This game is so linear - linear games are boring. (Linearity, is it the cool thing to hate now?)

[ElArabDeMagnifico]

Just like "repetition" - linearity is now a popular thing to condemn a game for.

All games are linear in one way or another, only game I can think of that isn't linear is Garry's Mod, or skirmish in RTS games, but in general, aren't all games linear? Why is "this game is linear" considered a problem now? Maybe "This game is too linear, it isn't dynamic enough" makes more sense, lets compare "Stranglehold" to "Bioshock".

Stranglehold: Same guys pop out of the same places, and you shoot the same things that are above their heads to fall on them, using the same john woo skills. That is too linear because not only is it repetetive, but you can repeat the same thing every time and get the same result.

Bioshock: The AI is a bit more dynamic even though they respawn in the same places and such, but there are a variety of ways to do things, therefore making it less linear, but it is still linear.


Even Crysis is linear, but since you can replay it and do many different things, it still makes it feel like a sandbox game, even around the rail-ish sequences near the end (except that aircraft carrier level, not much you can do except kill aliens) - so even though the same events happen, you can replay them in different ways.


When is linearity a problem? -or is it even a problem?

 

[PedroSteckecilo]

Linearity isn't a problem, really, not as long as it's an interesting game but it is currently a negative buzz word in gaming.

 

[laikenf]

Yeah, I'm hearing a lot of people complain about that lately. You sound as surprised as I was when I discovered that complaining about unlockable content was "in"; so it's just a matter of time when people start saying: "this game sucks, it's a game so it sucks, it plays like a video game... it sucks"...

 

[cleverlymadeup]

Stranglehold: Same guys pop out of the same places, and you shoot the same things that are above their heads to fall on them, using the same john woo skills. That is too linear because not only is it repetetive, but you can repeat the same thing every time and get the same result.

yeah some guys are in the same spots and you are supposed to shoot those things over their head. i think that linear parts of the game are there for a reason and work because it's something you'd see in a john woo flick

i don't think it's as much of a problem as being obvious about repeating the same thing over and over, assassin's creed was like this, first 2-3 lvls were fun but then it was like "omg this is the same lvl, then in the 4-6 range it's omg this IS the same lvl and after that it's well i'm this far i might as well finish the game

and really being linear is what games are about, even gta is linear it just appears not to be

 

[MagnetoHydroDynamics]

Great linear games: Zelda series (gets a big fat OoT stiffy)

 

[MindBullets]

Linearity is fine if it suits the game. I have no problem with it in FPS games, seeing as it will get me to the next firefight quicker. Being lost is no fun at all.

 

[sun_and_earth]

I just got Persona 3, and by the standards of current game reviewers, it should suck. The storyline is entirely linear, and the gameplay is extremely repetitive. However, the linear story line is ridiculously entertaining, and the things it repeats are so damn fun it doesn't really matter to me (i.e. shooting yourself in the head to cast spells, battles based around knocking enemies over then beating them to a pulp in a cartoon dust cloud.)

 

[Credge]

I like linear games. You know, like 99% of games made.

People have a real problem understanding what the word means. Most people use the word linear to express how much they aren't enjoying a game without sounding aggressive.

 

[Necrohydra]

Yeah, I'm hearing a lot of people complain about that lately. You sound as surprised as I was when I discovered that complaining about unlockable content was "in"; so it's just a matter of time when people start saying: "this game sucks, it's a game so it sucks, it plays like a video game... it sucks"...

The braying of the sheep certainly can be distracting, can't it?

To the OP: You know what you like, and what you don't like. Just because some people are very vocal with what they dislike, doesn't mean you're wrong. Last I checked, having an opinion different from someone else's didn't automatically make you right or wrong.

As for linearity..I'd say the ultimate form of linearity would be a movie or a book. There is only one way to get from point A to point B, and it's already been laid out for you by someone else. You're just along for the ride. If you like games like this, sure, have fun. If not, well, there's other games out there that offer more "choice"..play those.

 

[fix-the-spade]

Linearity only presents a problem the second time through a game. Or if the game pretends to have choice.

If a game is entirely linear it should at least play well and have some replay value other than alternate endings. Rail shooters like Lylat Wars are good linearity.

 

[Jumplion]

I agree with Credge, people don't understand what linearity means (i probably don't get it too much either).

All games are linear in some way shape or form, no exception (even sim games like, well, the Sims. You just build stuff, but in a different way)

Games solve the problem of linearity by giving the players different ways to overcome an obstacle (many FPS titles) let the gamers eventually progress the game (Sandbox games like GTA4) or just force them down the path (RPG's like Final Fantasy)

There's no problem with linear games, but too much is a bad thing.

