r/gamedev • u/Double-Guarantee275 • 16h ago
Discussion competitive FPS with procedurally generated maps
Why hasn't anyone tried making a tactical FPS like Valorant where the maps are procedurally generated, so you can never play the exact same map twice?
I honestly think this could be a huge innovation in a genre that seems to be struggling lately.
One thing I really dislike about games like Valorant and CS is how much the skill gap depends on memorizing every single corner, angle, lineup, and pixel-perfect grenade throw. Some players spend hundreds of hours learning every little detail of a map, to the point where they can throw utility across the map and land it exactly where they want without even seeing the target.
Honestly, I find that kind of gameplay ridiculous and far removed from what I would consider actual tactical skill. It also creates a massive gap between newcomers and veterans, because new players aren't just competing against better aim and game sense, they're competing against thousands of hours of map-specific knowledge.
Imagine if every match had a different map layout. The environments and visual assets could be reused, but the actual geometry would change: corridor lengths, entrances, cover placement, sightlines, and connections between rooms. You could still have recognizable settings, such as subway stations, industrial facilities, or office buildings, but the tactical layout would always be different.
Players would have to read the environment, assess the situation, adapt their strategies, communicate, and work together. Character abilities could even become more interesting in this context, since you'd have to figure out how to use them in an unfamiliar environment instead of relying on memorized lineups.
Obviously, aim and mechanical skill would still matter, and procedural generation would need to be carefully balanced to avoid unfair layouts. But wouldn't this shift the focus toward actual decision-making and adaptability, rather than memorizing static maps?
I find it hard to believe nobody has ever considered this. Are there major technical or game design challenges that make this approach impractical? Or has someone already tried it and found that it doesn't work?
16
u/Jaco2point0 16h ago
Due process did curated procedural generation for their r6 siege style shooter
2
u/Zloty_Diament 15h ago
I was looking forward for this game for 6 years, then once I bought it I never played it. They added bots support, so maybe once I get to playing it I won't alone at least
1
u/theanorak 5h ago
This comment should be higher. The Due Process guys have definitely attempted what OP is talking about
It's still a fun game tbh, but never really kicked off. The Devs are still supporting it though if anyone is interested. Would be nice to see its lobbies get some life back again.
6
u/_Lightning_Storm 14h ago
Due Process was a lot of fun, and I put some time into it back when there were more players!
They implement a planning phase so it’s about how well you can plan and execute on a new map with 30 seconds of planning, not completely blind, and they added some QOL stuff for navigation (drawing on the map creates a path you can see in game).
I had a blast playing it, but the playerbase fizzled out, which led to a small population of very dedicated and skilled players that makes it a bit difficult for new players.
6
u/sanelushim 14h ago
Why hasn't anyone tried making a tactical FPS like Valorant where the maps are procedurally generated, so you can never play the exact same map twice?
I did a search and found one game, https://store.steampowered.com/app/753650/Due_Process/, I haven't heard of it I don't think.
On learning maps everyone knows vs adapting to a fresh map at the same time is a valid question. It's like how chess has centuries of opening theory which can be removed by playing Chess960 with the random starting positions. Learning openings takes a different skill set than the straight into the action random chess offers. But one thing holds true for both crafted maps and standard chess, its a level playing field, everyone can take the time to learn openings or the map layouts, so that offers a broader competition of skills. By playing on a procedural map or starting with a random chess setup, you've just removed that other portion of the competition and focus on the "action" so to speak. Which is fine, you've made it your preferred approach.
Players would have to read the environment, assess the situation, adapt their strategies, communicate, and work together.
Whether a map is hand designed or procedural, the gameplay holds true for both.
Designed vs procedural maps is an interesting discussion. With hand designed maps, you can end up with some great maps, maps that can be improved or adapted as the game changes, there are some classic maps from various games that are hard to forget. Maps are typically designed around flow and areas of engagements, in line with the game features and objectives. Those elements are leveraged in the map design, and can be flavoured around feature subsets. Also, maps are refined based on feedback, so they tend to be improved upon as time goes on, where balance and fun are the key metrics.
With procedural maps, you're offloading all that human design knowledge on to an algorithm thats going to explore the state space of all possible configurations. Just think of how many bad map designs human discard because they were unsalvageably unbalanced and/or unfun. Now your algorithm needs to be within a certain threshold of fairness (since you put competitive fps in the title), and it needs to offer enough variation so it doesnt become predictable. And the map output needs to have whatever elements to support the features and objectives of the game. And even if you managed to create a robust procedural map generation algorithm, none would be memorable or at least the maps would be that similar yet different feeling, you would start seeing the patterns of the building blocks of the algorithm. None would standout, and if one did, you wouldn't see it again.
Personally, I think you would be limited by the reusable patterns and elements, the map needs to be legible and follow the game rules and fit the environmental aesthetic and be logically consistent with the game vision. A procedural map generation algorithm would be more about its constraints than its freedom to create maps, and I don't know if that would be more interesting or fun to play than well crafted maps.
4
u/Many_Reindeer6636 13h ago
COD MW4 has an arena type mode with prebuilt map blocks that shuffle each round. I played the beta and it is a unique idea with the major downside being you have to play Call of Duty.
