NightmareFarm
Member
Linear. I'm sick and tired of everything going open world even when it doesn't fit the series.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Would you perfer more linear games than open world?
- Thread starter The Infectious Paradox
- Start date
Majukun
Member
I like open world when there's a gameplay purpose for it, aka you are rewarded for approaching your objectives from different angles, or with different means.
Like, i remember in red factin guerrilla, by the numnber open world but had a destruction system ahead of its time....there was this mission where you needed to rescue some hostages from an heavely defended building and i kept dying...then i noticed that
1)the building had an hill directly behind it
2) all the hostages were on the same side of the building
my solution?, take a garbage truck, bodyslam it from the hill to the building leveling half of it and killing most of the guards, then casually just get out of the truck and jumping my way through the half destroyed building to reach the hostages.
that's the kinda of gameplay that justifies an open world being there
Like, i remember in red factin guerrilla, by the numnber open world but had a destruction system ahead of its time....there was this mission where you needed to rescue some hostages from an heavely defended building and i kept dying...then i noticed that
1)the building had an hill directly behind it
2) all the hostages were on the same side of the building
my solution?, take a garbage truck, bodyslam it from the hill to the building leveling half of it and killing most of the guards, then casually just get out of the truck and jumping my way through the half destroyed building to reach the hostages.
that's the kinda of gameplay that justifies an open world being there
K2D
Banned
I'm more bothered by structure and direction of open worlds, than anything.
If it's breath of the wild execution or GTA - I'm in.
If it's Elden Ring execution I'm right on the fence, but in ERs case I'm leaning out today.
If it's Horizon I really want to be into it but I am not.
Run of the mill check list open world I'm hard out.
If it's breath of the wild execution or GTA - I'm in.
If it's Elden Ring execution I'm right on the fence, but in ERs case I'm leaning out today.
If it's Horizon I really want to be into it but I am not.
Run of the mill check list open world I'm hard out.
mcjmetroid
Member
99% of open world games are garbage with bad mission designs etc. Linear allows for better pacing etc.
More linear please.
More linear please.
JimmyRustler
Gold Member
Elden Ring is, just like BoTW, a very unusual Open World game in todays landscape. It has a very clear structure, like you have many linear levels spread out in a OpenWorld. That’s imo the only way to do it right.
Levels need to be tailored to a certain playstyle. Coming up with this “approach every situation however you like” is the single most idiotic idea the industry came up with because you end up with gameplay that can be played by everyone but isn’t really the best for anyone all the time.
Open-ended linear, or Hub-like
Reactive and systemic world (physics, characters depending on your actions), freedom of approach, and physicalised simulation driven systems that can be learned and exploited for emergent moments.
Think of immersive sims like Deus Ex, Hitman, Dishonored, System Shock, etc. Density of systems that create interplay of entities, and let's you be in the moment at all times due to good pacing. Instead of open nothingness to traverse between mission to mission, having this start and stop loop with bad pacing.
The current 'open world design' is flawed and nobody seems to tackle it to push design further. They feel more like 'theme parks', with missions serving as 'rides' to go on with no real consequence (other than scripted narrative beats). Most open world games never really make use of the fact that they're 'open' or have interplay with other systems that create meaningful repercussions. (With slight exceptions like STALKER, Far Cry 2, MGSV, Elden Ring or BOTW, even though these have similar problems but at least try to break boundaries in some aspect)
Reactive and systemic world (physics, characters depending on your actions), freedom of approach, and physicalised simulation driven systems that can be learned and exploited for emergent moments.
Think of immersive sims like Deus Ex, Hitman, Dishonored, System Shock, etc. Density of systems that create interplay of entities, and let's you be in the moment at all times due to good pacing. Instead of open nothingness to traverse between mission to mission, having this start and stop loop with bad pacing.
The current 'open world design' is flawed and nobody seems to tackle it to push design further. They feel more like 'theme parks', with missions serving as 'rides' to go on with no real consequence (other than scripted narrative beats). Most open world games never really make use of the fact that they're 'open' or have interplay with other systems that create meaningful repercussions. (With slight exceptions like STALKER, Far Cry 2, MGSV, Elden Ring or BOTW, even though these have similar problems but at least try to break boundaries in some aspect)
Last edited:
SeraphJan
Member
Dark Souls are exactly Metroidvania level design
Darksiders franchise (especially 1 and 2) toke a lot of inspiration from Classic Zelda, its also Metroidvania level design.
As for Elden Ring, this game was great regardless of open-world or not, it was a great experience due to so many factors, good Boss, good combat, good enemy variety, good lore and atmosphere, and excellent dungeon level design.
