed since I last played it, it's actually .XM music right?

[necroslut]

 MusicallyInspired, on 16 May 2020 - 06:29 AM, said:

Nice video and very revealing. I didn't know General Arcade was in charge of the ports. Nice! He did say though that the music was natively OGG Vorbis on PC. Unless something's changed since I last played it, it's actually .XM music right?

It's the sound effects are .ogg.

[MusicallyInspired]

Ah he just said "sound" and not "music." I don't know why I thought he said music.

[oasiz]

Music was also rendered

[Truck Stop Santa Claus]

amazing how limited consoles are

[MusicallyInspired]

 oasiz, on 19 May 2020 - 07:43 AM, said:

Music was also rendered

Yes, but not originally from OGG files. At least....I hope not.

[LeoD]

I[r]on Fury build r8953 for Win32/64
Provided as-is. Do not ask me or even the developers for further support. Do not file bug reports about these executables.

[Truck Stop Santa Claus]

uhh
ok

[Hank]

Ion Fury soundtrack, is the best (second best) soundtrack for May, of PlayStation video games ...
https://www.pushsqua...sic_of_may_2020

All the best Voidpoint. Keep it up.

[Truck Stop Santa Claus]

wow
that is nuts

[MrFlibble]

Hey, I've actually gotten around to play the full game a bit!

Is it me, or has the title theme changed slightly compared to the preview builds? I can't tell for sure because I played the previews on Linux while Windows has some HD audio driver thing that maybe alters sound quality.

I'm somewhat disappointed that while the preview campaign is playable as a bonus mission, it still uses the final version settings for enemies and weapons, with alt-fire and no brown technocultists anymore. I'm not complaining, and it makes the demo/preview more special, if only it were available to other people too. (BTW, I also don't have the latest version of he preview with the Heskel's House of Horrors level).

[MrFlibble]

Playing a bit more, I realised, for the first time in a Build engine game, that the enemy AI is rather limited:

• enemies frequently get stuck in corners or hug walls when they are alerted to the player's presence but are unable to reach her, e.g. because they're on low ground
  
  
• enemies sometimes try to shoot at the player through solid walls, or from around the corner but their weapon is pointing into the corner (thus firing into the wall) while they are exposed to the player's fire
  
  
• so far I haven't noticed any enemy defensive behaviours from the enemies, e.g. trying to dodge or take cover. They seem to either stand idly, attack from distance while remaining stationary, or go straight at the player in an attempt to attack

It occurred to me that it would be nice if enemies would act in more diverse fashions, e.g. I don't think I ever ran into one patrolling an area (something that you can find even in Wolfenstein 3-D). Or see them do some stuff like set up weird equipment for Heskel's experiments, or even just an automated turret. I guess making a few extra animations for that could be quite possible. You know, so that you don't have the impression that the only thing they do is stand and wait for the player.

Ion Fury is such a great new start for the Build engine, it could incorporate a lot more elements, including friendly NPCs and more diverse situations/missions, e.g. rescuing captured GDF personnel or civilians, sabotaging enemy operations or something along those lines. I mean, many outdoor areas I have been into so far, including a replay of the preview area with the Sandy's bus and GDF HQ, gave me a strong feeling of intense urban combat I never had in any of the classic Build games. This could be peppered even more if the enemies showed some smarter behaviours than they do now IMO.

[oasiz]

Themes (music) are the same. Reason why preview enemies are different is because every code/art/etc.. change has been incremental so what you get in full version is basically "1.0".
Colour was changed around because the old one was very badly visible in darker areas. The cultists went through like 3-4 major hue changes so what you see is just one of the them
Altfire simply didn't exist during preview and we never coded any way to disable existing functionality so that's why you get that.

As for A.I. -- It definitely uses a lot more compared to other build games as the enemies seek towards the player much better. Why they run against walls is mostly due to the geometry, build falls apart here. The functions for A.I. are just not suited for this, a lot of workarounds had to be made (i.e. marking sectors that they're not allowed to go into are done manually and so on).
Dodge, crouch, etc.. is all random in the old games, SW/Blood perhaps utilize this a bit more but only on some enemies. It's still very hard to make a "smart" A.I. with what there is, you could say that the complexity of the game doesn't match the A.I. well.

