Do you prefer open world or wide linear/focused story driven games?

[Sid]

With the explosion of bloat filled and extremely repetitive AAA open world games this generation I find myself missing the AAA focused story driven games. Which types of games do you prefer and why?

Edit: Wide linear also includes hub based games like Dark Souls III etc.

 

[InfinitePotat0]

Wide linear/focused! First thing that comes to mind is god of war. Checks all the boxes for me.

 

[Raigor]

Wide Linear or linear focused titles can be both good (God of War / Plague ) or straight up bad (The Order / Ryse Son of Rome) and Open World games can also be both good (TW3, RDR2) or straight up bad (Days Gone/ FF XV)

 

[Oghuz]

Depends entirely on the open world. If it is something like AC then obivously I'll pick wide linear. But if it is something like RDR2 then I'll go with that.

 

[Sid]

Wide Linear focused titles can be both good (God of War / Plague ) or straight up bad (The Order / Ryse Son of Rome) and Open World games can also be both good (TW3, RDR2) or straight up bad (Days Gone/ FF XV)

Click to shrink...

I'm talking in general, mostly which kind of games do you like to play

 

[Raigor]

I'm talking in general

Click to shrink...

In general? Depends for the same reasons.

 

[Trelova]

i prefer Ys 8 which has multiple huge areas that aren't specifically 'one big world' like traditional open worlds, nor is it anything resembling standard linear. Same for Xenoblade.

i feel that gives a lot more options for environmental changes, making room for a lot big distinct unique areas and all that while not having to necassarily making it all properly 'fit' in a connected world.

 

[Deleted member 68874]

Would wide linear be considered hub based games? Games like Deus Ex and Metro Exodus where you go to several open areas, but the games aren't open world. Because this is my favourite type of game.

Or is wide linear more like TLOU 2 where the game is linear but more open?

If a game is open world it better have a good reason. I cant stand big for the sake of big.

 

[Dr Pears]

Wide linear, 25-45 hour adventures are sweetspot for me. Games like God of War, TLOU2, Dark Souls/Bloodborne, Sekiro, Resident Evil 4 all have great length and pacing, and I could replay them over and over again.

 

[signal]

In general I guess more linear experiences. Broadly speaking I feel like there is just far too little to do across long distances in games, and there generally isn't huge diversity in a single game in side quests or whatever.

OW can definitely provide fun experiences but I'd rather play an MGS or an HL1 or something. I feel like the control the creators have in what they can expect the player experience to be provides for better games.

 

[monmagman]

I've no preference,I can enjoy a GOW/Uncharted 4 as much as a RDR2 or Horizon Zero Dawn.

 

[Finaika]

Focused open world.

 

[DJwest]

Open worlds are exhausting to me. Unless you're a Spiderman with cool traversal mechanics. Wait is Spiderman ps4 considered open world? I don't know lol

 

[Deleted member 16876]

I like both.

Days Gone as an example could have been wide linear but then you lose everything that makes it unique and great. GOW would suck as an open world because it would lose it's focus.

If a game doesn't justify it's open world then wide linear is better.

 

[Mechaplum]

Doesn't really matter to me, the theme and subject does more.

 

[Wispmetas]

Wide linear for sure. Or whatever games like Xenoblade and to a lesser extent KH3 are. With tons of semi big open areas to explore, but you're exploring those areas in a linear way thanks to the story.

 

[Xita]

I've always been a linear gal. Like people complain about how linear games like Final Fantasy X are and that legitimately does not bother me at all, even in replays. Doesn't mean I can't enjoy a good open-world game (Xenoblade X comes to mind), but linear is usually my bread and butter.

 

[Ser_Kafka]

No one is forcing you to do all quests and points of interests on a map in an open world game. Just do the story.

 

[Vergil]

It depends on the quality and variety of the title. I prefer the longevity of an OW. The ability to do side quests, as well as explore a world full of numerous activities

 

[Rosebud]

Depends?

