Linearity vs Non-Linearity

[Anacybele]

So, after sorta bringing up this topic in the Zelda: A Link Between Worlds thread, I decided to make a separate thread about it.

You can say whether you prefer some linearity in games or prefer them to be more open and non-linear and all that stuff. I personally prefer some linearity in my games. It doesn't have to be entirely linear, just enough to where I'm never completely stumped and can't figure out a damn thing. But I can enjoy something that's more linear than open too, such as Zelda: Skyward Sword (my favorite game outside of FE, in fact). It really depends on the story, gameplay, and how challenging it is, I suppose. Skyward Sword had a great balance of this, imo.

To me though, it seems that most gamers prefer non-linearity. But I tend to dislike it because as I said above, I often find myself really stumped and not able to figure out what to do next or what I should do next. I usually find it annoying. I realize that non-linearity can add to the replay value, but there's other ways to make a game's replay value high, if you ask me. Take FE where you can get different supports and stuff each time you play. Sometimes even different characters and scenes, like in FE10. Now I realize not all of this is possible in a game like Zelda, but I'm just using FE as an example.

I'm not saying I want a game to hold my hand the whole way through (even though Skyward Sword sorta does this because of Fi xP) or that I'm too lazy to try figuring things out. I DO try to figure out stuff on my own but sometimes it takes me forever and sometimes I go at it so long that I give up and resort to a guide. This is what I've had to do with Zelda: Link's Awakening. The game hardly gives you any clues about what to do except for a sentence or two the owl tells you. And the overworld map is confusing as hell. And I gave up entirely on Super Mario Sunshine because it doesn't give me any hints at all about where to go. I tried finding out on my own and I still couldn't. I think I only got a total of three Shine Sprites. xP

I just don't want to be thrown into an overworld, told "here you are, now play!" and that's it. Truth is, I haven't been able to see the appeal in non-linearity in games. Why DO people like it, exactly? o_O

[Sasori]

To me it all depends on how it is handled. Linearity can be better for storytelling since the designers can place every event in the right order, but non linearity gives you a certain feeling of freedom which can add to the experience.

It all depends on the games in my opinion. Non linearity is one of the things that makes the Elder Scrolls a good series, but I think there are plenty of examples where it doesn't work out.

I'm fine with non linear games as long as the game at least gives some sort of structure, instead of telling you to figure things out for yourself.

[Nobody]

I agree with you in almost everything except the part about not being able to find everything. My problem with non linear games is that I just can't proceed until I get EVERYTHING, which means I get really lost in games that are too non-linear. I also like to know where to go in a game, which is the reason why I prefer Dark Souls over Demon's Souls or Skyward Sword over A Link Between Worlds. I'm a very indecisive person, so I can never decide where to go first in games without set paths haha

I can still enjoy non-linear games, but in general, I prefer linear ones.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Nobody

[Silver Lightning]

I like both for different reasons and for the different experiences you get out of them. Linearity is good for storytelling and plot, but I also like to explore and tinker with things in the non-linear 'wide open sandbox' games. And I like when there is a combination of both, like in most RPGs where you can take a break from the main plot and go do some sidequests or explore the overworld for other stuff. Different strokes for different gamers, I suppose.

[AstraLunaSol]

Non-linearity allows the player to do whatever they want. It basically feels less like you're just walking on a guided path the entire time and instead can choose what you want to complete first. However, it can feel overwhelming. A good example of non-linearity is the second portion of Dark Souls where you can choose to defeat any of the 4 (or was it 5?) bosses in whatever order you want, as long as by the end you kill them all since they hold important plot items. Each boss has its own area and there are multiple ways to reach the boss within that area, that is good non-linearity. Then there is the absolute non-linearity some games follow, such as FarCry3, where you're literally thrown into an island and are told to just do whatever you want, whether it is to progress the story or find secrets. Those types of non-linear games can definitely get overwhelming.

then there are linear games that have tiny side paths like metro 2033, literally a tunnel with some branching paths to get extra loot

I personally like non linear games but don't mind linear ones either. Hell, I played Final Hallway 13 and enjoyed it.

[RJWalker]

A damn good game is a damn good game whether it's linear or non-linear.

[LuxSpes]

My taste depends on the situation a lot, though I enjoy a slight amount of linearity. I can enjoy extremely linear games like Ace Attorney and Mario games or more open ones like the Metroid Prime games and Xenoblade. I do usually prefer games like the later where the option to wander away from the main objective is possible.