Patrols are definitely in, enemies can walk, patrol, stop and do various things (Not present to this degree in other build games), it's all hand-crafted. Not absolutely every area has patrols but many areas do, also many respawn sprites "route" enemies to their spot.
But yeah, doing more complex A.I. does require quite a bit of extra effort, especially with build. I guess Fury hits the kind of late 90s era where it's more reasonable to expect HL-like A.I. but build is a bit iffy for some of this. We actually had plans for some hostage/defusal stuff at some point but it would've required too much development time that we couldn't afford, plus it distracted from the main game.
In the end, we scrapped the extra fluff and went with what is there. NPCs were scrapped as a first thing, the game would need more focus on plot for these to make sense.
Fury in many ways is sort of Duke3D in it's gameplay loop.

[Danukem]

Build engine does make it difficult to overcome the kinds of problems that MrFlibble listed, but it can be done -- mostly. I've had a lot of success with pathfinding and preventing enemies from going into bad places. It's not enough to use a few invisible waypoints to define patrols, you have to have them all over the level to define the entire space that actors are allowed to move in. Then you need a recursive pathfinding algorithm that can lead actors where they need to go (not necessarily to the player). You basically have to use waypoints to make a simplified version of their area that the actors can "see" because it's extremely difficult for them to evaluate the level geometry otherwise. Even then, it's pretty tough (but not impossible) to make them properly use doors in pursuit, let alone elevators; there's about a hundred pitfalls. Level design has to follow certain rules to make it work with the pathing system and if the level designer doesn't understand that or the system doesn't exist at the time the level is built, that poses another challenge. I think you guys know this already and you made a decision early on to make a more "classic" style build game in terms of simple enemy AI.

Enemy dodging can be handled very well without waypoints but it's important to have additional animations to really sell it, like a rolling animation for example. Also make the enemy do some hitscans in several different directions so they know what a good direction to move in is -- never lazily make them roll into a wall with a random angle change if they had better options. And don't overdo it -- it's annoying and frustrating when an enemy dodges all the time, and I actually suspect that's the main reason enemies in Ion Fury do not dodge much. One method I use a lot is I have non-hitscan projectiles constantly do hitscan checks on their flightpath, and if they are hitscanning an actor, send a signal to the actor with the projectile ID, so the actors knows a projectile is coming right at them and they can decide what (if anything) to do about it. That's way better than the "ifbulletnear" garbage in Duke 3D.

The classic method of beating enemies in build is to have either you or the enemy near a corner, then time your strafing so that the enemy shoots into a wall. It could be a chase around a pillar, or it could be at an intersection in a corridor. To some extent this works in any shooter, but build is especially susceptible to it, apparently. Part of the issue is enemies not using waypoints, as mentioned above. If waypoints are placed in known good locations then when an enemy engages they can be programmed to check and see if they are in a known good location, and in many cases that will prompt them to move away from an exploitable corner. The other issue is that when the enemy is checking for whether to fire, we need a more sophisticated check than line of sight to the player. A good location to shoot from will allow a certain amount of variance -- if small changes in the position of the shooter or target invalidate the shot, that's evidence that it's a very "brittle" position and it's probably time to move to a better one. It's extra work, but line of sight checks can be run testing different coordinates to see how robust the current position is. This last bit is something I have not really used, though, so take that with a grain of salt.

[necroslut]

While the AI might be "smarter" on a technical level, I do have to agree that it "feels" dumber than in Duke, SW or Blood. Quite possibly a lot of this comes down to the more complex levels, but also – I think – to the lack of "secondary actions" for the enemies. They don't jump, roll, fly or use secondary attacks, like a lot of the classic Build enemies did. It might have been triggered randomly, but the way it interacted with the level designs still worked.
And while I noticed that patrols were in, you're much less likely to notice it in any meaningful way than in Shadow Warrior or even Wolf 3D. I guess this comes down to level design mostly, but it does feel underutilized, and the enemies on the whole feel very basic.

[MrFlibble]

Thanks for the detailed answers guys!

oasiz, on 06 June 2020 - 10:13 AM, said:

But yeah, doing more complex A.I. does require quite a bit of extra effort, especially with build. I guess Fury hits the kind of late 90s era where it's more reasonable to expect HL-like A.I. but build is a bit iffy for some of this. We actually had plans for some hostage/defusal stuff at some point but it would've required too much development time that we couldn't afford, plus it distracted from the main game.
In the end, we scrapped the extra fluff and went with what is there. NPCs were scrapped as a first thing, the game would need more focus on plot for these to make sense.
Fury in many ways is sort of Duke3D in it's gameplay loop.

