I dont think Minecraft would do too well being linear.
post
I like a game world that's just fun to be in even when I'm not advancing the story. Taking a break to explore is awesome, and much easier in an open world.
Spider-Man for the PS4 had fast travel via subway, by why would you miss out on web-slinging your way from one end of Manhattan to the other?
This is what witcher 3 did best imo.
It's open world, and it feels large... But it's not actually that large when you think about it.
And the side areas are so rich and dense that you can do quests from a random hub, some that chain on for quite a while... And then realise this whole time that you haven't actually done any of the main story.
I was excited to learn more about certain monsters in the bestiary, what oils and elements they were weak to etc.
I'm not sure that it's *better*, but it's hilarious when you go off and do all the side quests and end up completely over powered by the time you get round to the main quest and just beat the shit out of the main bad guy without realizing that they're important.
Big bad: "so you have finally come to meet your doo-"
Competitionist: *drops bag of loot on boss, crushing all his bones*
That’s why you scale the enemies to the players armour and level!
Honestly I really don't like that in most open world games, mostly cause enemy levels tend to make it feel like I'm just as powerful at lvl 1 as at lvl 40. Bethesda games post Morrowind are particularly bad about this IMO, not to say you can't have leveled shit just don't do it to all the enemies, do it like NV where some enemies are leveled but most are flat preset levels.
Sorry, was being sarcastic.
It sucks when you get an item and do 10,000 damage, but now your enemies all have 50,000 HP, especially when it's the same old enemies just stronger.
At least in Skyrim you start seeing new enemies later on, but sometimes it's just fun to wreck some bandits as the Dragonborn.
I disagree. I hate when games do this, particularly open world ones. The point of going to find loot and stuff is that it benefits you. If there is no benefit then the game shouldn't give you the option. Those games should be linear, because they're trying to make a linear experience out of something non-linear.
If I'm struggling, I want to be able to leave and come back stronger. Even if I wasn't, I want to come back and feel that I've gained power with the time I spent. If I don't, I know I'm wasting my time.
That’s what Elden Ring really did well imo. The game sort of guides you towards Margit at the start, but he completely destroys newcomers, which causes them to explore the map more and discover more content in the intro areas. By the time they’ve done most of the interesting stuff in the first couple areas and go back to Margit, he’s far more balanced to fight. Still not a pushover but far more reasonable to fight and no longer frustrating.
Yep, and, if you're paying attention and thoroughly exploring, you can actually go around the castle and totally avoid him. You can get incredibly strong before fighting him. It makes you feel like you're actually progressing.
I’ve only skipped him once because Stormveil Castle is an excellent dungeon but it’s cool I have the option if I want to.
Yes! It helps if it is clear the bad guy has been doing things as well. (Aren't there a few games where the bad guy moves locations with this, so if one is really fast, they can catch them rather weak.)
That's so fucking lazy by the gamedesigner, and takes away all the fun too IMO.
Imagine scaling enemies by actual player skill needed to defeat them, instead of just 'my number more big than your number'.
Yes. Many. Stop playing Ubisoft checklist simulators.
Generally, good open world games have a lot more emergent content - situations that emerge from the interaction of agents and simple mechanics (in the style of how simple rules create complex outcomes in the "Game of Life") - whilst good linear games have highly curated set-pieces scenarios which were created by level designers directly.
For an example of the former, imagine you're running around the Game World looking for a special kind of plant to create a potion that you need. You come across a battle between bears and a bandit group. When they die their drops are free for the taking and both groups are too high level for you to take on your own. None of this was setup to happen when you crossed some trigger line, it literally just happened because those the entities in those groups are part of enemy "factions" and the patrol route of one group (a route which might itself be procedural rather than fixed) passed near enough the position of the encampment of the other.
This kind of thing randomly happen is just not something you get in linear games which are generally just set-pieces and even the ability to pull on group of high level enemies to another group has to be designed in (mainly by making the restricted game area big enough for it in that section and placing the groups in the right places).
This is also why in a linear game if you die and restart you get the same fights in the same places you had before up to the place were you died unless that section of the game was designed with enough alternate paths of mechanics (say, hide mechanics) that you can go around and avoid certain fights.
Emergent content is also why Multiplayer can be a lot of fun, though in this case the "agent" whose interactions can give rise to all sorts of situations are other players.
Oh hell yes.
I'm playing Horizon Zero Dawn Complete (it includes the DLC) and as soon as I got to Daytower, I ran into a guy named Ohtur who mentioned The Cut.. I pivoted and headed up there and by sneaking around everything with higher stats than I had, (which was almost everything) I managed to find resources that got me a wickedly powerful weapon. Game changer. Literally.
Getting to any part of the map and find it's hidden goodies is amazing.
Emergent content is what I liked about loading a ton of Skyrim mods. Too bad it was also crashy as hell.
I'd like to start a new game but since I'm Linux only these days it makes it harder.
Being able to fuck around can be fun. A linear Elder Scrolls (morrowind, oblivion, skyrim) would be boring
GTA 3, Vice City, San Andreas. Morrowind, Oblivion, Fallout 3 (yes), New Vegas. Elden Ring. Subnautica.
Try making San Andreas linear and you would instantly destroy one of the best games ever made.
On the other hand later GTAs didn't embrace the open worlds for which the series is known. Once you start a mission the games turn extremely linear without giving the player options.
OTOH, just drifting along the map and running into a total stranger who feels perfectly safe in trusting you to escort his daughter or something is kinda meh.
I like open-world, but procedural anything, not so much.
Open world =/= giant map
Take resident evil games, Control, Batman. Some larger maps than others, but the key is open. Most of the map or level is available to you to explore how you like, with a linear story guiding you through as well, and then progression opens smaller locked areas and new levels.
Had to explain this to a friend when I called the original Deus Ex titles "open world" games. (It's technically semi-open world but, meh, nuances)
RDR2, GTA, Elder Scrolls, is this a shitpost?
The benefit is the experience. The difference in experiences comes down to the level design. Are you in a maze or in a field?
The best game designs masks this in both scenarios.
The well designed linear game doesn't always feel like a maze, and has sections that feel like fields between mazes.
The well designed open world game contains mazes that you discover in a field that feels roped off into clearly defined sections that differ from each other and contain large landmarks to orient and draw you in.
Both feel bad if they don't include (at least the illusion of) the other. A linear game is boring without any choice. An open world game is boring without linear moments.
I mean like, compare a ... hub and spokes style immersive sim game, to any given open world game.
With an ImSim, you often get planted into an area, with a single or multiple main quests, and a whole bunch of essentially discoverable sidequests... and, when done well, those optional sidequests significantly affect how the main quests play out, and may give you different options for how to approach or conclude those main quests.
Then, onto the next hub/spoke section.
ImSims are not typically associated with literal huge open spaces... but the spaces they do have tend to be well interwoven.
There are often entirely optional, missable 'sidequests and submazes', basically, even in a typically smaller amount of literal space.
But also, they're not strictly linear in the way of like ... an FPS campaign/single player mode usually is. Sure you can have the literal levels be maze like, but typically/traditionally, theres usually only one entrance and exit, and the specifics of what you did in any given maze don't really impact the next maze beyond your weapon and ammo count and health maybe carrying over.
ImSims open up the conceptual field of a given linear sequence of levels, by allowing totally different play styles to yield signifcantly different experiences, and often the additional mechanics they do this with are more than just combat... social and exploratory play can be rewarded or punished by altering the narrative itself.
Cyberpunk 2077.
I like the linear missions, but just exploring the open world and discovering things naturally is fun too. I think they could have done more with that, and it definitely feels like the game was way more linear in early development, but with all the updates CDPR managed to make something pretty cool IMO.
Midnight club 2 was pretty dang cool.
The open world nature made the races very fun and was a big (arguably genre defining) departure from other racing games with invisible walls.
It’s had a rare combination of skill, map utilization, and novelty that made it a fun game to play
As a completionist open-world games give me progressively more anxiety. Worried I might miss something or mess up a quest line I like.
I am perfectly fine with a clean story or just don't bog me down with a growing list of uninteresting side quests. No I don't want to harvest 500 goblin dicks for a helmet that completes my set.
Tap for spoiler
Yes the helmet is a big floppy dick for my Phallus gear set. I get all the pieces, it unlocks a projectile attack that sticks enemies in place.
the helmet is a big floppy dick for my Phallus gear set. I get all the pieces, it unlocks a projectile attack that sticks enemies in place.
Well now I want the helmet, but if I complete this other minor side quest it's going to become uncompletable, but it doesn't mention that anywhere I have to read a strategy guide to know that.
You were supposed to run up in time to kill the first hard-dicked goblin you see first, before it dies in its scripted sequence.
Then you can loot the sticky gobnut item, and if you interpret its lore correctly, you'd know that finishing the side quest where you find the lost canoe tribe would quell the hunger of the hard-dicked goblins, changing their world models and drops so you can't craft the helmet recipe after that.
Duh. Git gud.
Try Kenshi.
There's no main quest at all, beyond try not to die.
Everyone has different tastes. My tend to get narrowed the older I get.
Now I pretty much stick to co-op games with drop-in and out via a matchmaking. Usually with a mechanic for tweaking things, like DRG or Darktide.
If I play anything solo, I'm a big mech fan (MW5) or I lean towards city builders.
But overall I need more than survival games or open world blank slates. I know people love those, but I'm from an era without that as the norm. I don't mind some rails if it's good content.
Last night I had a realization that the whole reason fallout 3 was given a radio is to fill the hours and hours of nothing in between locations. And also for the dungeon crawling.
For me, half the fun in Fallout is discovering some old building and piecing together what fucked up thing happened there.
Bethsoft often pisses me off or lets me down but they are absolutely good at environmental storytelling, no doubt
There's definitely something to that. I liked that detective kind of work too. Games don't need dialogue to tell good stories. There's even good ways to just wander a large empty world and see sights.
Too bad that the music selection is so tiny that you basically need mods with more (lore-friendly) music.
When progression is properly controlled such as in fallout: new vegas or hollow knight, then a larger map can do wonders
I wouldn't put Metroidvanias (with large maps, back tracking, ability gating and flexibility in which area to go to next) alongside other open world adventure games (like GTA, Witcher, Breath of the Wild, etc). I love Metroidvanias and linear games, but I wouldn't touch open world adventure RPGs with a 10 foot pole.
I’m certain nearly 25% of my crimson desert playtime is climbing mountains for fun then flying back down
This was me with Breath of the Wild. Every mountain is a stamina puzzle in the early game. And nothing (except rain) can stop you if you're determined enough. And while the Korok isn't a satisfying reward on its own, it's nice to see them as achievements. Like the creators saying "Yes, we put this mountain here for you to climb, and you did it!"
The Witcher 3. Linear as hell story, super fun open world. It was literally gwent simulator for me by the time I finished that game.
Elden Ring did it very well.
I’ll have to agree with this statement.
However, it recently has come to my attention that, unfortunately, the abundance of land between each settlement and the hereby caused long travel times have significantly lowered the property values in regions that have not yet been attached to the Gold Road Transport Enterprises® public transit network.
Unhappy with this status quo, the city council of Liurnia under mayor Boggart reached out to me.
In cooperation with the "Multifunctional Anti-Gravity Intelligent Carriages" research team at the Academy of Raya Lucaria, we have developed plans for a fleet of self-driving, hovering vehicles which will provide a convenient and reliable way of commute around the wetlands, with the central station soon joining the GoldRoad network.
Totally free of charge and non-invasive to the habitat of all local swamp life, this project will be realized by the FIERY GIANT Construction & Regenerative Energy Crucible Technologies LLC.
Death Stranding / Elden Ring cross over?
count me in.
I’ll try to bribe Kojima with exclusive Malenia feet foot pics, understood!
(The research on limb replacement at the Stormveil Medical Center is currently halted following an investigation into ethical concerns regarding the origin of grafting materials, during which a serious breach of the hygiene protocol caused by the decomposing body of a dead demigod that recently lost its immortality was discovered in the building complex’s basement facilities. Our department of divine biohazard containment is scrambling to minimize the ecological damage, describing phenomena like crabs suddenly turning goth or swamp lobsters gathering around a death metal festival music stage.
As soon as these issues are addressed, research is bound to continue and treatments will be approved for the social healthcare program.)
Yes, but the open world has to exist in the game as a meaningful set of gameplay systems/potentialities.
There have to actually be things that could challenge you, cost you, reward you, capture your attention, present you with a secret if investigated, set off an actually meaningful chain of events, etc.
If 'open world' is implemented as simply 'big space with occasional trash mobs wholly disconnected from the rest of the game'... you have a very shitty implementation of an open world.
Open world doesn't, or I guess shouldn't simply mean 'big empty space'.
If your game has a fast travel option that you regularly or often use to skip the open world, your open world sucks.
I pretty much always prefer open world, or at least something interconnected like a Metroidvania. Linear makes me feel like my back is against the wall.