I like TW 3 and TLOU, I don't want them to change.

 

[Tibarn]

It depends on the game, my favorite game of this gen is BotW, which is a clear example of gameplay-focused open-world game with no narrative focus, but I found most other open world games I played this gen (Spiderman, Horizon, Infamous, some Ubisoft games ...) to be pretty meh. So I dislike the "standard bloated open world" style that most games are using, but a well executed one can be an amazing experience. I can't really generalize in this case.

 

[SmartWaffles]

Open world as a design trend is a plague.

 

[Bioshocker]

I'm surprised to see how many here prefer linear story driven games like I do. I understand the appeal of open world games but I have never liked them that much. These days I don't have time for massive games, no matter if they're open world or not, and I feel that a game like RDR2 is better played if you have the time to invest in the impressive world Rockstar's created, not just do the main story. THLOU2 took me 25 hours to finish, and that was a bit too long for a story focused game.

 

[Rommaz]

I like both but lately I think stuff like Xenoblade or TLOU2 is ideal. Big areas but not "open world"

 

[Shairi]

Wide Linear or linear focused titles can be both good (God of War / Plague ) or straight up bad (The Order / Ryse Son of Rome) and Open World games can also be both good (TW3, RDR2) or straight up bad (Days Gone/ FF XV)

Click to shrink...

You've to swap RDR2 with Days Gone and I would fully agree.

Anyway I feel more fatigued by Open world games this generation. Time constraints and the amount of bloat drives me more and more into the wide linear camp.

 

[GasProblem]

Man, can't choose. I love open worlds for the exploration aspect of it, but I also like more lineair experiences because they often have more impressive setpieces.

 

[upinsmoke]

I don't have a preference as long as they work. I think with an open world approach there is maybe more chance of the user becoming disillusioned if the world isn't engaging or interesting.

 

[ArchLector]

I love both RDR2 and TLoU Part 2 so I guess I love both when done well and when the story and characters are engaging.

 

[iiStryker]

It depends on the game

Games are an escapist power fantasy for me. Playing as a specific character I find to be mostly pretentious and boring.

Im into games with deep complex mechanics mostly RPG's
Dark Souls
Dragon's Dogma
Elder Scrolls
Games of this ilk

theses games give my character a basic setup with how they fit into the narrative but the gameplay is entirely up to me.

the witcher
Red Dead

games like these are too mechanically narrow and rely primarily on me being interested in the individual I'm playing as.

 

[Mekanos]

I certainly enjoy some open world games but 9 times out of 10 I prefer a tighter, more focused experience.

 

[Fjordson]

Don't really have a strict preference. I guess open-world games have provided more memorable experiences this gen.

 

[Enrico Pallazzo]

Some years I ago I would answer "open world" instantly. But I got older and I don't have that much time anymore. Right now I prefer short story driven games over gigantic open world games. Furthermore some studios were responsible for making open world games really irrelevant and boring (I'm looking at you, Ubisoft). I'm just looking forward to open world games from studios like CD Projekt, Bethesda Game Studios, Rockstar Games, Piranha Bytes to name a few. These are studios where I know I get something special regarding the world they're putting me in.

 

[Nightengale]

It depends on the game.

 

[Trieu]

Wide Linear/Focused for me. I think the way Last of Us and Last of Us Part II did it was exactly right for me. Same can be said about RE2 and RE3 Remake.

Open World is so hard to get right. It feels like an impossible task and I would rather explore smaller worlds entirely.

A game being open world doesn't stop me from playing it, but if you ask me if I prefer 8 hours Resident Evil 2 Remake or Horizon Zero Dawn 40+ hours open world I will pick RE2 Remake.

I guess a perfect rotation for me would be 6 linear/story driven games with smaller hubs or "wide linear" and then 1 open world game. Though I think gamers wouldn't reject smaller open world games that don't have gigantic maps where it takes 15-20 minutes to cross it with a vehicle, but rather 5-10 on foot and the world being more concentrated and vibrant.