Perhaps these ideas could be implemented in the expansion/sequel? I totally agree that IF is a lot like Duke3D in the core gameplay elements, but somehow, somehow it feels different in a multitude of ways. The enemies are more human and you kind of expect them to act as such, especially as you can hear coherent utterances in their radio chatter (compare this to Quake humanoids that are intended to be drones). Again, action in many places makes you feel like it's a more realistic military operation or something.

On the whole IF feels more mature (not in the sense of "adult content") compared to Duke3D, which should be unsurprising considering the many years of mapping and coding experience of the developers, and the community on the whole.

Trooper Dan, on 06 June 2020 - 11:47 AM, said:

Build engine does make it difficult to overcome the kinds of problems that MrFlibble listed, but it can be done -- mostly.

Indeed I'd not be asking about the features above if it weren't for Alien Armageddon and AMC TC. These prove that neutral and allied NPCs work exceedingly well in Build (at least, to my mind).

Ion Fury's levels are very well crafted but I had a feeling of the urban areas being completely deserted -- again, something that I'd never think about when playing Duke3D or Shadow Warrior. It isn't like I had some sort of different expectations, but I guess playing Alien Armageddon in-between the preview campaign and the full release has affected my perception.

I'm thinking that the more vast and complex nature of the levels (compared to classic Build titles) has played its part in exposing the limitations of the AI. But at the same time it seems to me that there is potential for developing this aspect of gameplay further, and maybe creating novel situations for the player to find themselves in. The protagonist's character and the setting are quite conducive to exploring these directions IMO.

I think it could be quite organically woven into story/gameplay that Shelly

• works alongside other GDF members, either present physically as allies or communicating over radio/wrist console/whatever
  
  
• carries out various missions (not just shoot everyone and reach exit) in a concerted effort against Heskel or other threat
  
  
• sometimes has to operate in populated areas with civilians
  
  
• does not always resort to the gung ho attitude and can use stealth in the face of numerically superior opponents
  
  
• can (maybe?) have a choice of missions, with a branching/non-linear plot
  
  
• maybe can upgrade weapons at the home GDF base, or something along those lines

As a Dark Forces fan I am convinced that the above features can be seamlessly combined with the classic run-and-gun, explore-for-secrets classic Build FPS gameplay. And imagine how the level of detail in the maps could contribute to some unusual missions, something like infiltrating an enemy installation and then finding an escape route. I guess the Build engine could even allow for something like Hitman missions (especially in later games where you have sprawling locations) with several ways of completing the objectives.

But I have to apologise in advance if any of the above is contrary to the authors' vision of the game and the character, it's just the ideas I got from the game concept, artistic direction and gameplay, plus the aforementioned community mods for Duke3D

[Danukem]

necroslut, on 06 June 2020 - 12:06 PM, said:

While the AI might be "smarter" on a technical level, I do have to agree that it "feels" dumber than in Duke, SW or Blood. Quite possibly a lot of this comes down to the more complex levels, but also – I think – to the lack of "secondary actions" for the enemies.

It's been a while since I played IF and I haven't looked at the code, but... I think part of it is that enemies should often decide to move and reposition even when they have a clear shot. What I mean is, when you are coding an enemy and the enemy is already shooting, there's gonna be a point in the code where you reevaluate whether to stay in that position and keep shooting, or to do something else like move closer to the player, move sidewise, etc. If you still have a clear shot, the most natural thing is to tell the enemy to keep shooting. But if you do that too much then the enemies essentially become turrets, and just stand there and keep shooting whenever they have a clear shot. I felt like that was going on a lot when I played IF. It's a matter of degree -- I'm sure they did move around sometimes even when they had shots lined up. If you look at the enemy code in Duke 3D, enemies will often disengage and move around after shooting when they could just keep shooting. Individually, that behavior is not optimal in terms of killing the player -- if you just want the player to die, then shooting when you have a clear shot is typically the most efficient means. But when you have a group of enemies and the player's attention is divided, not only does it create a much more dynamic experience to have enemies moving around when they don't need to, it can actually make them more challenging because it's hard to track all their movements.

[oasiz]

Zone3 still has tiny remnants of this design, nothing reached beyond concepts mind you.

