Linear vs Wide Linear vs Open World

M

meta4

Junior Member
As this generation draws to a close and a new console generation begins there are again going to be some obvious trends that are going to define the new generation. Of late in GAF I see a lot of disdain for linear games which are often described as nothing but corridor shooters and there seems to be a huge resentment here for that sort of game design. There are obvious pro's and cons to each kind of game design and some of which I listed below

Linear games - There is a impression that most of the huge AAA games this gen have adopted this aproach to game design. The obvious advantages is that it allows proper focus on story, pacing and set pieces ( the biggest critical darling of this gen from this category being UC2 ). The disadvantage is the seeming lack of choice in the narrative and mechanics.

Open World - Unprecendented potential for completely immersing the player if the world is built well. More room for exploration and choice but the disadvantage always show up in repetitive missions, grinding,lack of pacing,no extragavant set pieces or OMG moments that deviate from the norm in terms of mission structure, mechanics tend to get old really quickly after playing the game for a few hours and you start seeing the shalowness of the design.

Wide linear/ Orchestrated Sandbox - A seemingly nice blend of the two that allows both space and focus at the same time though does so at the risk of not doing either superbly. Crysis 2, Dishonored and the upcoming TLOU ( at least based on what ND has stated ) seem to take this approach.

Personally speaking I would love the Orchestrated Sandbox apprach to be used by more games as that has the best potential to blend the advantages of Linear and Open World Games and really take advantage of the medium's strength in terms of both interactivity and story.

What does GAF think or like to see emerge as the trend next gen or is it better to have an equal balance of all types? Would UC2 or Gears be better if they had been open world? Would RDR have been better if it had more focus and mission variety by making it more linear?
 
Crysis 1 is the best orchestrated sandbox that I have seen. Orchestrated sandbox is the best but it is also the hardest to do right which is why so few games use it.


Crysis 2 is a consolized, restricted imitation in comparison.

Witcher 2 also does the wide open linear structure well.
 
- Linear shooters more like Doom, Serious Sam, Painkiller, etc with a reason to replay over and over maybe some randomly generated levels and/or enemy spawns.

- A real open world FPS games. Kind of like Fallout 3 and NV only...better. Maybe not an RPG. But more like you actually roam around a living, breathing city.
 
I like what I call semi non-linear best, games like Dark Souls, older Metroid, or older Zeldas: you had to do things in a rough order, but you could mix it up to an extent.
 
What the Witcher 2 was doing: faux open world. Large, seamless areas you can traverse to like an open world game, but steadily pushed along a narrative path like a linear game.

Straight up linear? Boring
Straight up open world? Even more boring

EDIT: based on your definitions, OP, I guess my answer was orchestrated open world.
 
I want more games like Xenoblade Chronicles, but I'm afraid the increase in required graphical quality for next gen will only make that harder to achieve.
 
Open world is only fun when the sidequests are fun. Those games are few and far between.

Eusis said:
I like what I call semi non-linear best, games like Dark Souls, older Metroid, or older Zeldas: you had to do things in a rough order, but you could mix it up to an extent.
Click to expand...
Yes. Love opening up parts of the map by progressing.
 
Far Cry 3 did pretty well by have the open world but the missions being fairly linear to a certain point. There was certainly some nice set pieces to be enjoyed there. Each of the three types you described are fine with me. I would never rate a game lower for being linear.
 
The events of the main story in the open world games use to be linear. But they allow you to go to places or to do actions that doesn't affect the main story at all. So in a certain way, they're also linear.
And to force backtracking doesn't make your game less linear.
 
"Open world" is an overly broad category, in my opinion. It technically encompasses a lot of Metroidvanias and Zelda-type games when they're largely non-linear, but their level design couldn't be more different from the laziness that pervades most sandbox games.
 
I'm a big fan of wide linear gameplay. Dishonored is a perfect example of this, and the number of ways you can approach each mission is incredible. In these games you feel like you're succeeding due to your own intelligence, rather than succeeding because you pressed the buttons in the order that the developer intended.
 
This gen has made me hate the term 'open-world'. Just another way to say 'empty-world'.
 
It's always better to have an equal balance of all of the above.

Some games work better in a linear setting while others could do well to be be open world instead.

I myself enjoy all 3 types.
 
