Oldschool FPS design is: Enter Area->Explore->find loot/kill enemies-> explore more->repeat-> next area. The enemies are encountered in a non-linear fashion, the enemies and loot are placed so that certain paths through the area are harder or easier than others, and it's entirely possible to miss enemies or be surprised by one. This just doesn't happen in modern FPS. SW2013's levels don't combine with enemy design and placement to enhance the whole. Instead, SW2013 levels are mere window-dressing with almost no effect or relation to the enemies or combat outside of very vague and simple notions of whether a level has lots of room to maneuver or not.
I'm not going to really disagree here. The new game is more Painkiller in its enemy encounter design, large combat-filled areas rather than precisely placed smaller encounters across the map. Some people prefer one over the other, but I'm not sure either is more "old school" than the other. Painkiller/Serious Sam style games are often billed as "old school" style, after all.
In any event, enemy placement does not negate my point. In the areas of combat pacing and level design Shadow Warrior is a big step up from most modern tunnel FPS games. You finding flaws in it does not prove me wrong, as a "step up" does not mean a fully traditional experience, or a perfect game. From the very beginning I have tried to balance my praise of this game with pointing out its faults and modern aspects. From the very first post I said the game was more linear, had cutscenes, focused on swords, etc. None of this is a shock to me, or refutes what I am saying.
Codex cannot into gradient improvement scales.