RPGs and linearity

Recommended Videos

facade

New member
Jul 18, 2009
19
0
0
I've been looking at a lot of the discussion on FF XIII and one aspect of the discussion that bugs me is that there is little agreement on whether a game is linear or not. I think a big problem in these types of threads is that no-one is making a distinction between a linear story, linear level design, and linear gameplay.

A linear story is more or less a tightly controlled plot. FF games have a linear story: nothing you do drastically changes the final outcome of the plot. This shouldn't be a point of major contention.

Linear level design focuses on the difference between walking down a corridor to the objective (linear level design) or choosing one's own path across a wide expansive area. I would like to point out that both types of level design can be present in the same game. For example, FF IX had both an explorable, non-linear world map (especially once you can use different modes of transportation like Chocobo or airship), but pretty linear dungeons.

For these first two types, it's pretty straightforward to say whether a game is linear in these regards or not. The last one, I think, is the biggest point of contention and definitely allows for degrees in how linear a game is.

Linear gameplay is basically a matter of what activities and options are available to a player at a given point. FF X is a good example of a FF game with a very linear plot and level design, but non-linear gameplay. At any given moment (especially later in the game), one can explore the next area to continue the story, play blitzball, explore optional areas for hidden weapons and summons, explore towns for new sidequests/character development, grind enemies in area of choice, etc.

One important note, though, is that a game can have fluctuating linearity concerning the gameplay. For nearly every FF game until you get the airship, your options are pretty much limited to advance the story, grind in your current area, or occasional side quests.

So for discussion, while keeping these guidelines in mind (or making your own), how do you prefer your RPGs?

Personally, I like both linear plots and level design (badly designed expanses generally means a lot of boring travel between areas of interest), however I greatly enjoy non-linear gameplay, the more sidequests the better. In these three respects on linearity, I loved the balance in FFX.
 

MellowFellow

New member
Feb 14, 2010
970
0
0
I guess I lean a little towards the more linear side than open world, probably because I am a big Bioware fan, but I don't mind open world rpgs. I really liked fallout 3, it is probably my favorite open world rpg.
 

TSPhoenix

New member
Mar 16, 2010
7
0
0
I think its safe to say FFXIII is linear, the real question here is what other JRPGs aren't. And well as far as I can think of for a good while now most JRPGs have been quite linear, you can explore the map, but can't really do anything worthwhile until you go to the next plot event's location.

If anything FFXIII is one of the first JRPGs to stop pretending that its non-linear. In some of the earliest JRPGs exploration actually had a point, NPCs would be worth talking to often telling you tips for your quest, as opposed to how great scrambled eggs are. Money was actually a commodity where with most new JRPGs you can buy the best gear for all your characters and have a stack of cash left over. Old games rewarded inquisitive players for exploration. Lately JRPGs seem not to incentivise exploration at all.

Obviously some new games are getting it right, but a LOT of JRPGs seem to do things just because that is how it was always done, without really getting why it was done. If they aren't going to do it properly, I'd prefer they don't do it at all.
 

auronvi

New member
Jul 10, 2009
447
0
0
FF XII had a great combination of the two. I think that it's lame that people complained about it's wide open world. It reminded me of the best part about starting a new MMO... exploring the world. I think they need to loosen up the exploration on the next one but maybe not as much as 12 because of whiny noobs.

I am getting a bit claustrophobic in 13... I am hoping it opens up soon.
 

Housebroken Lunatic

New member
Sep 12, 2009
2,544
0
0
My favourite RPG's are probably Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind and Fallout 1 and 2. So I guess im the biggest fan of RPG's which are as open ended as possible.

Though there's one thing that really bugs me about RPg's developed to be as open ended as possible and that is the static game world. Yes, you as a player have many choices and can more or less influence the development of the game world depending on which factions you decide to back, which people you decide to kill and so forth. But for the most part it feels like "quest givers" are just static vending machines, standing around waiting for you to give you further instructions.

I've grown kind of bored with the whole concept that the "fate of the world" always has to be dependant on me and my choices. Yes, I'd like to be able to rise through the game world and become a "major player" of what goes on in the game world itself, but I'd also like to see that changes and events happen in the game world by themselves too, without me interfering at all, but rather become "caught up" in it all.

If I take Morrowind for instance, the gameworld is nice, well detailed and all that, but for the most part it's pretty "quiet". What happened if I just strolled around doing my business as usual and then suddenly I hear from a panicked villager running my way that Morrowind has been invaded by a foreign army who are currently busy sacking the main capital of Morrowind itself?

Or perhaps when im doing stuff in Fallout 1 or 2, perhaps in NCR or Vault City, the cities are attacked by well equipped mercenaries hired from one of the crime families of New Reno and my character is caught up in having to defend him/herself against the attack just as everyone else in the town is.

I think that the introductions in let's say Oblivion was nice, where NPC's aren't just staying in the same spot all the time but walk around and actually do things, from sleeping to shopping, going someplace to eat etc. But it doesn't tend to have a really big impact on the game world itself.

What I'd like to see is where these random changes happen, not just between individual NPC's but between larger factions/kingdoms/cities/countries or whatever. Sometimes trading companies might strike deals with eachother and opening up new trade routes (and it's actually possible to see these changes in the way that caravans travel between locations more or less often than usual), opening up the possibilities of acquiring new items to shop for in the respective cities or towns. Sometimes political conflicts between factions spill over, resulting in war and frequent skirmishes, both between towns and cities and within the towns and cities themselves. Etc. Etc.

Quite simply, I want te open-ended world to feel more alive than it tends to do in games that have so far been released. And I don't want the game world to be too much of my personal sandbox and dependant on the choices my character makes, just because it's supposed to be open ended. I want to get the feeling that even if I don't involve myself in the wars between factions or other types of quest but rather spend time in the wilderness killing monsters or whatever, the game world will go on without me, even with certain story elements.