Another great example is Arkham franchise, the first game Asylum was a Metroidvania type of game, it was not any lesser compare to its sequel (which are all open worlds), the thing that its sequel did improve was actually combat variety, stealth and gadget variety, boss variety and more content (the content that actually mattered not the large hub itself).
If a designer can't make a linear or metroidvania style game to work, making it open-world will not save the game, open-world is not a get out of jail free card for bad game design.
Last edited:
BootsLoader
Banned
Linear games of course. Open world games are mostly shit.
Linear creates better game design in almost 99% percent of the cases so linear. Only exception is like Elden Ring it didn't have to really sacrifice anything but most developers aren't going to put in that kind of work. BOTW is the second best case but alot was sacrificed for it to be how it is so I don't believe it was worth it.
If you can do linear design quality sprawling a huge world sure go for it, if not it's a bad idea.
If you can do linear design quality sprawling a huge world sure go for it, if not it's a bad idea.
Last edited:
unlurkified
Member
I feel like Bethesda’s the only dev that makes compelling open worlds. If other devs can catch up, then sure, more open world games. Otherwise, no more please.
Arun1910
Member
I like both, both have their strengths and weaknesses but it depends on the developer.
The Witcher 3 is one of my favourite open world games of all time. AC Valhalla on the other hand is a slog.
I do like what Uncharted 4 and TLoU 2 do by making small sandbox areas for each section of the game. It was open enough for you to explore other things but still forced you down a point of no return.
The Witcher 3 is one of my favourite open world games of all time. AC Valhalla on the other hand is a slog.
I do like what Uncharted 4 and TLoU 2 do by making small sandbox areas for each section of the game. It was open enough for you to explore other things but still forced you down a point of no return.
The Cockatrice
Gold Member
Both. Variety is the spice of life.
Drizzlehell
Banned
Idk, it depends on the game. The problem starts when we stop having enough variety and balance between these two. For a while it seemed like every single major release was some sort of an open world game and it was starting to get really tiresome because it meant that each game required like a 50 hour commitment and I don't want every game I play to be like that. Sometimes I want my 6 hour long campaign that's super tightly designed and filled with action.
I think that PS3/X360 era was pretty well balanced in that regard, because we had equally as many linear action games as we had open world sandbox ones. And those sandbox games weren't so bloated either, so even though they were more open ended, they were much more tightly designed and fun to play. So many open world games these days have so much dull filler content, during which your higher cognitive functions shut down and you get into the gamer brain mode until the next story beat happens and it's like suddenly snapping out of some kind of a trance.
I think that PS3/X360 era was pretty well balanced in that regard, because we had equally as many linear action games as we had open world sandbox ones. And those sandbox games weren't so bloated either, so even though they were more open ended, they were much more tightly designed and fun to play. So many open world games these days have so much dull filler content, during which your higher cognitive functions shut down and you get into the gamer brain mode until the next story beat happens and it's like suddenly snapping out of some kind of a trance.
Last edited:
You can actually count open world games on one fucking hand.
Most "open world" games are simply hub world games that you use this hub to get to an icon to start your scripted linear experience or take a part in a mission based on a gameplay systems that are not connected to the open world nature of the game.
Even Rockstar went this route.
I prefer neither.
I prefer my linear games being on a level of quality of RE4R, HL2, MGS3, Bayonetta 2 or Uncharted 2 and my open world being on a level of Witcher 3 n BOTW.
So i play those 7 games. Everything else is mostly, kinda, sorta crap... Not really... But man realy great games are raaare
Most "open world" games are simply hub world games that you use this hub to get to an icon to start your scripted linear experience or take a part in a mission based on a gameplay systems that are not connected to the open world nature of the game.
Even Rockstar went this route.
I prefer neither.
I prefer my linear games being on a level of quality of RE4R, HL2, MGS3, Bayonetta 2 or Uncharted 2 and my open world being on a level of Witcher 3 n BOTW.
So i play those 7 games. Everything else is mostly, kinda, sorta crap... Not really... But man realy great games are raaare
Last edited:
Pelao
Member
I just want good games, man. My fatigue isn't with open world games, it's with the generic and boring ones.
On the one hand, there are a lot of boring open world games, with generic quests and unnecessary filler. On the other, the last few linear games I've played are full of scripted moments and unskippable walk and talk sections.
I'd much rather play a well designed open world game like Elden Ring than deal with a linear one with the Sony template, even though there are several that I enjoy on a first playthrough. Likewise, I'd much rather play a good linear game than a boring open world like Horizon Forbidden West.
On the one hand, there are a lot of boring open world games, with generic quests and unnecessary filler. On the other, the last few linear games I've played are full of scripted moments and unskippable walk and talk sections.
