Are FPS's Too Linear?

[GreyFire]

I'm currently a Games Art Student who is trying to create a idea for my current project, i have chosen to face the issue of First Person Shooters and Linear gameplay. I've been playing FPS's for as long as i can remember really and i find myself thinking that every game no matter how different the story maybe i'm told to go from point A to point B with some problem in the middle that leads to normally point C. This then repairs for the next level but with a variation of location and enemies. How many more games will do this? I want to know your opinion on FPS's and how we can break free from this repeating issue?

I will appreciate all your thoughts and comments.

 

[Iandiaeufaieubfeuihfi]

no, things like fallout 3... wait that is also rpg...

 

[Kuchinawa212]

Well yeah.
First
Person
Shooter.
Now most will not have you stuck in a corridor as you kill what's infront of you. Normally there is an option to find a way to best attack the enemy. Flanking, going in heavy from the front and so on. Now a game based on the consept of making sure the bad guys stay dead doesn't lead itself to open world experinces and the such. I mean Fallout 3 came close but still combate relied a lot on VATS. But they are revamping the iron sights for New Vegas so who knows? Maybe it'll work after all

 

[AnOriginalConcept]

Welcome to the Escapist!

You say "linear" as though it's a bad thing. A linear path means that developers can create a real experience for players by finely crafting each part. The Modern Warfare 2 demo is a great example of this.

Most games will continue to do this but I don't see the problem.

 

[Serenegoose]

I think that they tend to be very linear, but I don't perceive this linearity as a failing.

 

[Rednog]

I really don't think any game that isn't an rpg of sorts really can be "non linear" sure you can stir up the way you take down points A,B,C,D etc. But FPS in general are just about getting to the next firefight and the backgrounds are just scenery/mood. Like in Bad Company 2, there is a mission with like 4 points you have to take, you can take them in any order you choose. But in the end you're going to do all 4 points. Also FPS generally are setting you on a set story line where you have to accomplish some sort of goal, which really doesn't lend to being able to go out and do what you want. Plus with a more open world how would you really be able to find the firefights that constitute an FPS?

 

[JeanLuc761]

Welcome to the Escapist!

You say "linear" as though it's a bad thing. A linear path means that developers can create a real experience for players by finely crafting each part. The Modern Warfare 2 demo is a great example of this.

Most games will continue to do this but I don't see the problem.

Damn, beat me to it.

Sandbox gaming has seen a huge surge in recent years which has led to the idea that somehow linear gameplay is a bad thing. The easiest way to argue against this is to point out that linear games also tend to be the ones with the best pacing, story and atmosphere (Fallout 3 being a notable exception).

Take, for instance, Half-Life 1&2. If those games were anything other than the perfectly paced and exceptionally designed masterpieces(opinion) that they are, they wouldn't be even half as good.

Free-roam has its advantages, but when it comes to crafting a compelling story/atmosphere, it often gets in the way,

 

[GloatingSwine]

FPS games are about testing your skill, skill in planning your approach to a given situation and in actually executing that plan. As such they benefit greatly from linearity, keeping the player within a set of parameters for each situation (available approaches, weapons, etc) means that the developers can more finely tune the challenge that situation presents to the player.

 

[Fusioncode9]

I'm actually fine with linearity in FPS games, there are too many sandbox games as it is. Just look at wolfenstein, the missions were a lot of fun but the open world elementt was pointless and stupid.

 

[MiketheBassMan]

FPS games are linear because there is nothing more boring than retreading the same ground over and over again when you want to be blowing things up.

 

[GreyFire]

Thanks and thanks for sharing your thoughts!

 

[GreyFire]

Sorry, I didn't mean to show it in a bad way but i wanted to express my feeling of repetitiveness in the market. Yes it will carry on i have no doubts about that because It is truly the best way of telling a strong story by leading you through the story and experiencing everything the developers want you to experience. I want to find out if theres any way of making a FPS less linear and allow a person to explore, and analyse a situation. Yet keep strong experience like MW and Halo. This topic is to help me find out if there is a audience that would take interest concept

 

[twistedheat15]

I think that's one of the appealing things about them. You don't sit around thinking which way you have to go, or how you should get there, just point in a direction that way you can spray bullets, and explode everything along the way.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Huh, looks like I'm in the minority here. I don't have a problem with the linear level progression in FPS games, but I do take issue with the linear levels. What I mean is, in the early days it was always worth your while to explore the map fully, looking for secret areas as you went. The ones I've played in the last few years have been very much cases of Point A to Point B, without even a dead end along the way. I miss that exploration element.

 

[Megacherv]

Welcome to the Escapist!

You say "linear" as though it's a bad thing. A linear path means that developers can create a real experience for players by finely crafting each part. The Modern Warfare 2 demo is a great example of this.

Most games will continue to do this but I don't see the problem.

Damn, beat me to it.

Sandbox gaming has seen a huge surge in recent years which has led to the idea that somehow linear gameplay is a bad thing. The easiest way to argue against this is to point out that linear games also tend to be the ones with the best pacing, story and atmosphere (Fallout 3 being a notable exception).

Take, for instance, Half-Life 1&2. If those games were anything other than the perfectly paced and exceptionally designed masterpieces(opinion) that they are, they wouldn't be even half as good.

Free-roam has its advantages, but when it comes to crafting a compelling story/atmosphere, it often gets in the way,

I agree with this

Also, what makes people want to explore is (seemingly) alternate paths that the levels have. Things like the first Favela mission in MW2, or all the rooms in Left 4 Dead that are sometimes full of stuff. They stand out as not diverging at all, and making us realise how linear the level is. If you make the general world slightly more open (large linear paths, like a long stretch of land, and the fact that it's large and open, but linear without lots of nooks and crannies to waste your time in, makes it seem less linear in general.

 

[GreyFire]

Would you guys in interested in game that gives you linear play but a choice of exploration in a level, not open world but multi routed maps in which game play varies in your choice and how you play?

 

[rockyoumonkeys]

Not all games need to be open-world. Linearity has its place.

 

[Ekonk]

PLAY ARMA II.

ENORMOUS open world military realistic action!