Linear vs Non-Linear

[Chris the great]

Ok, so recently, I've had nowt to do but play video games, which has got me thinking, what's better, linear games or non linear?

 

Each has merits, and flaws, so let’s start with linear games. Obviously the main criticism is that your basically told were to go and when, and not given any real freedom. This can limit replay value dramatically, as everything’s basically the same. However, this also means the game knows were and when you come to things, and can throw in some awesome set pieces. Using the example of half life 2 (plus the episodes) there are incredible moments, your struggling through a huge building, its swarming with enemies, booby trapped up the ass, how could it gat any worse? Well, the platform your on can collapse, send you underwater and struggling to get to the surface fast enough for air. One moment in the game puts you in an old building, crawling with zombies, and of course, the lights go out. no problem, you have a torch, but the batteries only last a few seconds, leaving you constantly switching the torch on and off to save battery life, all the while being surrounded by zombies. it may be hard, but its intense as hell and leads to a genuine moment of relief when you escape, and a feeling of "wow, that was awesome" linear games also lend better to a narrative tone, the constant direction keep the story going, and you never really get stuck, unsure how to progress.

 

Non linear games are a different breed. Your in charge, you decide where to go and when, your exploring the world at your own pace, you investigate things your interested in. See some ruins? Go take a look. This keeps your identity in the game. However, the main problem with this is you’re rarely as free as you think. Let’s take the grand theft auto games as an example. Ok, so, you want to screw around? Take your time and kill prostitutes, when you've had your fill, get on with the missions, but as soon as they start, your back to linear game play. Sure, you can do it different ways, but ultimately, the game sets the conditions. Protect this guy, if you don't, you fail. What if you hate the guy, what if you want him dead? Tough luck, you gotta do it. Also, all the missions aren’t open from the start, you have to work through in some type of order, no option to just go straight to the final boss and kill him, you gotta win by the game's terms.

 

What’s my opinion? Well I’m in the middle. games are great when you can explore the world and find little secrets, knowing your experience is slightly different to that of other people, but set pieces are just more exciting, what’s more fun, running into the same enemies over and over as you make your way to the destination, or getting into a gun fight on a collapsing bridge, that’s like no other part in the game?

 

For my money, games should be in the middle. whilst your free to explore, and even have a choice in the order you do things, with optional extras that may gain you better weapons, the game also needs some direction, something clear that your going towards with no confusion as to what you need to do (unless the narrative calls for it). Also, set pieces are needed, they keep the game fresh and are far more interesting then the exact same fight over and over again.

[...]

One of the things I hate most in games is time limits. That's the only thing that makes a game truly feel linear, so to speak. Because you have to do the task in that given time, then you really have no choice.

Having a clock to track time has basically the same effect. It may be more realistic, since we do have watches in real life, but it's something I hate in games.

 

A game can be linear and not feel linear. Zelda and Metroid are good examples of linear games that don't feel in the least bit linear. So it ultimately becomes irrelevant and what remains is the old "good" or "bad" game, not "linear" or "non linear" game.

[Gaijin von Snikbah]

I would also prefer a little bit of both. If I had to choose between them I would pick linear. Non-linear games can get boring sometimes when you dont know what to do. Linear games usually have a more constant stream of exciting excitement.

[Emasher]

I like to play a little of both usually.

 

During most game sessions, I'll usually play multiple games.

 

I find if a non-linear game doesn't reward you for going off the beaten path, it really should just be linear though.

[Guest Maase]

I wouldn't live without them both :P

 

I love every single aspect of the two types, there are advantages in one side and advantages in other side.

 

But overall, i like the Non-Linear ones the most, because i have more time to have fun talking/killing, or doing side quests, à lá GTA or Legend of Zelda

[Diageo]

Zelda is pretty linear...

 

I like linear games like RPGS more then non linear games like animal crossing...

I have enjoyed non linear games but linear ones keep me hooked for longer...

[Grazza]

Semi-bump.

 

I think the best games allow you to explore without making you feel compelled to do too many sidequests.

 

Take Okami. I really felt I needed to "fill in" as many bits as possible, thus it felt a bit like a jigsaw puzzle. With Final Fantasy XII, you could get stuck exploring bits of map without knowing if you were taking a detour or not.

 

Onto the ones that got it just right...