Games like Elder Scrolls, with that level of openness, always have a predictable path for me. For 10 hours or so I am completely engaged in the world, then for about 10 hours I start noticing how fucking bland, boring, repetitive/pre-fabricated and sparse the world is, and finally I push myself to finish the game in the last 10 hour sprint.

Lacking far too much focus for me.
 
I don't want to see any dominant trends emerge, I appreciate all three approaches. But I would like to see more "wide linear" games, simply because they're less well represented. Hopefully DX:HR and Dishonored's success in the last couple of years hasn't gone unnoticed.
 
All three have their place and have examples of landmark games, but a lot of my favorite games of the last few years have been "wide linear." It gives the player options but still involves actual level design. I imagine it's probably the trickiest kind of game to design.

Other examples of "wide linear":
Crysis 1
Deus Ex 1
Splinter Cell Chaos Theory
People tell me Thief but I still haven't played it.

revolverjgw said:
I don't want to see any dominant trends emerge, I appreciate all three approaches. But I would like to see more "wide linear" games, simply because they're less well represented. Hopefully DX:HR and Dishonored's success in the last couple of years hasn't gone unnoticed.
Click to expand...

That would be nice. But still, that kind of thing requires actual level design, which has become a bit rare this console generation.
 
I want open world games.
I want a beautiful, detailed and alive, huge world, with a number of systems and good core mechanics, that i am free to use and exploit as i see fit.
If this means no story or even no main quest at all, i am fine with that.
Take RDR (example), remove all the main missions and cutscenes, let me create my character and let ME create my story by actually playing the game, deepen the mechanics and the npc natural interactions, let ME be as criminal, by acting like one, instead of telling me the story of John Doe and his tribulations.
I think there's a perfect balance between refined mechanics of a RDR or a Dragon's Dogma and the freedom of a more janky open world game, that they yet have to strike.
That is my ideal game, but of course i am able to enjoy a ton, any degree of linearity, from the point & click, to what have you.
 
I'd also add Pseudo Non-linear as a genre, for games such as Mass Effect 3 that appears to have "choices", but actually make little to no difference to the actual progression.
 
RedSwirl said:
All three have their place and have examples of landmark games, but a lot of my favorite games of the last few years have been "wide linear." It gives the player options but still involves actual level design. I imagine it's probably the trickiest kind of game to design.

Other examples of "wide linear":
Crysis 1
Deus Ex 1
Splinter Cell Chaos Theory
People tell me Thief but I still haven't played it.



That would be nice. But still, that kind of thing requires actual level design, which has become a bit rare this console generation.
Click to expand...

You need to play all the Thief games, now

We're getting Thief 4 from a proven studio that understands this style, so that's at least one wide linear game to look forward to
 
Hoping Metal Gear Solid: Ground Zeroes is more of the LINEAR WIDE than OPEN WORLD


What does Shenmue fall under? ...Linear Open World? :p


also what about Batman Arkham City?
 
I think wide linear will definitely be the next big trend. It's basically the best of both worlds. Those games are able to craft a certain experience so that the game always feels exciting (something that's rarely true for open world games) while also giving the player enough freedom so that they don't feel like they're just being pushed in the same direction every time that they play through it.

FlashbladeGAF said:
Hoping Metal Gear Solid: Ground Zeroes is more of the LINEAR WIDE than OPEN WORLD


What does Shenmue fall under? ...Linear Open World? :p
Click to expand...

GZ is definitely wide linear.
 
Solo said:
Games like Elder Scrolls, with that level of openness, always have a predictable path for me. For 10 hours or so I am completely engaged in the world, then for about 10 hours I start noticing how fucking bland, boring, repetitive/pre-fabricated and sparse the world is, and finally I push myself to finish the game in the last 10 hour sprint.

Lacking far too much focus for me.
Click to expand...

Precisely my problem with open world games. I had the same problem with Skyrim. The first few hours are great but after that you see how shallow everything is. With linear games the shallowness can be hid by introducing variety in the gameplay usually by introducing set piece moments etc.. but in an open world game they simply cannot seem to bring about mission variety..

shinobi602 said:
It's always better to have an equal balance of all of the above.

Some games work better in a linear setting while others could do well to be be open world instead.

I myself enjoy all 3 types.
Click to expand...