I have played few games with total non-linearity and even then, I tend to stick to a particular path.

As for the replaybility issue, I feel that it's entirely dependent on the quality of the game and that a linear game can be more fun to replay than a less linear one.

[Anacybele]

Well, like Nobody, I'm a rather indecisive person. xP

Also, I like sidequests too, but not a whole lot. Zelda: Majora's Mask was a turn off for me because of this. The game was almost nothing BUT sidequests, with a very short main story. And I didn't even like most of the sidequests on top of that. Exploration is also fun, this was one of the few things I actually enjoyed about Zelda: The Wind Waker (another game I generally disliked). Though in that game, it could've been way better because the islands were so small.

I guess I just need a good mix of linearity and non-linearity, with the larger portion being linearity. :P

[Tamanoir]

When non-linearity is made at the expanse of the story or character developpement.(that's partly the case in the last Layton), I tend not to really like it.

However, non-linearity can be a way to allows you to develop your world better and makes you feel like you're a part of the game world. It's quote refreshing.

That's the case of Orienta Blue, whhere visiting the different places with different characters or at different times leads to different event.

The problem with those kinds of game is that they have too many moments where you really needs a guide. Oriental Blue really missing correct English source can be quite hard to navigate... (finding a Zombie cure particulary...)

These sort of game should made navigation easier, because having to walk all the way from point A to B t C is pretty boring after a while. If it have options like New Game +, it also helps.

It should also allows you to take risk easier.

So, I guess my point is that as long as it allows to develop the world, the characters and the story better, I don't care which means you use. If non-linearity is at the detriment of the story, I'll usually dislike it.

tldr : play Oriental Blue. Now !

Edited February 5, 2014 by Totally Radical Judge

[Breezy Kanzaki]

I'll say I'm in the non-linear side I guess.

I like the games like Super Mario 64/Galaxy where I can do missions in whatever order (God Eater also applies here) and still end the game by doing the minimal amount.

Though I do enjoy other linear games, but it's dependent on the choices I can make (Persona 3/4 come to mind)

[ZemZem]

A damn good game is a damn good game whether it's linear or non-linear.

this this this

Though Majora's Mask was difficult to get into at first because the beginning in Clock Town was all like, 'Try to find something to do, loser.'. :P

[Tamanoir]

Do you consider the game with multile possible choices as non-linear ?

My main example here is Tactics Ogre, which allows to follows different paths.

[algae]

Non-linear seems like it's a lot harder to pull off (especially as you get less linear): if you can do whatever you want in any order, how do you balance it?

That's one of the things that irked me about A Link Between Worlds, actually... Every dungeon was balanced as if you were doing it first and didn't have any other items. Makes sense early on, but for the last few your inventory is full and all but a handful of items in it are useless... Which is a shame because a lot of them could be used in some pretty unique ways. More than that, it meant that a lot of the combat later in the game was fairly easy: you had to be smart for the first few bosses, you could pretty much just stand still and slash at the last few.

[PKL]

I like and enjoy both styles.

[Komeiji Koishi]

It depends, really, on.the genre, and how it's executed, for me at least.

3d platformer wise, I think I like a mix between linearity and free roaming, an example is that Mario game no-one likes. I felt that the Galaxy games were way too linear for what it should be.

For 3d adventure games, I think some linearity should exist (as in, where you should go and stuff), but should have some free non plot related stuff to do.

For a role playing game... depends on the execution, really. Like, I can see why people dislike FFXIII for being really linear, but at the same time, it makes getting back into it after half a year really easy (which happened to me).

So.yeah.But everyone has their opinions to it, so whatever.

[euklyd]

Oh darn. I thought this was talking about linear vs. non-linear in a math context.

I like both; it just depends on how it's handled. That being said, I probably have a slight preference for non-linear.

[Thor Odinson]

Doesn't matter to me really

If game pulls it off whatever well then their power

like butt creed is pretty non-linear (near open-world p much) but it still has that main mission objective marker you can always use to find where you need to go in the story, but if you just want to dick around and do side stuff and murder half of rome that is okay too

[LuxSpes]

Non-linear seems like it's a lot harder to pull off (especially as you get less linear): if you can do whatever you want in any order, how do you balance it?

