• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Why Do People Dismiss Linear Games?

P

PhantomHound

Banned
So lately, I've been talking to a lot of people who will dismiss a game because the story or gameplay follows a linear progression. My one close friend in particular hated The Last of Us because it followed linear progression.

There are a large number of linear games that I feel my life would be incomplete without experiencing: Super Mario Bros, FFX, God Of War, Half Life, Uncharted, Portal, Goldeneye, and the list goes on.
http://www.giantbomb.com/profile/chaoticpattern/lists/a-list-linear-games/29190/

Don't get me wrong, I love open world games. But, i just don't understand the hate or dismissal of any game that has linear elements.

Am I crazy, is there something I'm not seeing?
 
You will probably get that a lot more in the following years with the new generation of gamers growing up with Minecraft, DayZ and Rust.

I like linear games myself but I'm psyched what devs of this new generation of gamers can come up with.
 
I don't get it either. For the most part I prefer a well crafted game to an open world game with a bunch of content I'm just going to ignore anyway. The whole open world=good, linear=bad opinion that I've seen gaining traction lately is very odd.
 
I'm fine with linear games, but sometimes it can feel constrictive. Look at Metroid Fusion, which is more linear than other Metroid games, where a computer tells you where to go and what to do, and there's little room to deviate from the path (and sequence break for those who do that), except to collect the odd Missile Expansion or Energy Tank.
 
Linear games with that are well crafted are awesome(like Uncharted/TLoU), the problem is when you're playing a linear game that's boring and lifeless like FF XIII, they become repetitive and you feel like you're playing just to get to the next cut scene.

Most games are linear, and that's fine.
 
I think you're kind of misreading the general complaints about linear games if you're lumping half that list in there. Most of those games have plenty of exploration. The more harped on linear stuff tends to be things like corridor shooters, where if you stray off the path some anonymous military airstrike will rain down on you after 5 seconds.
 
Non-linear does not nencessarily mean open world. It means having agency in the narrative and in the way you tackle the various obstacles in your way.

Dragon Age: Origins is NOT open world, but it's also NOT a linear game. The story is affected by your actions and quests can be tackled in various orders and in various ways with vairous different outcomes.

THAT makes a game much more interesting to me than something like a TLOU. Of course just because I prefer one style of game, doesn't meant I hate linear games, there's something to be said for a laid back cinematic experience, even if it's not necessarily always my cup of tea.
 
Corpekata said:
I think you're kind of misreading the general complaints about linear games if you're lumping half that list in there. Most of those games have plenty of exploration. The more harped on linear stuff tends to be things like corridor shooters, where if you stray off the path some anonymous military airstrike will rain down on you after 5 seconds.
Click to expand...

I argree some games on this list like half life have bits of exploration in them. However, they still follow a linear progression. I thought Uncharted and Last of Us had some good exploration in them, but people still rag on them for being linear.
 
I'd say most people actually prefer a linear design. Even open world games like GTA have story missions with linear design. Only a handful of games (Minecraft, Day Z, EVE Online...) are pure sandbox.
 
I don't know if I'd call Goldeneye linear. It's not open world, but it's a game that puts heavy emphasis on exploration. Heck, several of its levels are open-ended.

When you consider the era in which it was made in, Super Mario Bros isn't linear either.
 
animlboogy said:
This criticism has ballooned into the standard angry nerd argument. It is basically meaningless at this point.

Linearity is not a bad thing; extreme linearity is. Doom is a linear game in a broader sense, but the level design generally drops the player into a maze and lets them figure things out.

Later, Halo provided setpieces with creative A.I. dropped in, so rather than walking forward, taking cover, playing pop-a-mole, then moving forward again (like, say, Mass Effect), lots of interesting things happen every time you replay those sections. So overall, you have a linear structure, yet within it, there is a lot of player agency there.

I feel like a lot of times this gets brought up lately, people are simply referring to being able to choose various different levels or something, like in a Mass Effect game, and thinking that is somehow better than a game like Halo. ...it isn't. In terms of player agency, which is what the entire linear vs. open discussion should hinge on, Halo is actually providing far more player agency and on-the-fly reactions to what the player does.
Click to expand...
Excellent post.