True. I dont mind all the types either. I guess when one kind of design starts dominating all the AAA games people get fed up and start hating it. Who knows, if there were many open world games this gen ppl would have prob got fed up and asked for more linear games. An equal balance of all three from the AAA games next gen would be nice and reduce the backlash that we have witnessed this gen
 
Developers have not shown that they can make good level design in an open world. The huge but linear level design like in Deus Ex or Hitman Blood Money is the best way to go for most games I think.
 
Solo said:
Games like Elder Scrolls, with that level of openness, always have a predictable path for me. For 10 hours or so I am completely engaged in the world, then for about 10 hours I start noticing how fucking bland, boring, repetitive/pre-fabricated and sparse the world is, and finally I push myself to finish the game in the last 10 hour sprint.

Lacking far too much focus for me.
Click to expand...

That's my main issue with large, wide open worlds... Yeah, it gives you the epic scale, but there's always a point where the fun turns into grind, or becomes just boring.

It's a tough balance, but options and the ability to explore and complete sidequests needs to stick around. Older games really struck that balance. Games like Metroid Fusion are linear but have that "look around, you may find something" essence that keep you playing... And Link's Awakening did a great job as well, better than even OoT for me.

Spending 20 hours of a 100 hour game traversing an open overworld is just padding, pure and simple.

But I don't need a hand holding, corridor-arena-corridor-boss formula either. Give me no more than 10% wandering, and at least an option to find a hint towards the next goal I need to progress. I may not use it, but leave it out there.
 
A game can never be too open or too non-linear.

Non-linear, emergent, open-world games with choices and consequences that affect the gameworld are the Holy Grail of Gaming.
 
Mario 64 is still unmatched. More platformers like that would be nice. Each level is "open" and you're free to accomplish any objective you wish. I guess the Spyro games had this same principle. Still waiting for the next real Spyro game.
 
Raptomex said:
Mario 64 is still unmatched. More platformers like that would be nice. Each level is "open" and you're free to accomplish any objective you wish. I guess the Spyro games had this same principle. Still waiting for the next real Spyro game.
Click to expand...

Sly 4 will probably be like this, plenty of open maps

Though Sly is an example of why linear can be superior to open. Sly 1's laser-focused linear platforming was the series at its best
 
Raptomex said:
Mario 64 is still unmatched. More platformers like that would be nice. Each level is "open" and you're free to accomplish any objective you wish. I guess the Spyro games had this same principle. Still waiting for the next real Spyro game.
Click to expand...

your right


Level design was perfect. You knew where you needed to go, yet you still had a ton of room to explore and get lost into the game
 
revolverjgw said:
Sly 4 will probably be like this, plenty of open maps

Though Sly is an example of why linear can be superior to open. Sly 1's laser-focused linear platforming was the series at its best
Click to expand...
I still need to beat 2 and 3. I enjoyed the first game. A little easy but fun nonetheless. But I never really felt compelled to replay for any reason. Once I beat it that was it. I'm big on replayability whether it be because of features or immersion.
 
revolverjgw said:
Sly 4 will probably be like this, plenty of open maps

Though Sly is an example of why linear can be superior to open. Sly 1's laser-focused linear platforming was the series at its best
Click to expand...

Yup. I agree. I preferred Sly1's linear platforming to the open world route that they went with 2 and 3.
 
Love me some wide corridors or large arenas.... love being able to plan my entrance to a place, something open world games are surprisingly not very good at....

Crysis is by far the best at doing this
 
Ultima, Gothic, Risen, Fallout 2, Arcanum are all examples of how you can make an open world game and yet put enough setpieces and relevant characters in it to make it feel anything but "empty, repetitive and boring".
 
I've always felt that Mafia 2 got a bad reputation because people compared it to open world games. I would consider it more of a Wide-Linear World game because there is not a lot to do (read: nothing) outside of the missions and the Playboy search. If you just treat it as a linear action game with a fantastic story and great set pieces, it is absolutely fantastic. Misunderstood game.
 
I love wide linear games. Now that I think of it most of my favorite games are wide linear.

Deus Ex, Vampire: Bloodlines, Crysis, MGS3 and the list goies on.

