Why Are Linear Games Frowned Upon?

[Dyan]

Exactly what the title says folks. I've been lurking on quite a few different forums and I am beginning to notice a trend. Mainly the opinion that linear games are inherently bad. As you might have guessed I don't particularly agree, I think more linear games can have more focused and coherent storylines. But what is your opinion fellow escapists?

 

[Zhukov]

Not sure. I guess it's because they offer less freedom?

Personally, I'm fine with linear games. I like what I call the Deus Ex apprach to linearity, where the game is broken up into levels that come one after another in linear order, but each level allows for a good bit of wriggle room.

However, I've nothing against 100% linear games where the levels are essentially funny shaped corridors, a la Half Life 2.

It can go to far though. Final Fantasy XIII was too linear even for me.

I certainly prefer linear games to open world ones. I'm yet to play an open world game where the open world didn't just amount to a commute between the interesting bits... which were usually linear bits.

 

[shrekfan246]

A problem with non-linear games is that, there has to be contrived reason why the main story has to wait, and is put on hold, while the player character faffs about doing something else.

Or they just ignore it completely and you end up in a situation where the greatest evil to ever threaten the land, ancient destroyer of worlds and nommer of adventuring heroes, poses no actual threat because the player is busy cracking bandits upside the head and running horses off of cliffs.

OT: Pretty much what Zhukov and Topaz said.

I like linear successions of events with areas that allow for exploration. Very few open-world games have kept my interest for longer than ten hours or so, because the lack of focus becomes boring to me fairly quickly.

The funny thing is that as far as the quest lines actually progress in open-world games, the vast majority are still technically "linear" games. They're just hidden behind a thin veneer of non-linearity in the world, and then the weight of the narrative loses all impact because of previously mentioned lack of urgency in progressing. But, you know, it's an open world so people don't care, or something.

 

[JET1971]

It depends on how the game is setup. For Half-Life series it is linear but you are allowed to get off the set path and wander about and explore compared to COD series where if you dare to muck about the game yells at you to do something to proceed such as "Use that RPG on those tanks!" or have invisible walls forcing you to follow a path with no cover rather than allow the player to explore each section. One is fun exploring to find the path while the other is just a movie where you have to do an action at a ceartain time to proceed. Other examples is like the forced vehicle sections, In HL2 you have the boat and the buggy. You have a set path but you can choose to get off and explore the environment while looking for Lambda cache or just finding headcrabs for fun, Other games have a forced vehicle section where you are stuck in the gunner position and have to destroy X enemy vehicles on the road from point A to B and if you dont do it right its game over.

Sandbox and games like in the HL series are popular and more desired because you can dick around and enjoy yourself while on rails games are less popular because it may as well be a movie with quick time events. More people enjoy the freedom than there are that prefers rails.

 

[Pebkio]

They're not. Let me ask you something? In these trends you're noticing, are people referencing linearity in a negative light for RPGs? Maybe for Bioshock Infinite?

The Bioshock Infinite thing was more about expectations. This is a fantasy world full of garish light and fun roller coasters instead of cars... and then they rail-road you into dark and gritty territory, never to look back. The setting was screaming out for wandering in the magical city but what we got was shooting galleries, a lot of which were inside buildings. Also, it was touted as being made by the original Dev team for the first Bioshock, which was revistable for the most part.

As for RPGs being bad for being Linear... and not just FPS's with RPG elements... it's because RPGs create entire worlds for us to explore, not just a setting for a plot. The game has to be bigger than just a setting, otherwise you wouldn't really have enough time to use the mechanics of leveling like they were designed to be used. Following through, creating a world but forcing us to experience that world in sections with limited access feels very restrictive. In reality, it's no more restrictive than the linearity of Modern Warfare... but they're essentially dangling a Banana Split in front of us and only giving us the cherries. In fact, linearity in an RPG can restrict the very game mechanic the genre is based upon, because your level becomes based on where you are in the game, and not the amount of time you've spent in preparation.

Otherwise, you won't see a lot of people complaining about linearity in modern shooters, or Halo. You didn't see many complaints when they made the latest Sonic (about linearity, anyway). Platformers, most FPSs, some over-the-shoulder shooters, horror, and puzzle games... these games aren't expected to be open-world... and I've even seen gumbling when some of them are (I'm looking at you, Sonic Unleashed).

 

[Fraser Fitzpatrick]

It's the aggressive nose leading of Battlefield 3 brand of linearity that I find annoying. That jet combat level had to be one the most BORING sequences I've ever encountered in a game ever. And I play Empire: Total War...

 

[Soviet Heavy]

The problem I have is where linear games tempt you with these large open vistas, only to corral you along these tiny corridors. See Final Fantasy 13.

I like the type of linearity where you are still given these big areas, and then they actually let you go through them. The Killzone games are great for this. They are extended corridors, but with semi open spaces. Killzone 1 and 3 in particular were really good at this.

 

[hazabaza1]

People are dumb.
Like, Battlefield 3 and FF13 or whatever, okay, too linear, kinda shitty. But like, look at Bioshock Infinite. Linear and loved. Half Life series, linear but loved. Hell, even Mass Effect is mostly linear. Still got a massive fan base.

 

[bafrali]

Because your avarage gamer is easily deceived and will instanly assume that game will have more content if it is a sandbox when in reality most developers will create a huge map with no real level design and scatter a few wolves and spiders here and there.

Same thing with the word linear but somehow different.

 

[Joccaren]

In a large part because linear games oversaturate the market, but really depends on the game.