Basement used have some of your squadmates injured, you'd go in and Heskel would taunt you that the place was rigged with bombs and you wanted to get to upper floors in order to extract some intel.
Once you extracted this intel, you'd get to the rooftops where an extraction vehicle was shot down and you'd go down to the basement as the building gets blown up.

Further GDF stuff, missions, etc.. would have required more development time. It took us 4+ years to get this out
That immediately needs supporting story, more voice acting, NPC code and most importantly it should never feel like it stops or slows your progress.
It all sounds more cool on paper though.

We had a dialogue prompts but it was a bit janky and all of this ended up being a bit unnecessary in the end.
I think one of the CON files still has the temp stuff we tested it with (including these bits).

To fit guided missions, etc.. we'd have to decide if we wanted to focus on a more classic gameplay loop or make something more modern. This was the biggest reason why things got scrapped, we didn't want to handhold the player on where to go or what to do next. When it came to story, less is more.

[Truck Stop Santa Claus]

Zone 3 is a fan favorite for good reason
it's just master class level design trough out

[MrFlibble]

oasiz, on 06 June 2020 - 11:24 PM, said:

To fit guided missions, etc.. we'd have to decide if we wanted to focus on a more classic gameplay loop or make something more modern. This was the biggest reason why things got scrapped, we didn't want to handhold the player on where to go or what to do next. When it came to story, less is more.

Well, I did not mean "guided missions" in a modern sense, Dark Forces has you roam around freely but you still have more complex objectives than just find switch/keycard, and reach exit. You get briefings and occasional radio messages, but these serve to put your actions into context, not hand-hold the player through a linear path. For example, the Imperial Detention Centre is a hugely complex, nonlinear level where you have to figure a lot of stuff on your own, but the player's actions make sense for knowing that you're in a high-security prison, and the place is designed with that in mind. In fact Dark Forces is almost never simply "Doom in Star Wars decorations", yet the missions never go into hand-holding the player -- as a matter of fact that would be quite anachronistic for the time!

[necroslut]

MrFlibble, on 10 June 2020 - 07:39 AM, said:

Well, I did not mean "guided missions" in a modern sense, Dark Forces has you roam around freely but you still have more complex objectives than just find switch/keycard, and reach exit. You get briefings and occasional radio messages, but these serve to put your actions into context, not hand-hold the player through a linear path. For example, the Imperial Detention Centre is a hugely complex, nonlinear level where you have to figure a lot of stuff on your own, but the player's actions make sense for knowing that you're in a high-security prison, and the place is designed with that in mind. In fact Dark Forces is almost never simply "Doom in Star Wars decorations", yet the missions never go into hand-holding the player -- as a matter of fact that would be quite anachronistic for the time!

Dark Forces kinda sucks though.

[t800]

Except for lack of manual saving during missions what else do you think sucks?

I would say instead, that it is quite enjoyable and solidly made FPS with nice classic Star Wars atmopshere. Even call it quite ambitious and advanced for its age. I mean mission objectives, jumping and crouching, alternate firing modes for weapons, primitive 3D models, dynamic music...

[MrFlibble]

I tired out the Dark Forces demo around 2005-2006 out of simple curiosity coupled with nostalgia -- I never played that game in the 90s (maybe didn't know about it back then), and wanted to know more about the titles that I had missed -- and I got immediately hooked, and I'm not even a Star Wars fan. From the very first seconds of the demo level, the game just oozes atmosphere and feels right -- you are in the thick of Star Wars action with blasters, Stormtroopers and all the good stuff.

And the levels are really clever, the developers pushed the abilities of a Doom like engine to the max. The underlying gameplay elements -- fight enemies, collect keycards and powerups etc. -- are organically woven into a more complex narrative that plays so well with the "lone Commando against an army" setup. I would certainly compare some scenarios to Shadow Warrior levels, e.g. Talay - Tak Base drops the player into a destroyed Rebel outpost that is still occupied by Imperials, and you need to reactivate the generator to restore power in order to progress -- rather like Zilla Construction. And yes, while the power is still down there are dark areas were you need to use your headlight (IIRC you don't get the night vision goggles yet) to get around.

My idea is that in DF, the scenario of each mission creates certain logics that the player can relate to, and act upon them. Correspondingly, the level is designed so that these logics, and the respective player behaviour, can be realised. You can storm the fortified entrance to the research facility on Fest, but you'll be better off sneaking in through the back door. It's a matter of choice for the player, but it's a different kind of choice compared to the alternate routes in a typical Duke3D level.