 

[laikenf]

Yeah, I'm hearing a lot of people complain about that lately. You sound as surprised as I was when I discovered that complaining about unlockable content was "in"; so it's just a matter of time when people start saying: "this game sucks, it's a game so it sucks, it plays like a video game... it sucks"...

The braying of the sheep certainly can be distracting, can't it?

To the OP: You know what you like, and what you don't like. Just because some people are very vocal with what they dislike, doesn't mean you're wrong. Last I checked, having an opinion different from someone else's didn't automatically make you right or wrong.

As for linearity..I'd say the ultimate form of linearity would be a movie or a book. There is only one way to get from point A to point B, and it's already been laid out for you by someone else. You're just along for the ride. If you like games like this, sure, have fun. If not, well, there's other games out there that offer more "choice"..play those.

I'm not talking about opinions, I'm just surprised at how the the level of complexity on todays games is directly proportional to the level of complaining gamers have reached.

 

[Lvl 64 Klutz]

I just got Persona 3, and by the standards of current game reviewers, it should suck. The storyline is entirely linear, and the gameplay is extremely repetitive. However, the linear story line is ridiculously entertaining, and the things it repeats are so damn fun it doesn't really matter to me (i.e. shooting yourself in the head to cast spells, battles based around knocking enemies over then beating them to a pulp in a cartoon dust cloud.)

J-RPG's don't get much more non-linear than Persona 3... are you sure you're talking about the right game?

 

[ayoama]

"Linearity sucks" is the new "cutscenes sucks".
I wonder, has a trend study on videogames ever been published?

 

[EnzoHonda]

First off, although there are many exceptions, Japanese games seem to be more guilty linearity than those from other nations (many exceptions, I know). JRPGs do this (although getting better) Devil May Cry and their ilk are just about walking room to room killing stuff in each (I just rented it, I'm still eary, don't shoot me if it changes). Baldur's Gate, Elder Scrolls, and Deus Ex really open up the world a lot more.

For me, the problem with excessively linear games is that it can feel like you're not doing anything. Sometimes this is fun (I enjoyed Xenosaga), sometimes it sucks

 

[NotPigeon]

You know, I feel like people's opinions on linearity are closely related to their passivity. Allow me to explain:
Ace Attorney games, all of them: So linear, you're basically reading a book that makes you figure out where to go or what to present at certain times. I love it, but that's because I'm fine with games being passive and I love reading books. On the other hand, someone who doesn't enjoy reading, likes to have a great deal of direct involvement, that sort of thing, would hate them. It's all a matter of opinion, is what I'm saying.
Another example: The World Ends With You. I haven't gotten it yet, but I plan to, because most everything I've seen on it is positive... except, that is, for the ZP review. Here, too, it all comes down to personal opinion. Yahtzee doesn't like the JRPG style of story interaction, he complains about it. I'm okay with it, doesn't bother me.

All in all, a very, very roundabout and overcomplex way of saying: Some people like linearity, some people don't.

 

[The Potato Lord]

It is good or bad based on the game's goal.If the game is based about being able to do whatever you want the way you want to like Crackdown, GTA, or MercenariesoD being forced go from point A to point 1 on a predetermined route ruin's the goal of the game.

If a game is based on telling a story like Assassin's Creed,Bioshock,etc. linearity helps keep things moving ahead, because I wouldn't like to go around Rapture sandbox-style because I'd get lost inevitably and finding the right place to go would become irritating because the story wouldn't flow smoothly if I wasted four hours finding the right plasmid to open a door to advance the story.

 

[Seldon2639]

It's largely based on how we've changed our view of what the character is. In earlier games (and a lot of current RPGs), we viewed the character as someone we're *watching*. In modern games, we like to view the character as ourselves, acting out what we like. Oblivion was based on the character being *you, where Mass Effect still played and seemed like a movie with some gameplay elements.

It can go too far in either direction. A completely linear game (especially one without a good plot) won't be very good at all (picture almost any movie-based game). A completely non-linear game would lack any kind of cohesive plot, and would thus simply be you making your character better ad infinitum (WoW). It takes some element of customization, but also some linearity (for me). Yahtzee put it best: he wants to feel like *he's* the one driving the story, some gamers want to be the one driving the gameplay elements, but feel like they're watching a story unfold.

I wouldn't be surprised if there were a correlation between liking linearity (and the whole "the characters drive the story, not me" concept) and using an inverted Y-axis in shooting games. One explanation I've heard for y-inversion is that if you see yourself as being in the front of the head of the character (and thus actually *are* the character) you'd use up to be up. If, however, you see yourself as being outside of the character, you see yourself behind the character, so pushing up on the back of the head causes the character to look down.

Maybe I'm completely off base, but it seems true for me. I always use inversion, and I like character-driven stories