MizzouRah said:
I've always felt that Mafia 2 got a bad reputation because people compared it to open world games. I would consider it more of a Wide-Linear World game because there is not a lot to do (read: nothing) outside of the missions and the Playboy search. If you just treat it as a linear action game with a fantastic story and great set pieces, it is absolutely fantastic. Misunderstood game.
Click to expand...

This man knows what's up. Mafia 2 is a fantastic game.
 
MizzouRah said:
I've always felt that Mafia 2 got a bad reputation because people compared it to open world games. I would consider it more of a Wide-Linear World game because there is not a lot to do (read: nothing) outside of the missions and the Playboy search. If you just treat it as a linear action game with a fantastic story and great set pieces, it is absolutely fantastic. Misunderstood game.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. And I really enjoyed the game. But as an open world game I felt it really had potential. They created an amazingly beautiful city which I felt was quite immersive. There's so much they could have done. It's a shame, really.
 
MizzouRah said:
I've always felt that Mafia 2 got a bad reputation because people compared it to open world games. I would consider it more of a Wide-Linear World game because there is not a lot to do (read: nothing) outside of the missions and the Playboy search. If you just treat it as a linear action game with a fantastic story and great set pieces, it is absolutely fantastic. Misunderstood game.
Click to expand...

Yeah its open world was more o a hub than anything...btw absolutely loved the game some of the best gunplay in a tps....horribly underrated game....also liked how your gameplay earnings actually take realistic hits based on the story....super excited for Mafia 3
 
I can appreciate all 3, what's important to me is expertly executing on whichever design direction is taken.

Open world design is tough but highly rewarding when done well, though I find myself being more critical towards games that try to do too much as of late. I'd rather play a captivating linear experience that knows what it is and excels at it greatly than a huge AAA experience complete with rough edges and uneven content, even if the AAA game is more ambitious and outwardly impressive.

The middle ground sounds like a good compromise, but again it has to support the vision for the game and not just become a default framework because it tests well. There will be lots of opportunities to play around with all 3 as the next generation begins, but at this point I just want greatness in any form it takes, in as many aspects as possible.
 
megalowho said:
I can appreciate all 3, what's important to me is expertly executing on whichever design direction is taken.
Click to expand...
Yep, but I have a preference for open worlds if only for the fact that I can define my own pace with the usual choices of story missions, side missions, mini-games, straight up exploration, and my holy grail of gaming, player-character-driven objectives. I'm perfectly fine with linear wide if there isn't enough solid content or polish for a true open world though.

But if its truly linear, I have extremely high expectations. There has to be some truly solid and fresh gameplay to warrant removing aspects of player choice.
 
Corky said:
This gen has made me hate the term 'open-world'. Just another way to say 'empty-world'.
Click to expand...

Yeah, getting kind of burned out on every game having shoehorned-in giant environments with nothing to do in them. Sorry to rag on Dragon's Dogma again, but that game would be more serviceable if it were beat em up than as an open world game, especially since most of the game world consists of tight corridors interspersed with designated combat zones.
 
The earliest example of wide-linear that I can think of is the original Deus Ex, and I still think that game did a lot of things with the concept that haven't been matched.
 
MizzouRah said:
I've always felt that Mafia 2 got a bad reputation because people compared it to open world games. I would consider it more of a Wide-Linear World game because there is not a lot to do (read: nothing) outside of the missions and the Playboy search. If you just treat it as a linear action game with a fantastic story and great set pieces, it is absolutely fantastic. Misunderstood game.
Click to expand...

Story is kind of shit though and it gets pretty boring even if you play it as a more linear game, imo.
I'd say after
you exit from prison
, it's a steep downhill ride.
Fantastic graphics and quite good gunplay though.
 
I think wide-linear is my favourite.

A linear game done well can be amazing though (like Uncharted 2). Alan Wake was a good one, because it was completely linear, but the world felt so much more open than you'd expect - beautiful atmosphere and level progression.
 
Anything but linear. Being linear isn't always a bad thing but Uncharted: Golden Abyss (the only Uncharted that I have currently played) is linear to the max and because it focuses so much on its generic and cliche story it fails to offer any compelling gameplay. If you're going to focus on story don't neglect the gameplay, it is a game after all.
 
Orchestrated linear. The "arenas" in UC2 are some of my favorite gaming moments this generation.

Straight up openworld is boring as hell to me.

Straight up linear is ok if they do a truly fantastic job at it (a la HL2)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom