Linear games are better than non-linear games and I'm tired of pretending they're not. Actually I never pretended, I have always been outspoken about how much better linear is, and I will always call anyone who disagrees with me either a retard or a nigger, or even both. Linear games are more finely-tuned, with better level design, better pacing, and better difficulty balance. They don't just scatter some random bullshit around that doesn't flow well with each other. They value your time so you don't wander aimlessly looking for something interesting. Non-linear games are for normalfags who have this retarded obsession with freedom, probably because most of them are wageslaves that only have 2 hours and 15 min to play games before they have to get ready for bed to wageslave the next day, where they will talk to their coworker about the awesome game they played last night where instead of just going right, they can go left OR right which is just so heckin' awesome and wholesome. Non-linear games are developers being lazy cunts and making you work for the fun, instead of providing it to you.
Linear games are better than non-linear games and I'm tired of pretending they're not. Actually I never pretended...
Based. I never understood the point of open world in singleplayer games. It's the laziest design you can have.
What a brainlet take. Open world is not inherently bad, just like linear games are not inherently good.
generic fence sitting opinion. fucking pussy
>Linear games
>Content > Content > Content A> Content
>Open world games
>Empty space > Content > Empty space > Content
>NOOOOOOO, YOU MUST HATE ALL OF X AND LOVE ALL OF Y, IT'S OBVIOUSLY ALL THE SAME
Why are you a smoothbrain, user? It's like saying every fighting game is better than every RTS. Just a dumb opinion that's only based on generalisation.
Why not dense (tiny) Open world? Every criticism of open world is padding and empty space. Why not smol open world? Paper Mario TTYD is kinda like that.
hub/loop based level design > linear level design > open world trash
no exceptions
either linear games are generally better, or non-linear games are generally better. choose one faggot, or do you want the fence to penetrate your asshole?
>Open world games
>decide which content you want to do and how deep you want to go on it
>Linear games
>Corridor > Cutscene > Corridor > Cutscene
God, I hate PS3 zoomers. There doesn't need to be a binary for one thing, but two gens ago, there were way too many boring, linear games that still managed to be bugged out the ass and not worth retail price with the lack of content.
you are are incredibly dumb
And there *were* some good linear games in there like Dead Space or Modern Warfare but that gen was full of devs and publishers not knowing how best to use their budgets
I'm sorry your tribal brain breaks down when there's more than two options, user.
Linear
>Content > new content > new content > new content > end
Open world
>Content > empty space > same content by slightly different> empty space > same content but gather 100 collectible contents > empty space > backtrack the whole area but in reverse content > empty space > same content but your character wears a new hat > empty content > its new content on the same map that'll be 45$ plus tip
Open world is basically applying a corporate jew mindset to videogames. Everything must be used and re-used to maximum capacity and commercial efficiency, 200 hours of mediocre gameplay are easier to sell than 10 hours of goodness.
stop baiting for a second and explain why you have to pick one side
>decide which content you want to do and how deep you want to go on it
this is the most idealistic view of it and it's never fucking like this unless it's just a hub and you choose levels, which is still mostly linear.
>Corridor > Cutscene > Corridor > Cutscene
soul. million times better than "cutscenes" disguised as gameplay where I walk with some faggot for 5 minutes and listen to the dialogue. is the fag in your pic supposed to be the kind of person who enjoys that type of shit?
It's actually like this:
>Linear
>Content > same content by slightly different > cutscene > forced walk&talk segment pretending to be "gameplay" > more rehashed content > another walk&talk segment > some fresh content > another cutscene
GENERALLY, LINEAR GAMES ARE BETTER DESIGNED. YES OR NO? PICK ONE FAGGOT. THEY'RE NOT 50/50 EVENLY SPLIT.
>10 hours of goodness.
>implying that was what we got during the "predominantly linear games era" that you were too young to see
Try 5 hours of mediocrity
Sometimes it's nice to play different types of games op
based user shitting le heckin enlightened centrists (that always lean towards the faggier side)
>GENERALLY, LINEAR GAMES ARE BETTER DESIGNED
In modern vidya? No fucking way because both are quite shit. This only applies to older video games but back then there very barely any open world games (and those were really fun). What actually caused the "downfall" of open world games is this marketing tactic:
>OUR GAME IS A GORILLION SQUARE KM BIG, WOWEE, IT'S 500H OF CONTENT, PLEASE BUY OUR GAME
Stop pretending linear games are good just because you hate bloated open worlds.
most open world games are 90% linear anyways
almost everybody i talked to followed a 90% identical path in elden ring, skyrim, and botw
the only difference is, the roleplaying gamers like to pretend they're exploring the same caves & dungeons over and over again, while the chads ignore all unnecessary content
>this is the most idealistic view of it and it's never fucking like this
give me an example of an open-world game that isn't like this
>soul. million times better than "cutscenes" disguised as gameplay where I walk with some faggot for 5 minutes and listen to the dialogue.
Yes, I know that you linear enjoyers just want to watch movies, not play actual games.
is the fag in your pic supposed to be the kind of person who enjoys that type of shit?
it's just a face my dude.
What is the best linear game ever made?
Open world games are better cause there is usually more content. Im the kind of guy that likes exploring side areas and tries to find every treasure box there is, and open world caters to that better. Linear games usually offer (or used to at least) better setpieces and allows for more agressive ai, so they probably make for the better game if you're not a lootgoblin like me
Typical angry thread where no one replies to anyone.
Half-Life 2
Hubs > everything else
Deus Ex, VTMB, Witcher 3
Hubs use the best of both worlds.
>Open world is not inherently bad
Name a single open world game that isn't trash
I'll give you two:
Gothic 2
GTA Vice City
inb4 but X is shit WAAAAAHH
Open world games that actually let the world live independently from the player
>Space Rangers
>Pathologic
>Majoras Mask
>Kenshi
>Elona
There are also games that simply put linear-game attention but arrange it in a small open world, like Gothic 2 or Majoras Mask. In other words, the real problems with open world games are their static nature and obsession with gigantism that devs cannot love up to but really want to sell.
>Witcher 3
When the "hub" is 3 times bigger than the entirety of Skyrim, then it's not really a "hub".
meant for
You fuckers disgust me.
Back when all we had were cinematic, corridor-like experience all you complained about was the linearity of game design that was plaguing the industry.
Now that open world design got mainstream, all you complain about is how the design is all about empty areas, side content, check-lists etc.
When will you finally understand that every type of design can and WILL be shitty if it's designed by corporate brainlets with the objective of appealing to everyone, regardless if it's linear or non-linear?
>non-linear = open world
retard alert
>THEY'RE NOT 50/50 EVENLY SPLIT.
prove it
all shit
try again
no one asked
It's about game design. W3 indeed upped the sized but it's the same approach. Self contained maps with their own storylines and quests. Cyberpunk on the other hand is actually open world. Why people enjoy Bethesda DLC when it involves another map to explore? They're normally hubs and not integrated with the large scale open world. Hubs are just better.
This is correct and none of you "REEEEEEEEEEE open-world" fags can refute this.
I enjoy Linear games but they have to be Final Fantasy X linear, not Final fantasy XIII linear.
When non-linear progression is done right, it can be good.
There are 2 types of 'good' non-linear based on your main point about balance and fine-tuning:
Semi open world games which embrace the fact some paths should be taken later, such as Dark Souls 1 and Rain World. May you like it or not, the 'unfairness' of the game is intended, and it leads to memorable moments. It also makes re-runs much more interesting.
The other, are full open world where everything is balanced around character progression, such as BotW. I feel like BotW didn't manage to quite hit the mark in this case... but I believe some other game (BotW2) may possibly improve over the idea.
From these examples, Rain World is the one that is pretty much perfect in it's non-linear design, and I highly recommend it.
Skellige and white orchard are DLC-sized stories, the grand majority of the game is in Velen / Novigrad. In fact, north and south of the map were supposed to be their own hubs (like Skellige / White Orchard) and they deliberately changed it to be open.
The open space is the brainlet criticism. The actual criticism is that that linear games inherently allow you to more precisely design and plan around player interaction.
All of them are good when the size is good and has means of transportation.
Open world does wonders to immersion and atmosphere.
Immerse yourself in a vat of acid.
>more precisely design and plan around player interaction.
You can do that in smaller open worlds as well but the levels absolutely need to be handcrafted. No bullshit/usless items or encounters strewn around the map just for the sake of it.
What is the best example you have for "planning around player interaction". What's a great game that does this well.
I admit there was a point in time where I bought into the open world meme. Linear was slowly but surely becoming a dirty word in the world of video games and I went along for the ride. I was only more recently that I realised how wrong I was and how few open world games actually execute their non-linearity well as opposed to just feeling like you're checking items off a list and wasting vast amounts of time travelling from Mission A to Mission B just to waste even more time travelling from the mission giver to the point where the "level" actually begins.
The truth is that even older non-linear games have their own problems too. DOOM isn't open world but it's levels are open ended. The combat itself has aged exquisitely but the maze-like level design is just annoying. In the end of the day all I really want is to walk in a straight line jumping over holes in the ground and/or shooting people in the face, maybe with the occasional sidetrack to pick up a collectible before getting back to business. Where did it all go wrong bros?
>White Orchard
is mostly et glorified tutorial
Forgot to mention Elder Scrolls/Skyrim on the second part. I don't know why people think BotW 'invented' true open world games when these games are a thing.
Yes, BotW is more balanced and has overall better systems, but Elder Scrolls games were always fun to explore, and the massive amount of content overshadows the design issues.
>I don't know why people think BotW 'invented' true open world games
Brand loyalists.
I disliked the nonlinear meme since super metroid.
When I play something like Mega Man every obstacle was considered by the devs. In Metroid you backtrack all day so you cant have truly hard platforming or enemies.
Mega Man games even managed to offer out of order progression while keeping good linear design, albeit at the cost of a proper difficulty curve.
Irregardless of your (incorrect) opinion, these games use open worlds in ways that complement core gameplay. The world in Space Rangers lives on its own and doesn't wait for the player to give it attention. You can land on a planet, fast forward a few years, take off, and discover that the enemy faction took over 90% of the galaxy, currently has inflated making your money worthless, technological progress advanced and your current ship is an outdated piece of shit and winning at that point is impossible. It's the total opposite of AAA open world design is which the bad guys wil halt their plans indefinitely till you finish every side quest, and monsters will scale according to your level to make sure you aren't under- or overpowered
How come there are no open world books, open world movies, or open world music? Humanity seems to be content with trusting the artist to control the experience there, but when it comes to vidya its waaah me want be special important boy.
Actually never mind open world books exist, they're called choose your own adventure, and nobody reads them past the age of 10 cause its gay.
I used to think open world was cool because bethesda was good at making it, then i saw 343 make Halo Infinite open world and it showed me open world is dogshit when compared to what the game wouldve been with defined missions and levels instead
Bad content is the fault of the player.
What did Metal Gear Solid gain from going open world?
What did Zelda gain from going open world?
What did Mario gain from going open world?
What did Souls gain from going open world?
What did Halo gain from going open world?
I thought this is a fact but nigger loving zoomers and millennials with brain rot from years of playing mmos HECKIN LOVE their empty open world sandbox games with reused and repetitive content. Just look at Elden Ring.
Only time I enjoy open world games is when the world is much smaller and feels more handcrafted/fine-tuned like with first two Gothic games.