I think competitive players will always have a problem with any variables they cannot control in a match or else they will complain about balance. i.e. if i get killed on dust2 long i know its because I took a controlled risk and not because that area of the map was more open than i expected.
3
u/UnluckyPally 14h ago
Haven't looked at comments yet so forgive me if I'm repeating.
Former competitive overwatch player here - procedural maps might be cool for larger scale combat but the maps themselves are a significant component in competitive shooters, as you can develop strategies on a map to map basis. Having a new map every single time would make it very difficult to execute strategies because you and the other team don't know the map very well, which would lead to more of a call of duty feeling rather than a tactical feeling
4
u/Spudly42 16h ago
There is even a huge debate on if it's ok to have random weapon recoil/spray. Like some people want it to be completely repeatable so people can gain an advantage by learning it perfectly. Like that's considered a way to increase the "skill" you can have in a game. Can't imagine what people would say if the maps were changing regularly.
1
u/Genebrisss 7h ago
The fact that computer decides where you shoot is a much bigger problem in competitive shooter than not being able to progress a skill in something.
Random map would be a different problem. It would produce unfair and unfun maps, but at least it wouldn't be random auto aim choosing if you get a headshot or not.
2
u/_Strawble 9h ago
I personally would LOVE something like that. However, you have to consider the audience - super competitive people typically hate if there is even a minor element of RNG and begin looking to lock down every little element of randomness like weapon spray, which is good.
I think it would need to be aimed at the sort of niche "sub-competitive" space with games like Teamfight Tactics and trading card games and Marvel Rivals (sorry, I can't think of a truly good example) where people are still playing against each other and tryharding but it's not really about big money tournaments.
You would also be taking "map knowledge" out of the skillset so you'd probably have to make up for it with some other skill based system that works well with the randomness
4
u/hecu88 16h ago
it's not fun when you lose because of rng. might just toss a coin to decide the winner at that point
9
u/CastBlaster3000 16h ago
This doesn’t take away skill expression it just changes it. If both people don’t know the map then it is more dependent on ability to clear, game sense, aim etc rather than map knowledge (lining up smokes, weird angles, stuff like that)
3
u/Technical_Income4722 15h ago
Also depends on if the maps come out balanced. I guess you could generate half the map and then just mirror it on the other side but that limits your options too. Some games have done things where the "map" is cut from a much larger world, like some Arma game modes for instance. That's what I'd probably envision for this. Something you can still learn and be familiar with but won't be exactly the same every time.
1
u/spacewizardproblems 14h ago
ITT: Apparently there is only one way to enjoy a competitive FPS (just playing ad nauseum until you memorize all the maps and strategies). God forbid anybody have to improvise in the moment.
1
u/JaniUtopos 12h ago
I'd test the idea by shuffling a few routes through one map first. Opening one doorway and closing another can already change how teams approach it, without randomizing every sightline. See whether adapting to that is fun before building the full generator.
1
u/dota2nub 4h ago
Sure people have tried, and it always sucks the big one. You don't get to evade game design by going "It's different every time!" and then serving some algorithm bs.
1
u/No_Jello9093 Commercial (Indie) 15h ago edited 15h ago
One of the reasons FPS games are fun to get good at is learning the maps. It turns high level play into a 3D chess match that many including myself enjoy. Procedural levels would ruin that aspect.
If something as beautifully designed (eg cryo archive, etc) was procedurally made and designed, they would be forgettable. Maps are one of the most memorable aspects of good FPS games.
Skill curves are pivotal to making something competitive. Knowing a certain shortcut or trick that can catch your an opponent off guard is immensely satisfying, because you had to put the time in to understand the space in which you play in.
If you’re making a competitive game, removing as much RNG as possible is a design goal.
1
u/ShazbotSimulator2012 14h ago
Because map knowledge is the thing people want. There were enough brilliant creative CS:S custom maps that you could play a different one every round and never run out, and each subsequent game has become more and more popular with less and less content because the increased focus on competitive play has totally driven out anything that strays from the bog-standard competitive layout.
0
u/Genebrisss 7h ago edited 7h ago
If you call any PvP a "competitive" game, it's one thing. Due process did that.
But for real competitive games where people take it seriously like a sport, then thoughtful well designed maps are essentially half of the game design. Everything revolves around well made maps and you can't achieve that with random produced nonsense.
We are in the million dollar tournament, loading on a map and it happens to be something dumb. Who's enjoying the show? Which major sport works like that?
I want to see teams train the same map for years perfecting their craft so I can see the absolute peak performance in the grand final.
28
u/TheFlamingLemon 16h ago
One problem with this is that most tactical FPS games are attacker vs defender, and this gives a big advantage to whoever gets to be on the attacking team second. It is much easier to defend an unknown space than to attack it. You could randomize the map again at the halfway point, but then you have no guarantee that the maps will be evenly balanced. You could randomize the map after each and every round and hope that the balance comes out in the aggregate, but then there won’t be an opportunity to learn the map over the course of a match, and that means the only real effect of using randomized maps would be to seriously reduce the depth of the game.
Maybe what you would do is alternate rounds between defending and attacking. Then, halfway through, you switch the map and alternate again but starting with the opposite team. This could be awkward but I think it’s the best way to be mostly balanced while still benefiting from randomization.
I think this mechanic would go especially well with a game like rainbow six siege.