I'd much rather play a well designed open world game like Elden Ring than deal with a linear one with the Sony template, even though there are several that I enjoy on a first playthrough. Likewise, I'd much rather play a good linear game than a boring open world like Horizon Forbidden West.
Last edited:
Guilty_AI
Member
Each has its perks and place. Personally though, i usually like semi-open worlds or open levels the best. Wide enough to be fun to explore, limited enough as to not feel overwhelming and give the game good pacing.
Wide open worlds are good for sandbox and/or heavily systemic games. Overly linear games are for hyper-focusing on a specific aspect(s) of the game (like hack'n'slashing, shooting, story-telling, etc).
Wide open worlds are good for sandbox and/or heavily systemic games. Overly linear games are for hyper-focusing on a specific aspect(s) of the game (like hack'n'slashing, shooting, story-telling, etc).
Last edited:
TheDreadLord
Gold Member
Open world is more immersive but it sucks when you have hundreds icons on the map.
The Infectious Paradox
Gold Member
This is my thought. I've seen people ask why "both" isn't an option. Of course you can never stop both types from being made. However, I've found myself enjoying more linear games lately so I was using this to consider people preference.
Medium sized worlds are absolutely the best, it gives the illusion of a vast open world while being small enough to contain a ton of great game design within a reasonable space.
Last edited:
ThatPolishGuy
Member
Yeah, I always enjoyed Thief series, Dishonored series and later examples are maybe God of War 2018 and GoW Ragnarok.
Because semi open world just works and stuff doesn't feel bloated. I miss old school games like those.
We could do so much more with current consoles and their SSDs.
I really would want to play Dishonored 3. There's so much lore and world is pretty big. I mean google the Dishonored world map and we have whole Pandyssia Continent unexplored.
Maybe Thief can get to what it once was too under Embracer Group. Fingers crossed. Lorewise it felt just as big as Dishonored and maybe even bigger. The remake stuff was pretty bad, so the should just do this series some justice it deserves.
Also I would really want to see another Deus Ex game, I mean c'mon Cyberpunk showed this genre can sell and it was always pretty good semi-open world game. Game design was solid and game was not plagued by bugs, only maybe the latest entry had performance issues on PC at launch. Since I played on console, I wouldn't really know.
Embracer c'mon. Revive the good old games.
Crystal Dynamics twitted not so long ago to see the interest in Soul Reaver or they did some poll can't remember- I wish this series would return. Voice acting was top notch, so was the lore and world. And shifting realm mechanics could work pretty well with SSDs.
Last edited:
ThatPolishGuy
Member
Lately I started Callisto Protocol after all the patches, and I'm having a blast.
Really oldschool stuff, too bad about quick time events and dodging mechanics- it could have been done better.
But otherwise this title feels pretty solid. And it reminds me of simpler times, and that devs had the balls to make semi-open fun titles back in the day.
Also I hope that Capcom makes Dino Crisis remake. This would be awesome too. We need more fun semi-open world games that are 8 to 15h long tops. Not bloated stuff with generic open word designs.
We finally have SSDs in consoles. Devs could make almost seamless loading times in games with semi-open world design. I really wish this gen will take off in that direction. Let's flex those SSDs more!
I already put in a second SSD in my PS5 so some oled monitor and I'm all set for 7 years to come. Just wish we had more games like these.
Fingers crossed.
Really oldschool stuff, too bad about quick time events and dodging mechanics- it could have been done better.
But otherwise this title feels pretty solid. And it reminds me of simpler times, and that devs had the balls to make semi-open fun titles back in the day.
Also I hope that Capcom makes Dino Crisis remake. This would be awesome too. We need more fun semi-open world games that are 8 to 15h long tops. Not bloated stuff with generic open word designs.
We finally have SSDs in consoles. Devs could make almost seamless loading times in games with semi-open world design. I really wish this gen will take off in that direction. Let's flex those SSDs more!
I already put in a second SSD in my PS5 so some oled monitor and I'm all set for 7 years to come. Just wish we had more games like these.
Fingers crossed.
Last edited:
Tal Shiar Agent
Member
Hub and Spoke/Wide Linear.
Stuff like the new God of War games, Jedi Survivor, Metroid Prime,
Stuff like the new God of War games, Jedi Survivor, Metroid Prime,
Knightime_X
Member
Pseudo open world is MUCH better than actual open world.
And it greatly depends on the genre and purpose.
In most cases keep action and rpg linear.
And it greatly depends on the genre and purpose.
In most cases keep action and rpg linear.