Witcher 3 is so much better than 2 or even 1 (which was also confusing).
Also, imagine Gothic, Skyrim or Dragon Age in linear.
While Crysis would be worse with a fully open world. It plays as a narrative.
I think elden ring probably couldn't be told in a smaller scale level design.
You hear about massive spanning battlefields, wars with gods, etc. Could not be correctly portrayed with a more compact level design. And the vistas are gorgeous.
Open worlds benefit the game when exploration is the point.
Elden ring is really more linear than it is open world, so much content being locked behind certain progress milestones (and difficulty curve unless you're very good). You have no lasting impact on the game world, and the gameplay loop is heavily centered around dying and respawning at checkpoints. It has more in common with a Mario game than with, say, skyrim. Linking the "levels" together I guess has some aesthetic benefits, but honestly if you entered each area directly from the roundtable hold would the experience have been materially different?
so much content being locked behind certain progress milestones
Ehh, sort of? The main story is pretty linear but progress is very open ended, which you can say for almost every open world game, even minecraft.
You have no lasting impact on the game world.
Events you put into motion literally change geography(IE, killing radahn turns an entire area into a smoking crater.) Individual quest lines have varying levels of effect on the world ranging from affecting enemy spawns to changing the leadership of an entire region.
but honestly if you entered each area directly from the roundtable hold would the experience have been materially different?
Yes, because something that happens in elden ring is that you start with the world map being really small, and then you keep uncovering new areas, making the map bigger, but you have no idea until you actually explore and are hit with how expansive an area that's just hiding behind a bridge is.
In the DLC that feeling is compounded with the pure verticality of the world, a small non-descript cave that you can easily miss without a guide leads you about a quarter of the DLC areas.
The exploration, and the feeling when you uncover a new area, wouldn't exist if you could just warp there from a hub.
Killing redahn unlocks a new level and his entire army continues to stand in the same places and respond to you exactly as they did before. That’s exactly what I'm talking about with linearity. "can be easily missed without a guide" also exactly what I'm talking about, there's generally one way of getting everywhere and when it's hard to find that it's very tempting to look it up or ask a friend, exploring is mostly frustrating.
To be clear I'm a fan of the game, but I have spent probably <10% of my playtime on unstructured exploration or side quests (if you can call 5 bits of loosely related dialog in fixed locations a side quest). Not everything has to be open world, and I probably would have had as much fun with ER if wasn't. The most sandboxy bit I would say is the multiplayer, which I wish they had made a bit more flexible, but I do find very funny.
Genshin does have a story somewhere, but exploring the world is the real fun.
Project zomboid? Skyrim/Oblivion/Morrowind?
Game that didn't feel like it was really made for open world: the new mario kart. I don't hate it, it just feels.. forced somehow.
The exploration of xenoblade chronicles x is what seperates it as a gaming experience compared to the numbered xenoblade games. While it is the weakest narratively, it holds the largest sense of exploration
I would definitely say Gothic 1 and 2. Cannot imagine the games being better without it.
Yes? Completing objectives in the order I feel like at the time can absolutely be a better experience than a forced sequence of objectives that are misaligned with how I feel at the moment.
There can be benefits of open world. When traversal is a primary mechanic and is half the fun of the game like in a lot of Spider-man and Crackdown games. When the vaste distances with little to no civilization, just natural terrains, forrests, and the occasional temple ruin and giant beast fill you with a sense of wonder and unease to set the tone of the game narrative like in Shadows of Collosus. When the world itself is a living puzzle to be unraveled like in LoZ: Majora's Mask.
The problem is when games have big maps just by expanding terrain, filling it with tedium and unthoughtful design, make traversal a slog, and make everything feel unintentionally void of life and interesting things to do/see. And narrative driven games almost always benefit from at least some linearity.
I'll just mention Star Citizen and fetch the popcorn.
Not much. Open-world is often a design for a looooot of space without intention. It used to be a technical prowess, but now it's mostly for bland chores simulators. Generic open-worlds and mobile games have hurt game design a lot, especially in the 2010's, but IMHO, Fromsoft has saved us from that by creating a semi-open, interconnected world design that felt vast and intentional. Elden Ring was their first modern open-world and they nailed it with all that Souls experience.
The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild & Tears of the Kingdom.
It's all about exploring. It would be impossible with a linear structure.
I still haven't finished botw despite starting it over like 30 times. I just end up exploring and losing track of the story.
top 100 comments