For me, I don't hate linear games, but I dislike them. An open world game always has the potential to be better than its linear counterpart. Doesn't mean it will, and its rare to get one like that, but the potential is there.
What I do hate though is games that might as well be movies. Games that are a mass of cutscenes, and that send you down a corridor with nothing more to it than a shooting gallery every few steps. I'd rather just sit in a cinema and watch it as a movie TBH, IDGAF about the terrible shooting most of them have.
Linear games that I do like are pseudo linear. They have a set narrative, and even sometimes a set order for the levels that you go through, but the levels themselves aren't linear. Take the Witcher 2, or Mass Effect 1, the Bioshock series [Less so in Infinite but still alright] - you are given a level, given your goals, and you go do that shit however you want. Its not a one way track, one corridor leading straight to your objective. There's stuff to explore, things to find, and things to do, and there's usually more than one way to get to your objective.

Heavily linear games IMO are shit. Unless they have fucking stellar gameplay they're better off being a movie, as that's what they want to be.
Games that go more light on the linearity and allow the player to stray off the beaten path, but still follow a somewhat fixed chain of events, are largely enjoyable.

Still, I wait for the day I get a game with an emergent story, procedurally generated background to the world and even partially the world itself, and still fairly polished dialogue and interactions with everything.

 

[Maximum Bert]

Dont mind linear games at all in fact over all I would say I enjoy them more but thats usually because I find most open world type games are open world for the sake of being open world rather than it actually serving to enhance the game so it ends up feeling empty and dull.

I like worlds where they feel as if they are crafted towards the game type they are creating not because its the in thing at the moment so we have to shoe horn some stealth section in,make it open world and add a multiplayer mode when all they do is detract from the experience because the game they are making dosent lend itself to these elements.

 

[Alfador_VII]

I like Linear when it's well done.

If it's just hours of corridor after corridor with no attempt to change things up, or even hide the obvious straight line, then it gets old rapidly.

It's good to have at least a little freedom with side-rooms maybe offering some hidden items, even if there's no side-quests. A great example of this approach is Bioshock Infinite. Despite the apparently open setting of the city in the clouds and almost no straight corridors, it is actually pretty linear. Yes there are hidden side-areas, and a few little quests, for most part the game has one true path, which helps a great deal with the excellent story-telling.

 

[Dethenger]

I think it may have to do with either the perception or common characteristic of linear games as being an "on the rails" experience. I'm fine with linear games, but there are some, like Call of Duty, where you're led from one room to the next and do essentially the same thing everywhere you go. Even Halo, another FPS, does it better by providing huge environments with many, many different ways to approach a given situation. It is still a "linear" game, but it still leaves things open for meaningful player input, which many linear games do not.

 

[Johkmil]

Bioshock Infinite did a good job at balancing linearity and openness by letting the game be linear while allowing different approaches to solving the battle. The COD method of shouting "shoot that tank with the rpg we gave you just now!" at the player takes away too much of the feeling of player agency. Both linear and open-world works well when well-designed , and both might be executed horribly. So there's no inherent evil in linearity, only in bad design choices.

 

[Asuka Soryu]

Non-linear games are sort of like multiplayer, a lot of people think having it somehow makes the game a lot better, but in reality, not every game with that feature is gone to be good.

 

[Me55enger]

Modern Games as a format is so far the one that offers the most freedom in terms of narrative generation. The sheer potential for narrative multiplicity within generated settings dwarfs film and the written word. And possibly even the spoken word.

When a developer offers us a decisively linear narrative within a setting that implies it is a living, breathing world, then the player feels cheated out of an immersive world. The post above me argues Bioshock Infinite does this well. And in comparison to COD, it does. But of course theose are different genres competing for different primary audiences. I don't think the intergration between the story (fantastic) and the setting (also fantastic) was particuarily good there.

This doesn't mean a linear narrative is a bad thing, it just feels like a bad thing when the narrative they write is poorly intergrated into the setting they create. In many ways, Borderlands 2 is an example of this. The linearity of the principal story is broken by clear-cut dead-end side quests that work only to justify the size of the world, which in turn is used to prop up the realisation that the story they had was possibly smaller than the world they put it in.

But that's just opinion.

Boom, like that.

 

[Benni88]

Ummm....What? Linear games aren't frowned on: Limbo, Portal and Journey, three perfect examples of linear games which were incredibly well received.

I think what you mean to say is: Why are most successful AAA games non-linear/open world?

That's because of the notable success of games such as GTA and Elderscrolls, publishers have learned to associate quantity and variety of experience with sales. So now we see way more non-linear/open world games released than we used to, ergo more of these games considered to be great.

 

[Benni88]

Non-linear games are sort of like multiplayer, a lot of people think having it somehow makes the game a lot better, but in reality, not every game with that feature is gone to be good.

Awesome way to put it btw.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Well it's one of those idiosyncrasies where we latch on to the most noticeable aspect to describe a more complex pattern.
Mostly people mean the usual fair of lazy railroaded games that do everything for you and make you feel really limited if not downright useless as a player, which is just the worst thing they can do.

But Half Life and Bioshock are both corridor shooters that I absolutely love, because they put in the time to make things still feel consequential and important.

 

[MortisLegio]

I don't think it's linear level design that is what people complain about but linear gameplay on the other hand... allow me to explain. Linear level design is where there is one set path where as linear gameplay (at least in the way I understand it) is that there is one/few options to solve given problems. Like in CoD, you have a gun you use most of the level, but when a tank shows up, your only chance is to use the rocket launcher that is lying on the ground. Whereas in other titles you maybe able to flank the tank and plant C4, call in an airstrike, use a tank of your own, steal it, ect... Though no one likes a hallway, if the player is given multiple ways to face his/her opposition than he/she will be much more entertained.

This is all just my opinion of course.