Lunchtime Discussion: Linear and Open World
Which gameplay style do you prefer? Article written by Lorcan in Features, on Tuesday, November 24, 2009 at 12:00.“It’s too linear” is a comment heard all too often in reviews nowadays. There are a few buzzwords and phrases that annoy me nowadays but this is one which sticks out in particular because I love a linear game. This is probably down to my love for a good story driven experience and the on-rails rollercoaster rides that come with them. I like the progression of a linear tale and I thrive on watching the set pieces grow larger and more complicated as the story moves along so when people try to threaten that by sprouting nonsense about how the game would have been improved with an open world it angers me. A lot.
Lets take Prince of Persia for example. The Sands of Time trilogy was a great, fun, story-driven platformer. The latest game in the franchise which dropped all subtitles and opted just to reinvent the series from the ground up did things very differently. Along with the subtitles, it dropped the time-warp gameplay, ditched the art style, reset the story and biggest of all, it ripped down the walls and offered an entirely open game that had it’s path be chosen by the player. This, on the one hand, empowered the player and gave them a large open area for them to run all the way through.
On the other however, a lot was sacrificed. The story was designed to be rich, deep and even went to the point where the game wouldn’t let you continue after the final cutscene as it wanted to have an ending that stuck. The problem was that because of the open world nature of the title, there was no way to advance the story during the entire game so we get a fantastic premise in the opening and are then left to collect light seeds for 9 or so hours before the final cutscene. I can see how stories can work in the more traditional open world title such as Grand Theft Auto which handles it’s stories well, but for an adventure title, it just doesn’t work.
It’s not just the story that I find suffering in an open world adventure, but also the difficulty. Regular open world titles combat this by hiking up the enemy’s health bar and giving him a bigger gun. The enemies are your challenge, but in an adventure game, shooter or platformer, you depend on the level design to challenge you. This is another thing that’s dropped in an open world game. You can’t judge the players level of skill and therefore you can’t give them the challenge they deserve. One player’s last path is another players first.
When I first played Grand Theft Auto III, I loved the fact that I could go anywhere I wanted, but that’s old for me now and when I played Jak II, I thought it was the greatest thing since Vice Versas because you had a GTA style world, with large linear levels keeping the story and challenge flowing. Unfortunately, like Vice Versas, that’s not around anymore because, outside Jak 3, the open world with linear side levels disappeared.
But that’s the middle ground. It would be too easy to say that every game should have that perfect balance, so when it comes down to it all, which do you prefer? Open world or linear? Open world titles are there to give you freedom, though in my opinion, they actually restrict your experience more than they open it up.
Comments
Please note that all comments are the opinion of the individual author and not TheSixthAxis.
cc_star | 24/11/2009 12:07
Team TSA: Writer
5869 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
Linear games like Killzone 2, Uncharted2 & GoWIII lend themselves to the best graphics and ’set-pieces’
I’m getting a bit bored of open world games, they are starting to seem all the same just ‘in a different skin’ So whereas all the fun, creativity and innovation was in open world, I think it’s come full circle and all the fun is now to be had in a story driven ‘linear’ experience
bunimomike | 24/11/2009 12:20
Member
3371 TSA Points | Member since: Jul 2009
Even thought UC2 is linear when you look at it on paper, it’s such a thrilling ride of a game that it never feels curtailed or restrictive. You’re too busy enjoying the game itself. With this in mind, if GTA had a more structured approach then I’d still be good with that. Sure, stop playing missions for a day and enjoy the side-quests or zoom around the city but have such a strong journey through the core missions that you simply want to consume yourself with them and let the game show you the sites. It could work… but I find that it works equally well now.
I sound indecisive. Arses.
haz360 | 24/11/2009 12:09
Member
365 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
If I had to choose, I’d say a linear game, like Uncharted 2. I too am a sucker for a good story, set pieces and a structured way of progressing. I love open world games too though, like GTA, Oblivion and Fallout, because their stories are so well done. For me, the best kind of game is one which has a linear tale, but lets you tackle problems in several different ways, like MGS4 for example. The story was always going to be the same, you’d always get to the same point, but you could choose to go stealthy or all guns blazing if you wanted.
lewis815 | 24/11/2009 12:11
Member
686 TSA Points | Member since: Mar 2009
Depends on the game really, I love a good linear game, Uncharted is AMAZING and I love how it drives the story.