Danjin44
The nicest person on this forum
There is nothing wrong having dodge mechanics in survival horror game, people give lot of shit to RE3R but it’s dodge was free flow and fun. Problem with Callisto’s dodge system is once the combat starts the game turns in to turn based. You wait until the enemy stop attacking and then it becomes your turn to attack.
Once you figured this out the game becomes piss easy and all the enemies behave the same way even after they transform.
Represent.
Represent(ative) of bad opinions
Linear, with a focus. And shorter.
Devs have no fucking clue what to do with open world games anymore.
They just make their games bigger, not better.
Devs have no fucking clue what to do with open world games anymore.
They just make their games bigger, not better.
NeoIkaruGAF
Gold Member
Open worlds used to be the exception, AAA productions that broke boundaries. Now AAA tends to be open world to justify the dev time, the costs, the workforce, the worldbuilding, the research, the game’s price, and the DLC. Games have gone too big because otherwise people would think they’re paying too much for too little.
”Linear” as in “corridor” must have exceptionally engaging gameplay, like Doom 2016.
Most games today are in the middle ground, not open world but also not simple linear corridors. And that’s probably the best compromise. Open worlds like Horizon, Zelda or AC should go back to being once-in-a-gen outsiders, not a goal to strive for.
”Linear” as in “corridor” must have exceptionally engaging gameplay, like Doom 2016.
Most games today are in the middle ground, not open world but also not simple linear corridors. And that’s probably the best compromise. Open worlds like Horizon, Zelda or AC should go back to being once-in-a-gen outsiders, not a goal to strive for.
Laptop1991
Member
Open world but filled with meaningful content although why not both, shouldn't just be one or the other
Rippa
Member
Open world games are not conducive to someone that has some sort of attention deficit disorder. If anything open world games just heightens ADD/ADHD.
Open world games suffer from not being able to tell a cohesive story. What with so many side quests and other distractions.
If you’re trying to tell a story, Linear is the way to go.
If you want to have mind numbing action with little to no story, open world is fine I suppose.
Open world games suffer from not being able to tell a cohesive story. What with so many side quests and other distractions.
If you’re trying to tell a story, Linear is the way to go.
If you want to have mind numbing action with little to no story, open world is fine I suppose.
Yep the wide sandbox option.
Yeah I feel like the only true non hub open worlds are from Rockstar and Bethesda.
Rockondevil
Member
I like both and it's completely game dependent. Not every game is good linear, and the same goes for open world.
If I had to pick only one option I'd likely pick open world because I get more playtime for my money. However because most games I play now are Game Pass I'm happy for either.
If I had to pick only one option I'd likely pick open world because I get more playtime for my money. However because most games I play now are Game Pass I'm happy for either.
Mozzarella
Member
I think this whole question is fundamentally flawed, i dont think there is that many that prefer Linear games, its just that a lot of people are tired of open world games.
But its not just Linear and Open World, pick one.
You can create a non linear game that is not open world and i think most people prefer that, and it makes sense, since that probably makes the level design far richer.
So just like with the other topic i was reading about Story vs Mechanics driven games preference, this topic also falls into the same trap of being shallow and one dimensional while at the same time ignoring most of the little details that flesh out gaming as a whole, you end up with answers that are not satisfying as soon as you leave the same topic and go read a top 10 favorite games in the other one.
Edit: Cont..
The key thing here is good level design, and ofcourse a good sense of pacing and content spread throughout the game.
You need to have some sort of balance, if you struggle to fill the open world with interesting and fresh content then you better cut the size or simply change the whole formula, in this case many developers fall into this trap where they need to chase trends and go open world for the heck of it. This is a critical flaw that many people have started to notice and get tired of.
I think there is a place for both, but personally i agree with the majority here that open world games have become some sort of a bad habit at this point, where many of the franchises that we know and love go for open world design for no good reason and the end result is disappointing.
There is nothing wrong with levels, a game that follows levels like the old Thief or new Dishonored games is probably more engaging anyway, its not linear but its also not too big and bloated. This not only makes the game less costly but it also gives the developer team more space to flex their creativity and level design in the game.
For me a linear game is like Uncharted 2, where you need to keep going forward until you reach the next sequence, this is not what i prefer the most, i noticed most of my favorite games are games that have you go back and forth in the level and explore a bit and get rewarded by doing side stuff, things like Metroid Prime, Resident Evil, Hitman, Dark Souls, Deus Ex, even games like Bioshock allow you to move around and explore a bit, that level of non-linearity adds a lot to the level design and makes playing the game better, and ofcourse i do have some larger favorites like New Vegas and Outer Wilds where i have the whole map open and i go where i want.