For those wondering, GAF's GotYs:
2013 - The Last of Us
2012 - Journey
2011 - Portal 2
2010 - Mass Effect 2
2009 - Uncharted 2
2008 - Metal Gear Solid 4
2007 - Super Mario Galaxy
2006 - Zelda Twilight Princess
2005 - Resident Evil 4
2004 - Metal Gear Solid 3
 
The opening post is a bit extreme. There is a sizeable chunk of games that fall between 'linear corridor' and 'open-world'. And a lot of supposedly open-world games actually have a linear progression (fixed story progression with no room for divergence, NPC's that you aren't allowed to kill, etc.).

That being said, I appreciate non-linearity when it gives me different forms of gameplay to play around with when I want and some way to interact with the story. Video games that tell their stories mostly through cutscenes are doing it wrong, as far as I'm concerned.
 
animlboogy said:
This criticism has ballooned into the standard angry nerd argument. It is basically meaningless at this point. Even though I myself want more player agency in big budget games, whenever I see someone rant about linearity in games I immediately imagine they are wearing a fedora.

Linearity is not a bad thing; extreme linearity is. Doom is a linear game in a broader sense, but the level design generally drops the player into a maze and lets them figure things out.

Later, Halo provided setpieces with creative A.I. dropped in, so rather than walking forward, taking cover, playing pop-a-mole, then moving forward again (like, say, Mass Effect), lots of interesting things happen every time you replay those sections. So overall, you have a linear structure, yet within it, there is a lot of player agency there.

I feel like a lot of times this gets brought up lately, people are simply referring to being able to choose various different levels or something, like in a Mass Effect game, and thinking that is somehow better than a game like Halo. ...it isn't. In terms of player agency, which is what the entire linear vs. open discussion should hinge on, Halo is actually providing far more player agency and on-the-fly reactions to what the player does.
Click to expand...

This post gets it right. The thing is many overly linear games also have a ton of handholding and gating of the player's progress (like NPCs standing in front of doors and talking forever blocking your gameplay) and invisible walls (in some COD/BF games the game literally kills you if you walk off the predetermined path), which are very annoying and immersion breaking. People hate those artificial barriers while the game tries to tell its hamfisted narrative to you which is often a very awful story to begin with, so it just ends up being frustrating. That's what people hate. If the game is engaging, it being linear doesn't matter.
 
I'm perfectly fine with linear games, provided that it can keep me distracted enough to not notice just how linear it is, or that it doesn't doesn't tempt me to stray off the path I can't get off. Especially the latter is important to me. I'll keep my hands inside the vehicle if the ride is interesting enough.
 
I've always preferred more open games since at least Sony's Everquest was released. I think 3D games should be about experiencing a world and EQ, SWG, GTA, Morrowind, WoW, etc. accomplished that for me. Even 2D has some great examples like Super Metroid. A good open world game is a more challenging project for devs and generally has more replay for the user (GTA's record breaking sales anyone?).

I'm also looking forward to No Man's Sky, EQ Next, virtual reality, etc. Especially No Man's Sky with its seamless travel and procedurally generated worlds.
 
PhantomHound said:
So lately, I've been talking to a lot of people who will dismiss a game because the story or gameplay follows a linear progression. My one close friend in particular hated The Last of Us because it followed linear progression.

There are a large number of linear games that I feel my life would be incomplete without experiencing: Super Mario Bros, FFX, God Of War, Half Life, Uncharted, Portal, Goldeneye, and the list goes on.
http://www.giantbomb.com/profile/chaoticpattern/lists/a-list-linear-games/29190/

Don't get me wrong, I love open world games. But, i just don't understand the hate or dismissal of any game that has linear elements.

Am I crazy, is there something I'm not seeing?
Click to expand...

I dont. Im worried Witcher 3 wont be as good as Witcher 2 because they are giving up on the linear template.