That's one of the things that irked me about A Link Between Worlds, actually... Every dungeon was balanced as if you were doing it first and didn't have any other items. Makes sense early on, but for the last few your inventory is full and all but a handful of items in it are useless... Which is a shame because a lot of them could be used in some pretty unique ways. More than that, it meant that a lot of the combat later in the game was fairly easy: you had to be smart for the first few bosses, you could pretty much just stand still and slash at the last few.

I'm not far into ALBW, but this is the one thing I feared about the game. Dungeons scaling with you are interesting in Zelda games and having a dungeon where you have to use an array of different items to get through is interesting and really make it feel like you accomplished something. It'll have to wait until I'm farther into the game, but I'm perfectly fine with the linearity of previous Zelda games.

(The reason I'm not far into it even though I had it since Christmas is that it hasn't hooked me the way other Zelda games do andI've been playing FE:A, AA:DD and Pokemon Y instead. Also all the hype it received and the nostalgia goggles brought by its connection to ALTP, that I haven't played, make me very wary about the game).

[Dr. Tarrasque]

I just don't want to be thrown into an overworld, told "here you are, now play!" and that's it. Truth is, I haven't been able to see the appeal in non-linearity in games. Why DO people like it, exactly? o_O

Because some developers use linear design that results in crap like this.

I welcome both linear and non-linear gameplay but that all depends on the kind of game we're talking about. Mario games and older Castlevania games are mostly linear and I still enjoy them for example.

[Knight]

Hmm, in my opinion, I prefer non-linear, but there are advantages for both. A linear game allows for easy storytelling, such as in Metal Gear, Ace Attorney, or Skyward Sword. Although I loved Link Between Worlds, I'll admit that because of its non-linearity, its plot was somewhat scattered and disconnected. Although in my opinion, a story isn't an absolutely necessity for a good game. Some non-linear games use their structure to its advantage, such as adventure games featuring multiple endings, Skyrim which has many subplots and quests scattered across the world to discover yourself, or Metroid Prime, using data logs and ruined scriptures as pieces to a subtle plot, in which an unobservant player wouldn't find the plot at all.

As far as gameplay goes, different genres have strengths and weaknesses. You wouldn't expect any sort of competitive fighter or shooter to be an open game, because the focus is solely on action. In the case of Fire Emblem, I prefer the linear string of levels and am not a fan of the world map feature. And getting lost can be frustrating, but depending on the game it can be immersing. Castlevania SOTN wouldn't be as good a game if the sheer size of the castle and twisting labyrinths didn't give off its threatening scale, considering that combat in the game is rather easy. So there are strength and weaknesses to both, but it's all good if a game developer can take advantage of them and make a good game.

[Refa]

Is Mega Man linear or non linear because I like whatever one that is more.

Real answer- I like having a good amount of freedom in my game, be it through where to go (Zelda), who I'm using (Fire Emblem), or how I go about playing the game (Mega Man). Don't like how some people use non linear as shorthand for a lack of conveyance in the game, not all non linear games are like that. Also Metroidvania is my favorite video game genre, so I guess you can tell which one I prefer here.

[Soledai]

Both are good, like it's been said, and especially in my case, the execution or presentation of story, and of how the linearity or not, was handled and how well it complements the story

Do you consider the game with multile possible choices as non-linear ?

My main example here is Tactics Ogre, which allows to follows different paths.

This is also my question, if I may include games that have multiple endings based on these branching paths?

I just don't want to be thrown into an overworld, told "here you are, now play!" and that's it. Truth is, I haven't been able to see the appeal in non-linearity in games. Why DO people like it, exactly? o_O

Different strokes for different folkes, I guess...

I don't really like that either, it's pretty damn annoying, particularly in those open-world games that's all the rage these days, I also hate when games boast their open-world feature, but you can't do a damn thing in that "open-world".

[Brendor]

Non linear definitely. The Fallout series is the perfect example of how amazing a game can be when the player has complete freedom.

[Robert Stewart]

Linearity. I'm not opposed to a certain amount of non-linearity or exploration(I'm a really big fan of Metroidvanias, for example), but as others have mentioned, I really don't like being just dumped in an open world with no idea of where to go or what to do(the worst example of this that comes to mind was when I tried to play Daggerfall, which I just could NOT get in to).

[Happy_Dingo]

Both have their merits and I wouldn't necessarily say one is better than the other. Non-linear seems to be a bit more difficult to pull off succesfully. That might also be why there are more linear games than non-linear. I guess if I had to choose I'd pick non-linear because those games usually have more of a sense of adventure (although I'm not that big of a fan of Metroid. It's only "good" for me).