When did linearity become a dirty word?

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

eh it honestly depends..

personally sandbox world games are pretty dry and boring to me, it's a "been there done that" kind of thing, so if the game has linearity to make it fun, or worth playing/going through the story, then yeah i'd sacrifice player open worldness to make it that more epic.

but then again some games fail horribly at it and make it so linear you can't even breathe (ff13 for example)

if it rings along with the game and doesn't destroy the pace, then i don't see linearity as a bad thing at all, but sometimes developers do not do it right...

 

[Hides His Eyes]

By the way guys, I think it's a bit harsh to say Space Marine is a clone of Gears of War, even if the gameplay is very similar, especially since Gears appears to borrow heavily from 40K's space marines in the first place.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

FFXIII filthied it up for everyone.

speak for yourself. i loved FF XIII

that's wonderful, that doesn't mean the game isn't linear to hell and back though.

the game is unanimously named with linearity when spoken by word of mouth now, you could basically label the game as god of linearity, at least among the RPG genre.

 

[Elivercury]

I think Yahtzee makes the point best. You need a certain amount of linearity for a game to have a strong story, as otherwise you'll be getting random story bits without much context or chronology. I think the problem of linearity surfaces when you don't have a decent story that is the central reason for having a linear game.

By the same token though, I do agree with you, that not EVERY game needs to be GTA. Half the time the sandbox elements are added poorly and end up with the game being worse than if they'd just kept it fairly linear.

Ultimately it just depends on how good the game is overall tbh.

 

[Your once and future Fanboy]

Well the word linear should be a term for a direct and purpose based narative, but after FF 13 we all have swapped the meaning to "corridor hell"

 

[manythings]

Linearity became a bad word when people got totally retarded for the "Freedom" of sandbox games, that's why you'll see games where a sandbox is completely unhelpful or or flatout inappropriate.

It's no different for QTE's or any number of other things that people hate because they have been told to hate them. People who complain about linearity are people who don't care about/don't understand story.

 

[Irriduccibilli]

I always liked linear games. Often non-linear games tend to drag on for hours (Far Cry 2 as an example), BUT non-linear games like Deus Ex... I love those, but it all depends on what kinda game it is. Deus Ex would never work as a linear game. Some games just work better as linear games while others don't. Simple as that

Or as the guy above mentioned, QTE's never bothered me as well. It really just seems that people hate linear games and QTE's because they've been told to. Only bad thing about QTE's is that it's hard to focus on the action on screen and the prompts at the same time (I'm looking at you Witcher 2)

 

[Arina Love]

FFXIII filthied it up for everyone.

speak for yourself. i loved FF XIII

that's wonderful, that doesn't mean the game isn't linear to hell and back though.

the game is unanimously named with linearity when spoken by word of mouth now, you could basically label the game as god of linearity, at least among the RPG genre.

first; it's not all linear (gran pulse) and that's doesn't mean it's bad game. It's turned off some players yeah but i actually liked first 15 hours of linear stuff with character introduction and plot beginning it kept me focused and then on grand pulse it let me to run wiled with side quest and chocobo hunting that i enjoyed for many hours and then got back in story linear mode and kept me focused to deliver beautiful ending. everyone have different tastes.

 

[CannibalCorpses]

You have to look at the game as a whole.

Linearity is not bad, when you make a unique and innovative game. (Portal)
Linearity seems cheap, when you make a Gears of War Clone (Space Marine)

Not saying SM would be a bad game, but I can sort of see the point when a linear game is also a pretty bland cookie-cutter of it's genre.

Lol, here we go. It looks a bit like Gears of war so lets call it a clone huh? I can see the similarities...one is a cover based shooter and the other is more melee focused...definately grounds for calling it a clone

To the topic at hand though. Linearity is good in something that requires the story to carry it but once that story is gone on the second playthrough it becomes a massive burden to the player, especially when they can't always skip it. I personally don't want to be forced into a role, i want the role i decide upon to be reflected in the game. It requires more effort but makes the experience much more personal and rewarding. I don't want the games i play to be more like movies than games.

I want choices on what to do and where to go. I'm not 12 years old anymore, i can make my own decisions without someone holding my hand the whole way.

 

[shrekfan246]

I really want to address something here that will basically be paraphrasing something Yahtzee once said that apparently no one seems to remember anymore: Every single game ever made that follows a set storyline is linear. There is absolutely no such thing as a non-linear story-driven game.

Sure, sandboxes give you a little extra freedom in the game world itself, but the actual story progresses in a strictly linear way. Even The Elder Scrolls, with all of their touted open-world gameplay, has a linear story. Fallout 3/New Vegas have linear stories. You will experience the same story every single time you play the game.

There are games that give you a little freedom with how you approach a given situation. Deus Ex, Crysis, the Metal Gear Solid games. But, and I want to stress this:

Any game that has a predetermined storyline which is followed by the player in the same fashion each time you play, is a linear game.

Any freedom of options for sections of the game simply means that the gameplay is a bit open-ended. It doesn't make the game as a whole any less linear. For a truly non-linear game, the storyline has to branch multiple times during the game so that you (almost) never experience the same thing twice throughout multiple play-throughs. If that does not happen, you have a linear game.
EDIT: Actually, even then technically the story is linear, just branching off into other sections of linearity. A truly non-linear game would probably have no story at all, because it simply would not be able to exist. You can not have a non-linear story. There is always a beginning, middle, and end, and they always lead into each other. If that does not happen, the story makes no sense.