So to conclude linear and open world are not the only choices here, its not this or that situation, for me as long as the level design is good im good with it, that comes first, when its open world size can add to the feeling of breathing alive open world, so most likely the repetitive/miscellaneous content is going to be optional, whereas the meat of the game probably goes to the main campaign and its core side quests/major dungeons, in this case that is fine too, as long as the design has a unique coat to it and isn't copy pasted in the infamous Ubisoft style. Ultimately its the right balance of size and pacing with a sprinkle of unique coating, art style and atmosphere, that is mixed with creative level design. Linear or Open World doesnt matter.
Noticing the consequences of the open world trend these days i lean more towards games that gives me levels/hub areas with good level design the most, i guess i just appreciate a good level design a lot, i dont mind linear games since they usually are short and you finish them quickly, but their levels tend to be forgettable too, and most open world games these days are just cookie cutter and there's too many of them and they are full of bloat so thats just a turn off.
But its not just Linear and Open World, pick one.
You can create a non linear game that is not open world and i think most people prefer that, and it makes sense, since that probably makes the level design far richer.
So just like with the other topic i was reading about Story vs Mechanics driven games preference, this topic also falls into the same trap of being shallow and one dimensional while at the same time ignoring most of the little details that flesh out gaming as a whole, you end up with answers that are not satisfying as soon as you leave the same topic and go read a top 10 favorite games in the other one.
Edit: Cont..
The key thing here is good level design, and ofcourse a good sense of pacing and content spread throughout the game.
You need to have some sort of balance, if you struggle to fill the open world with interesting and fresh content then you better cut the size or simply change the whole formula, in this case many developers fall into this trap where they need to chase trends and go open world for the heck of it. This is a critical flaw that many people have started to notice and get tired of.
I think there is a place for both, but personally i agree with the majority here that open world games have become some sort of a bad habit at this point, where many of the franchises that we know and love go for open world design for no good reason and the end result is disappointing.
There is nothing wrong with levels, a game that follows levels like the old Thief or new Dishonored games is probably more engaging anyway, its not linear but its also not too big and bloated. This not only makes the game less costly but it also gives the developer team more space to flex their creativity and level design in the game.
For me a linear game is like Uncharted 2, where you need to keep going forward until you reach the next sequence, this is not what i prefer the most, i noticed most of my favorite games are games that have you go back and forth in the level and explore a bit and get rewarded by doing side stuff, things like Metroid Prime, Resident Evil, Hitman, Dark Souls, Deus Ex, even games like Bioshock allow you to move around and explore a bit, that level of non-linearity adds a lot to the level design and makes playing the game better, and ofcourse i do have some larger favorites like New Vegas and Outer Wilds where i have the whole map open and i go where i want.
So to conclude linear and open world are not the only choices here, its not this or that situation, for me as long as the level design is good im good with it, that comes first, when its open world size can add to the feeling of breathing alive open world, so most likely the repetitive/miscellaneous content is going to be optional, whereas the meat of the game probably goes to the main campaign and its core side quests/major dungeons, in this case that is fine too, as long as the design has a unique coat to it and isn't copy pasted in the infamous Ubisoft style. Ultimately its the right balance of size and pacing with a sprinkle of unique coating, art style and atmosphere, that is mixed with creative level design. Linear or Open World doesnt matter.
Noticing the consequences of the open world trend these days i lean more towards games that gives me levels/hub areas with good level design the most, i guess i just appreciate a good level design a lot, i dont mind linear games since they usually are short and you finish them quickly, but their levels tend to be forgettable too, and most open world games these days are just cookie cutter and there's too many of them and they are full of bloat so thats just a turn off.
Last edited:
That was before everyone was oversaturared with constant internet enabled entertainment back when ideas where based on "Ground Truth".
Everything now a days is made by people who only spend time indoors staring at screens. They dont know what the essense of an open world should be because they havent even explored the one they where born into. Everthing they make is just a copy of a copy of a copy.
Last edited:
anthraticus
Banned
Bond007
Member
Yes- always have.
Some games need open world and are done right (GTA)- but not everything needs it. My preference is linear and that is especially the case for me with racers(NFS)- the best ones have always been a list of races rather than open world copying the competition.(Horizon)
Some games need open world and are done right (GTA)- but not everything needs it. My preference is linear and that is especially the case for me with racers(NFS)- the best ones have always been a list of races rather than open world copying the competition.(Horizon)
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
Open world.
Linear games constantly pull you out of immersion by forcing you to walk in certain directions. There is no such thing as an excellently paced linear game. They're all just this...
Linear games constantly pull you out of immersion by forcing you to walk in certain directions. There is no such thing as an excellently paced linear game. They're all just this...