 

Shadow of the Colossus has a massive world which can be explored at any time, yet you are always focused on the next colossus. Dragon Quest VIII, which I'm playing now, has a set path to follow. You can detour if you like, but there's no particular reason to. You can always find something or other if you really want to, but it doesn't get in the way.

 

The Zelda games generally get this right too. You feel you can easily complete the game doing the basics and anything else you fancy, then go back and explore it fully.

[darksnowman]

Yeah, I'm probably somewhere in the middle too. I like it when you know where you are going next in games, but to strike the balance, I like it to feel like there's other things I could be doing rather than heading straight to the next thing that will advance the story.

[Rummy]

OoT, MM and Fable are 3 prime examples of awesome games with a good balance of both, Fable was probably one of the best games I ever played when I think of it, I just always discount it again later for some reason, probably the fanboy in me. It lacked linearity, but also didn't. You need some course or path in a game, because totally open and non-linear games generally aren't all that cool cos you just don't know what you wanna do. I think to make a great game you start of linear, then flesh it out with so much stuff outside that line that it becomes both non linear and linear at the same time.

[Grazza]

Yeah, I'm probably somewhere in the middle too. I like it when you know where you are going next in games, but to strike the balance, I like it to feel like there's other things I could be doing rather than heading straight to the next thing that will advance the story.

 

Yeah, exactly.

 

OoT, MM and Fable are 3 prime examples of awesome games with a good balance of both, Fable was probably one of the best games I ever played when I think of it, I just always discount it again later for some reason, probably the fanboy in me. It lacked linearity, but also didn't.

 

I'm a dope for not giving Fable more of a chance! I got the Xbox and four games (including Fable) for £40. I tried it a few times, but I didn't like the graphics, camera controls or voice acting. I was far too impatient with it, but I'm interested in Fable 2.

 

I think to make a great game you start of linear, then flesh it out with so much stuff outside that line that it becomes both non linear and linear at the same time.

 

Good way of putting it.

[Guest Jordan]

Fable was good, but its story was so linear it felt like the Lylat Wars of RPG's.

[LegoMan1031]

Never really thought about this before. I would probably say that i am in the middle as well.

[EEVILMURRAY]

A game can be linear and not feel linear. Zelda and Metroid are good examples of linear games that don't feel in the least bit linear. So it ultimately becomes irrelevant and what remains is the old "good" or "bad" game, not "linear" or "non linear" game.

Metroid is linear, it's just not one way linear.

[Rummy]

Fable was good, but its story was so linear it felt like the Lylat Wars of RPG's.

 

Haha, I guess so, that's probably why I discount it sometimes. When I tell my friends about Fable though, I mention rather little about the actual game's point and gameplay, but tell them things such as how you can get married, flip off your wife/other people, how you can marry a guy if you're that way inclined, go round kicking chickens, just lots of little pointless and not really neccessary things in the game that make it a game that had alot of effort put into it! All those little touches, I think they're brilliant.

[Jonnas]

The middle is just about right.

Make a game too linear (Starfox Adventures) and it's left with no replay value. Making it completely non-linear (Fallout) makes it's story very dull, and no real sense of progression most of the time.

 

To me, a game's main adventure can be as linear as it so pleases, as long as we can take a break whenever we want, to explore what we can, and complete side-quests we find (Tales of Symphonia, Zelda, Skies of Arcadia, are games that do this perfectly. And ToS' story even has two major branches).

 

And then there's the beauty of Metroid, where the entire game is a single mission, where every conclusion Samus reaches is our own, where we must use everything we've seen thus far to understand what's going on. The result is what EEVIL said: we can complete a linear objective in the way we see fit.

 

Of course, I'm talking about the adventure/RPG genre, but even in other genres a healthy dose of both is good. Say, Hitman 2, where you can complete a set mission however you see fit. Sure stealthiness gives you some good weapons, but the path of a mass murderer is equally satisfying.

[DazzeL]

I much prefer a good old linear game with a gripping plot, awesome set pieces and good scripted ai.

 

I grew out of non-linear single player games, on the whole, a long time ago as none of them offer true freedom. The closest thing to true freedom is a PC mmo and no single player game has some close to that yet. I think I'm the exception though, I don't even like GTA all that much whilst everyone else heaps praise upon it.

[Zechs Merquise]

Goldeneye - set out in missions, but how you went about those mission was up to you! The Dam, the Facility - wow. Each a mission in itself, with clear objectives, but the order and the way you carried them out and achieved them was up to you. I like that style.