It may seem like semantics, but honestly. The way the word is used these days just sickens me.

 

[DrOswald]

Bad linearity:

1. When a game feels like it forces you onto a path you do not want to go down. This can be story or game play based. This is typically called railroading. I say feels like because there are tons on linear games that don't feel like they are railroading you. For example, Uncharted 2 is a extremely linear game but it does not feel constraining.

2. When linearity doesn't make sense. B does not follow A. The game jumps all over the place like an 5 year old who just downed a pound of sugar.

Good linearity:

1. When a highly structured game uses linearity for strong pacing, story telling, and to establish causes and effect. Once again, Uncharted 2 is a fantastic example of this done very well. All of the levels lead naturally into one another, and each portion of each level fits into the overall game.

Critics use linearity as a negative because:

1. Linearity is currently seen as "non innovative" and is therefore arbitrarily deemed bad for no good reason.

2. They don't like a game but all their complaints are difficult to put into words, so they get lazy and throw out a buzzword instead.

3. The game is linear when it should not be. Rarely the case.

 

[Deathninja19]

When games started to cost £40 (or $60)

 

[Hosker]

I think it depends on the genre, mostly. People have come to expect a decent amount of choice when it comes to RPGs, but with other genres people (including myself) don't care. It's strange how people are calling Space Marines out on it, I will admit; I haven't seen it myself, though.

 

[Da Orky Man]

Well... when is linearity ever a good thing? It always has been a negative point against games if I remember correctly, and so it should be.

Portal/2
Half-life/2
Halo
Metro 2033
CoD
Prince of Persia
Dead Space
Amnesia: The Dark Descent
batman: Arkham Asylum

All considered good games, all considered to be linear. Can you say that you never enjoyed any of these?

 

[Thaius]

There is an aesthetic plague sweeping game criticism right now. It comes in the form of the idea that a game is only good if it takes full advantage of the unique things it has to offer that other mediums don't. People think if a game is linear, it's giving up the potential games have to allow the player complete control over how they play. If a game tells its story primarily through cutscenes, it is criticized for telling its story in the same way a movie could. Basically, the quality of a game only matters if it's a specific type of quality that only games can have.

Yes, it's painfully stupid. But it's becoming more and more common; even Yahtzee supports this on a fairly regular basis.

 

[Thetwistedendgame]

Take Metal Gear Solid. Copy paste. Add blonde in. Smoke tulips and execute. So linear, but sneaking around in cardboard boxes never goes unrewarded.

 

[DEAD34345]

Well... when is linearity ever a good thing? It always has been a negative point against games if I remember correctly, and so it should be.

Portal/2
Half-life/2
Halo
Metro 2033
CoD
Prince of Persia
Dead Space
Amnesia: The Dark Descent
batman: Arkham Asylum

All considered good games, all considered to be linear. Can you say that you never enjoyed any of these?

I didn't say linearity automatically made a game bad, I said "it has always been a negative point against games".

Can you say that none of those games would be even the slightest bit better if they had everything they currently had, and a branching storyline (of the same quality as the original storyline)?

Also, I wouldn't consider Arkham Asylum to be linear, personally.

 

[thiosk]

I liked warhammer. A lot. I generally wish a fully linear game would have a somewhat longer campaign, though.

 

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

I do think there can be degrees of linearity.

1. Sandbox: Very open, choice of how and when you do missions, choice of customisation etc. Exploration is both essential and encouraged.

2. Linear: Definite path, character and order, but with some openness. Half Life, Doom, Halo, this is a very wide open definition. Generally anything where exploration leads to extras, but isn't essential.

3. Railroad: One path, one character, limited items/weapons, no exploration at all. Exploration may even be punished in more extreme examples. Personally I found GoW to be very much this. Also Portal.

Option 3 can be good, Portal even used it as part of the story, making you a lab rat in a maze, but it's also the hardest to get right. For my part I found GoW far too restrictive to ever enjoy, but loved Portal (though the length may have been a factor there)

I think in general people like options 1 and 2, since it gives more feeling of control over the story. Also, the term linearity is (I think) being used more to describe option 3.

 

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

Well... when is linearity ever a good thing? It always has been a negative point against games if I remember correctly, and so it should be.

Portal/2
Half-life/2
Halo
Metro 2033
CoD
Prince of Persia
Dead Space
Amnesia: The Dark Descent
batman: Arkham Asylum

All considered good games, all considered to be linear. Can you say that you never enjoyed any of these?

I didn't say linearity automatically made a game bad, I said "it has always been a negative point against games".

Can you say that none of those games would be even the slightest bit better if they had everything they currently had, and a branching storyline (of the same quality as the original storyline)?

Also, I wouldn't consider Arkham Asylum to be linear, personally.

(See my above post for why I don't consider Half Life and Halo to be linear)

Portal and Batman would not have been better games with a branching storyline because part of the point of those games' stories was that the characters were being forced around by factors outside their control. In Portal you are a lab rat being forced around by a hostile entity, so obviously you should have no choice. In AA it wouldn't be nearly so claustrophobic and terrifying if it didn't feel like the Joker was always one step ahead.

The same probably applies to some of the other games on that list (CoD you're taking orders from a commander, Amnesia and Dead Space are the malevolent entity thing) but I haven't actually played them so I couldn't say for sure.