Witcher 2 took EVERYTHING the company got. They were so close, so many times to shutting down. So I don't understand how they can build a game that is 50 times the size of skyrim with a randomly generated world, and still try to deliver a narrative and great characters of same quality.


There is a reason why skyrim has such a POS main story, but an amazing game world, and Witcher 2 has an amazing story but extremely linear and limited world.


I hope I am wrong about witcher 3. It just sounds so crazy I have a hard time wrapping my head around it.
 
Kinthalis said:
Non-linear does not nencessarily mean open world. It means having agency in the narrative and in the way you tackle the various obstacles in your way.

Dragon Age: Origins is NOT open world, but it's also NOT a linear game. The story is affected by your actions and quests can be tackled in various orders and in various ways with vairous different outcomes.

THAT makes a game much more interesting to me than something like a TLOU. Of course just because I prefer one style of game, doesn't meant I hate linear games, there's something to be said for a laid back cinematic experience, even if it's not necessarily always my cup of tea.
Click to expand...
So Megaman is considered non-linear? Huh. And Starfox witht he choosing of the multiple paths?
 
Vigilant Walrus said:
I dont. Im worried Witcher 3 wont be as good as Witcher 2 because they are giving up on the linear template.

Witcher 2 took EVERYTHING the company got. They were so close, so many times to shutting down. So I don't understand how they can build a game that is 50 times the size of skyrim with a randomly generated world, and still try to deliver a narrative and great characters of same quality.


There is a reason why skyrim has such a POS main story, but an amazing game world, and Witcher 2 has an amazing story but extremely linear and limited world.


I hope I am wrong about witcher 3. It just sounds so crazy I have a hard time wrapping my head around it.
Click to expand...

I think you're stretching it a bit with Skyrim there. There are many open world games with better stories. Skyrim doesn't have a bad story because it's open world, Skyrim has a bad story because it's writers are incapable and/or unwilling to write something better.

Dark Octave said:
So Megaman is considered non-linear? Huh. And Starfox witht he choosing of the multiple paths?
Click to expand...

Definitely in the case of Mega Man, and to a lesser degree Star Fox 64. That was kind of Mega Man's charm point back in the day; you could pick the order stages were played instead of following a fixed path.
 
Sophia said:
I think you're stretching it a bit with Skyrim there. There are many open world games with better stories. Skyrim doesn't have a bad story because it's open world, Skyrim has a bad story because it's writers are incapable or unwilling to write something better.
Click to expand...

Yeah Fallout and other Elder Scrolls games were open world, and they still had a great story.
 
Some people just enjoy goofing around inside a toybox more than advancing towards an in-game goal.

You happen to know some people who are very aggressive about this preference and don't get any enjoyment from following a narrowly defined path
 
I think a lot of hate for linear games come from entries in franchises that have not been historically linear. For example, Skyward Sword was chided for being too linear since the Zelda franchise has been quite open in the past. Same with FFXIII.
 
PhantomHound said:
It is, but they do the whole "Hey here's a bunch of wrong paths to give you the illusion of choice!" thing.
Click to expand...

Yeah that sounds right. From what I remember the game was pretty linear and I actually enjoyed it. Sometimes I just want a game like that, too many choices in every game I play can get overwhelming for me lol
 
yeah, that was a buzzword for a while. Some are still in that state of mind. Not sure why.
It's something to say i guess.

Untill a game comes out where one tiny level isn't linear and doesn't tell you exactly where to go and all hell breaks loose (Killzone Shadowfall forrest level).
 
The big key is there ought to be more than one way to play through the game.

It could be multiple paths through the levels, choice of which level to go through next, open world, able to backtrack, or multiple ways to approach each setpiece.
 
I personally hate them because I like the freedom. I love going off the beaten path and trying to see all the easter eggs developers put in their games or try to get an amazing screenshot from the highest viewpoint etc. So much more enjoyable for me.
 