However, Jak will always be my favourite game series ever, and the reason for that is its storyline, and the open world approach gave a great feel to the city locations itself and exploring the city gave a deeper insight into the mythology of the game. Side missions were actually useful to complete and FUN as well, unlike some open world games at the moment.
DJ Judas | 24/11/2009 12:11
Epic
371 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2008
I think that open world games that began their life as open world games are great as the characters and world are designed with this in mind.
Likewise I think that linear games should remain linear! Burnout 2 and 3 are up there with my all-time favourite games. Paradise is good, but it lost so much by moving ‘open-world’……………I want proper Burnout back!
Some games benefit from being open-world, others suffer because of it. I tend to enjoy linear games more, and needless to say, racers should ALWAYS be linear.
cc_star | 24/11/2009 12:13
Team TSA: Writer
5869 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
Amen to Burnout!
Lorcan | 24/11/2009 12:19
Team TSA: Writer
1132 TSA Points | Member since: Oct 2008
Uh! I agree with you SO MUCH with the burnout thing.
With Burnout as an open world game, you lose that intensity because the AI always goes a different way than you do so there’s no takedowning and no fun!
All your crashing is your own fault and so you can’t get the real road rage the other ones had.
DJ Judas | 24/11/2009 13:02
Epic
371 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2008
Precisely!I think while Paradise is good in it’s own right, I’ve not spent anywhere near as much time on it as I did the previous games. It’s just not as good.
Unfortunately, all the kiddies are expecting games to be open-world now
lewis815 | 24/11/2009 12:27
Member
686 TSA Points | Member since: Mar 2009
Sonic is another casualty of that. Bah Sega..
hazelam | 24/11/2009 12:15
Member
2986 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
for the story, yeah, you usually can’t beat a linear game, but the open world game offers more for the player to do outside the main story.
i won’t say one is better than the other.
it really depends on what you want out of a game.
i like a good story in a game but i also like to be able to just have fun playing around in a game world, seeing what i can do, where i can go, or just how long i can evade the cops for
double-o-dave | 24/11/2009 12:22
Member
821 TSA Points | Member since: Nov 2008
It can’t be that hard to find a happy medium. BadCompany had a storyline and set missions but it was still quite an open world game.
3shirts | 24/11/2009 12:56
Member
1789 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2008
I don’t think a happy medium really exists. A game need to be one or the other and whichever path it chooses, it needs to embrace. GTA is totally open world and always has been. Rockstar know how this works and how to use it so it feels right. Uncharted is totally linear but I never felt lost or like I should be able to go somewhere but can’t. It handled the linear style perfectly.
shields_t | 24/11/2009 13:32
Member
1158 TSA Points | Member since: Oct 2008
Would you not say something like Arkham Asylum is a happy medium?
I suppose you still need to complete the objectives in the same order though so maybe not.
bunimomike | 24/11/2009 17:57
Member
3371 TSA Points | Member since: Jul 2009
That’s a good observation. To many of us, it’s not about whether the game is linear or free-flowing but down to how the developers handle delivering that to us. The more important question if you ask me.
Doofer_Nasenmann | 24/11/2009 12:24
Member
133 TSA Points | Member since: Mar 2009
I think the open-world concept fits very well with RPGs or Hack’n'Slay games, where its fun to explore the world. Or games like GTA or Saboteur can work well in open-world, as long as there is enough to do besides the actual missions (I think GTA4 is missing a lot there, finding “packages” is not that much fun).
These two gametypes should always be linear in my opinion:
Racing Games:
I HATE this find-your-own-way crap. What was wrong with the old NFS and Burnout courses?
Jump’n'Run:
These should be linear and 2D-gameplay. Period. I miss the old times and I am really tempted to buy a WII just for New SMB. LBP didnt do it for me, controls not tight enough..
double-o-dave | 24/11/2009 12:55
Member
821 TSA Points | Member since: Nov 2008
I traded burnout paradise in as soon as i got it cos of the ‘find-your-own-way’ races. Couldn’t win a single one, I’ve got the worst sense of direction on the planet, maybe give or take a few blind people.
3shirts | 24/11/2009 12:59
Member
1789 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2008
I like that in Burnout but the ONE thing it needs is the option to set your route before you start.