To my mind, a big difference between DF and Build engine games is that while in both the player takes on what is literally an army of adversaries, DF is designed in such a way that you still have to rely on stealth rather than just brute force. For all the gameplay variety, many "realistic" areas in Build engine games are effectively intricate decorations, with gameplay still leaning towards the classic Doom formula, but in DF the entire layouts make sense as places -- not realistic in the sense of depicting real-life locations but coherent in their elements.

Back to Ion Fury, are there night vision goggles or the like? Those would be quite handy in spotting enemies in dark areas. (I know there's the radar, but I haven't used it much yet.)

[necroslut]

t800, on 10 June 2020 - 03:21 PM, said:

Except for lack of manual saving during missions what else do you think sucks?

I would say instead, that it is quite enjoyable and solidly made FPS with nice classic Star Wars atmopshere. Even call it quite ambitious and advanced for its age. I mean mission objectives, jumping and crouching, alternate firing modes for weapons, primitive 3D models, dynamic music...

MrFlibble, on 11 June 2020 - 01:44 AM, said:

I tired out the Dark Forces demo around 2005-2006 out of simple curiosity coupled with nostalgia -- I never played that game in the 90s (maybe didn't know about it back then), and wanted to know more about the titles that I had missed -- and I got immediately hooked, and I'm not even a Star Wars fan. From the very first seconds of the demo level, the game just oozes atmosphere and feels right -- you are in the thick of Star Wars action with blasters, Stormtroopers and all the good stuff.

Dark Forces is great in theory, but I don't think it came together in the end. The presentation is great, and it does some things really well, but in the end I find it not at all enjoyable. Level design is one of its major faults, I think, but the combat is pretty sad too. Actually playing it reminds me of stuff like Operation: Bodycount.
Outlaws has many of the same issues. And, yes, I did play both back in the day.
"Sucks" is a bit exaggerated though, I must admit, but I think it's an extremely overrated title.

Quote

Back to Ion Fury, are there night vision goggles or the like? Those would be quite handy in spotting enemies in dark areas. (I know there's the radar, but I haven't used it much yet.)

No.

[MrFlibble]

I played a bit more of the game. Maybe I'm primed to this already but enemies hugging walls and corners are a pretty prominent feature it seems.

Another thing I noticed is that there are certain areas in levels that are very highly detailed and meticulously crafted, but there's almost nothing going on there.

For example, the entrance to the GDF base with the tanks in Alphabet Soup. I'm playing on hard difficulty JIC. I sniped or lured out most of the enemies even without entering the open area, then took care of the turrets with Penetrator fire, and that's all. And I did miss on the entire tank vs. tank scripted part which I'm only aware of now after watching a video of the level because I probably was busy taking cover from fire or looking elsewhere when it occurred. (I'm assuming that such a scripted scene is intended to be watched by the player, so there must be a way to make sure the player does not miss it.) After that it's just an open area with some pickups scattered around, beautifully done no doubt but absolutely static.

Compare this to a somewhat similar open area sequence in Master Leep's Temple from SW, the temple courtyard. The player is more or less forced in the thick of combat because the area is entered by swimming underwater, and there is no way to back up in a corridor and shoot the ninjas safely from there.

In D.C. Meltdown, I cleared the food court in the shopping plaza without even entering it by lobbing a few grenades up there and then just waiting for the guys to come at me. After that, again, the court is a very detailed area -- possibly infinitely more detailed than any vanilla Duke map -- and undeniably beautifully crafted, but completely empty. I could say I missed on the action there for being cautious, I guess.

The theme of that area made me think of Duke Burger, and again, that level is built in such a way that the player cannot avoid certain confrontations in certain areas, e.g. you need to clear the inside of the burger by entering it, not otherwise. The level also has some puzzles for the player to solve in order to progress, including the hidden blue key. Contrast this with the red key in D.C. Meltdown, I just had to walk down a very large and straight corridor (it has elevation and escalators, and is filled with enemies, but it's still very straight). The shops on the ground floor seem like very optional decorations, I could probably skip them altogether if it were not for supplies.