Here's a map of Metroid Prime's Chozo Ruins.
chozoruins.jpg

Here's a map of Metroid: Other M's Biosphere.
sector_one_map--article_image.jpg


The first map has several spokes coming from the central plaza and a variety of optional shortcuts and areas that have multiple puzzles and options, with large sections of the ruins connecting to others.

The second one is a hallway that loops around.

The Chozo Ruins make you feel like an explorer. The Biosphere makes you feel like a dumbass just following directions.
 
Sophia said:
Definitely in the case of Mega Man, and to a lesser degree Star Fox 64. That was kind of Mega Man's charm point back in the day; you could pick the order stages were played instead of following a fixed path.
Click to expand...

But the levels themselves are difinitely linear. So something like Metroid and SotN would be considered open world?
 
I preferred open world games/RPGs when I was younger. Now all I want is linear, straight to the point games. The moment I see any leveling up or upgrading system I feel like turning the game down.
 
Linear games 10 years ago were fine.

These days though developers seem to do the bare minimum with mechanics and on top of that the actual environment you navigate seems to be square rooms that are identical on both sides because developers like to think that gamers have a hard time even making it out of thier own house.

Seems like developers like to spend a huge amount of budget on making pretty set pieces that they think will help the game be more atmospheric but it just doesn't do it for me. I need to feel like I'm exploring a real place to actually feel that but that rarely happens these days.
 
I think the question is more, "Why are people so quick to want a game to be open-world and non-linear?"

I see that request all the time without real thought behind what it means. Going by the posts above, many of our favorite games are linear, and many of our favorite "open world" games have a linear core. The point is: non-linear and open world don't make something better. In many cases it can make it worse. It's all about the developer doing what's best for the game, not just chasing fads.
 
Just depends what type of games you like and why you play games.

I like both linear and non-linear gamers. But probably lean more toward the former as I love a good story in games, and non-linear games often lack some in that department (think the story in a good linear/semi-linear RPG vs. a very open western RPG like one of the Bethesda games). I also don't have a lot of interest in aimless exploring/figuring out what to do--so if a game is non-linear it has to have a good quest log, map and compass/objective indicators to keep my interest.
 
A lot of linear games achieve success (albeit not to the same degree as some open-world series like GTA and Elder Scrolls), so I don't know that the question is even valid.
 
Toxi said:
Here's a map of Metroid Prime's Chozo Ruins.
[im g]http://members.ziggo.nl/maikel_phoenix/primemaps/chozoruins.jpg[/img]
Here's a map of Metroid: Other M's Biosphere.
[im g]http://static.gamesradar.com/images/mb/GamesRadar/us/Games/M/Metroid%20Other%20M/Everything%20Else/Other%20M%20Guide/section_maps/sector_one_map--article_image.jpg[/img]

The first map has several spokes coming from the central plaza and a variety of optional shortcuts and areas that have multiple puzzles and options, with large sections of the ruins connecting to others.

The second one is a hallway that loops around.

The Chozo Ruins make you feel like an explorer. The Biosphere makes you feel like a dumbass just following directions.
Click to expand...

That's because in your second example you're actually a dumbass just following direction.
I mean that's what the game is trying to show and how they want the player to feel.
 
I think games should deliver variety and interesting stuff to do at a good pace.

Linear vs Non-Linear is non-consequential.Its all about more options.
 
Could it be that people are confusing linear with bad level design?

Good linear level design = HL.

Bad linear level design = KZ.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Deus Ex, Marathon actor Elias Toufexis doesn't get why people root for games to fail: 'Life is so short, man'
Opinion  2 3 4 5
209
693
Red Crayon Aristocrat replied
Why are people so obsessed with Bloodborne?
2 3 4 5
219
2K
schaft0620 replied
Why GTA IV: The Lost and Damned Matters More Than People Realize
Opinion Retro Trailer 
34
363
R6Rider replied
People Can Fly-Sony Partnership game?
33
176
Mr. PlayStation replied
  • Poll
Are people still excited about big Sony games in 2026?
2 3 4 5 6
286
1K
Jacob4815 replied
Top Bottom