A map that you can stick waypoints on so you get an arrow between those points as you race. That would be a good solution to the ‘pause and look at the menu every 5 seconds’ that you often have to do
3shirts | 24/11/2009 13:00
Member
1789 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2008
“look at the map” I meant
double-o-dave | 24/11/2009 13:04
Member
821 TSA Points | Member since: Nov 2008
yep, that would’ve helped.
shields_t | 24/11/2009 13:30
Member
1158 TSA Points | Member since: Oct 2008
Burnout Paradise becomes a lot easier as you familiarise yourself more and more with Paradise City, though having platinumed it, I still always take the wrong route in the top left side of the map and end up going throughly the wrong way to the checkpoint in the mountains.
BrendanCalls | 24/11/2009 12:25
Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc - YOHIMBÉ!!!
1156 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
I honestly don’t mind as long as whichever way it is done, it is done well and has a story that holds together
cam the man | 24/11/2009 13:28
Member
1861 TSA Points | Member since: May 2009
I totally agree.
Some games suit linear and some are best done non-linear.
Damigos | 24/11/2009 12:26
* Banned *
-828 TSA Points | Member since: Nov 2009
World of Wracraft tought us that even in an completely open world game there is the possibility of a marvelous, never ending story…as long as the concept is good.
Dragon Age is an excellent example too..open world, but with linear paths (caves etc)
double-o-dave | 24/11/2009 12:57
Member
821 TSA Points | Member since: Nov 2008
World of Warcraft didn’t teach you how to spell ‘taught’ thought did it?
double-o-dave | 24/11/2009 12:58
Member
821 TSA Points | Member since: Nov 2008
and now I can’t spell though!
commuterzombie | 24/11/2009 12:28
Member
410 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
For me the type of game I prefer depends on my mood and how much time I have to spare. If I’ve got a free weekend I love a game like Fallout, where I can explore, find cool sidequests etc. If I’m cramming in an hour and a half in the evening then it has to be linear like UC2, MW2 etc.
I do get irritated at being lead around by the nose sometimes. I think Crysis represents a good compromise for me – an open world, with linear objectives but you still get to choose how you’ll attack each enemy base etc.
hairfreax | 24/11/2009 13:12
Member
582 TSA Points | Member since: Jun 2009
As long as the game gets me to want to go to the next point/level/mission then im not fussed either way how the game plays. You know what you expect when you buy the game anyway
shields_t | 24/11/2009 13:26
Member
1158 TSA Points | Member since: Oct 2008
Well they both have a place in my collection, this year I have loved Fallout 3 and inFamous from the open world camp, and Dead Space Extraction and Uncharted from the linear side of things and Arkham Asylum and Dead Space which sit somewhere in the middle.
DR-DAVROS | 24/11/2009 13:33
Member
131 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2009
Both I guess I just like whatever is new. I loved COD4 but then a while down the line I loved BF1943 and tried Bad Company because of it. I then tried Flashpoint dragon rising which im still unsure of as haven’t had much time to get back into since getting MW2 which im loving. I’m also in the Bad Company 2 beta which first play thru I really liked second time not so much. Therefore it all depends on mood and other factors on what type I like. So BOTH however my life is a little too linear at the moment.
DJ Judas | 24/11/2009 14:52
Epic
371 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2008
BF1943 and the Bad Companies pale in comparison to Battlefield 2 and 2142.
We need Battlefield 3! (In a shouty mood today).
TheDeathAvenger | 24/11/2009 13:45
Member
1562 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
I love both. However I get more out of open world games. I am currently massively enjoying Assassins Creed 2. As long as there is a wonderful world full of side missions, tasks, items to find, etc as well as the main story of course.
deadwelsh | 24/11/2009 13:48
Member
313 TSA Points | Member since: Jun 2009
I prefer Open Worlds, but agree they can suffer from not having the linear storyline to keep you fully involved in the game. The best thing about open world is the replayability value once you have finished with the main game.
Linear games can probably keep me more focused on the story, but if i reach a part which is particularly difficult, i am stuck having to try and complete, rather than being able to try another area of the game, only to come back to it later once i feel i can tackle it.
For examples
UC2 – loved it 1st time, seemed very same old same old on the 2nd run through.
AC2 – great to have the open world environment, and all the improvements over he 1st AC, but i feel the assassinations from AC2 feel a bit less satisfying so far, and not as much fun when all hell breaks loose and you need to escape.