Further down the D.C. meltdown level, in the area with the crashed red car in front of the ruined building, I found the grenade launcher guys rather inefficient as the grenades bounced unpredictably with little chance of hitting me. Eventually nearly all enemies there ended up flocking to the said car and stuck in the wall where I had an easy time picking them off. It is possible that my own use of the grenade launcher triggered that behaviour, not sure.

As a more general observation, playing so far I rather frequently find myself spotting a faraway enemy like a crossbowman whereas the enemy does not yet see me, but the only way to snipe him seems to be the revolver, with reduced accuracy and hence losing some ammo, or to try to get closer (which is not always possible). I'm not sure if such situations were intended and do not simply arise from the general leaning towards large, spanning areas in level design.

I hope my comments do not come across as nit-picking, I'm just trying to make sense of IF in the context of the classic Build games I have played. Because the level design and hence gameplay are undeniably different in many places, even if you ignore the difference in size/scope.

[Micky C]

I remember being disappointed that the tank was a scripted sequence instead of a drivable vehicle. They showed that in the trailer, and most people who see that and are familiar with Build would think it was a drivable vehicle, which made the trailer a bit misleading.

[NightFright]

@necroslut:

After having replayed Dark Forces a few months ago after not having touched the game since it came out, I have to mostly agree with your assessment. While the game creates a great Star Wars atmosphere in general with its locations, music and sounds, the levels themselves are just too huge and confusing (I still hate that sewer level early on in the campaign), which is probably like that to compensate that there are just 14 of them. That combined with the questionable checkpoint system which forces you to play through an entire level in one session before your progress is actually saved is what mostly breaks the game for me these days. If this can be fixed with a port (TheForceEngine, I count on you), accessibility and playability would profit a lot. Towards the end of the game it also gets overly hard with all those Dark Troopers hunting you down. If you don't have at least the impenetrable shields cheat activated in the menu, you are in for a massive loss of your hopefully accumulated extra lives.

I still think it's a great game, but the original Dark Forces campaign as it stands feels like a chore to get through the way it was realized. However, there are quite a few really nice user levels and campaigns out there which still make it worthwhile owning and playing the game. With a capable port, these mods will hopefully also see a revival by being usable far more easily.

[MrFlibble]

Micky C, on 19 June 2020 - 05:02 AM, said:

I remember being disappointed that the tank was a scripted sequence instead of a drivable vehicle. They showed that in the trailer, and most people who see that and are familiar with Build would think it was a drivable vehicle, which made the trailer a bit misleading.

I don't remember that from the trailer but I wanted to mention that too. It's hard not to have expectations in this department after Shadow Warrior's treatment of the topic. In IF the tanks are so detailed you could even think of C&C Renegade (and have even more unrealistic expectations)

NightFright, on 19 June 2020 - 05:19 AM, said:

After having replayed Dark Forces a few months ago after not having touched the game since it came out, I have to mostly agree with your assessment. While the game creates a great Star Wars atmosphere in general with its locations, music and sounds, the levels themselves are just too huge and confusing (I still hate that sewer level early on in the campaign)

Admittedly I last played DF some ten years ago if not more, but for all the frustration with the save system I liked it a lot, still. What got me was the Kell dragon fight in Jabba's ship, which ultimately killed my will to play further (I got to the Imperial city level but couldn't force myself to play). Yet the early levels are fun IMO, I did not hate the sewer level even though it can be annoying (and I love the music in that level), and of course I had to replay almost every mission several times before I'd get it right, because of the save system. But I think its okay, the trial-and-error approach is the more rewarding once you find your way around the obstacles. The game has so much more depth compared to Doom with the variety of missions and environments, and I'd say it feels very modern, i.e. the way the story unfolds and the player is presented with it would not be out of place in an early-mid-2000s game.

As for the scope of the Dark Forces levels, again I never thought of them as confusing. Sometimes you have to figure something out to progress, but IIRC there's virtually no lengthy backtracking, if any at all. Well, the Imperial Detention Centre might be confusing because it is so complex, but you're infiltrating a high-security prison of the Galactic Empire, I mean what did you expect?

And since we touched on this topic, in Ion Fury I cannot but have this feeling that sometimes the level design seems to get carried away a little with the scope of the areas. This is the first time in any FPS that I get literally tired because of backtracking to pick up some ammo or health, because some areas are huge. But I have never played Eternal Doom (the megawad, not the new game) which I'm told is notorious or super large levels, so maybe I'm just missing on this part of the fun