Obviously also depends on the game. I think GTA games do need a somewhat big open world to make proper use of the vehicles.

I don't like the term bloat even if I think it is fitting for some open world games having optional side stuff that feels like working a list and checking it off, but I think the intentions of most open world games are pure and I can understand people saying they like big 60 hours open world games. Every now and then I do too, but I couldn't play multiple gigantic open world games back to back. That would end in fatigue and probably makes me drop the game.

I know a few friends of mine who approach games as "I have to have 1 hour worth of fun in order to justify $1, so a $60 game needs to be $60 hours long". I can't get behind that. For me I think the sweetspot for a full price game would be 15-25 hours and I rather have multiple playthroughs on multiple difficulties with concentrated gameplay.

Though I have to admit that I am excited for next generation open worlds and seeing what they can do with the new hardware. I am open for surprises and in the end it is a decision by the developers if it fits or not.

 

[ClamBuster]

the clamour to introduce 'side quests' into historically linear story driven adventures is annoying

 

[ItchyTasty]

It kinda depends on the game.

I love both the linear "follow the road" gameplay of TLOU2 and the "go wherever you like" of BOTW. But I think both games would be much worse if they switched gamestyle.

 

[Mr. Genuine]

The Rockstar/Assassin's Creed format is quite possibly my least favorite kind of game.

 

[texhnolyze]

Open world, actually. Most of my favorite games are open world.

 

[FakePlasticTree]

I prefer Arkham Asylum, Yharnam, Kamurocho type of open worlds.

 

[Jawmuncher]

I prefer linear/wide, but will say open world can be good.

the big issue is just too many Open World titles feel "if we make it bigger, it's better". When less is literally more. Sleeping Dogs is a last-gen game and has a more interesting open world than titles this gen and is half the size.

 

[Rosenkrantz]

Doesn't really matter to me as long as the level design isn't completely linear (not that I expect everyone to follow the recent Hitman template, but at least give me something like Ravenholm). Linear level design with the bare minimum of interactivity is just a super boring choice to me.

 

[Edgar]

Open world def, playing at your own pace is something i value a lot. Also open world games offer something that most linear games or even hub based games cant.

 

[Vector]

I prefer smaller open worlds that are packed with content and where every location has narrative significance. Games like AC Odyssey and Witcher 3 are just too big to the point where I have no interest in exploring all of it. A solution to this would be to make the world traversal fun and dynamic, something BotW did really well with its massive world.

As for wide linear, I generally don't like that style of game just because I don't like the lack of freedom.

 

[Radec]

Whatever God of War is. Good amount of stuff to do while not keeping much away from the main story.

 

[Barberetti]

Depends on the mood I'm in. Each provide experiences you can't get from the other. At the moment I'm switching between S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Shadow of Chernobyl and Raft.

 

[Undrey]

I much prefer either open-world or completely linear games. This wide linear thing is really stressful for people like me who want to get all the collectibles and all that, as it becomes 'try to find the non-critical path so you don't get locked out of this area', which isn't the most fun. God of War handles this well because you can go back to any place within the world at any time. Something like Uncharted 4 made me second guess every path I took.

 

[KingdomKey]

I prefer wide linear games. I want some freedom but I really don't need a huge bloated map to endlessly walk through like the newer Assassin's Creed games has.

 

[Tuco Benedicto Pacifico]

Neither.
Or both, depends of the angle you look at it.

I vastly prefer non-linear game with a lot of player agency (so let's say open world) which don't forget to put proper focus on narrative and story telling.

Basically if what you are proposing is a choice between Assassin's Creed/Skyrim and Uncharted my answer is more or less "Fuck both of them. Give me more Ultima and Gothic".

 

[Aeferis]

Focused open world with the goal of making you feel active (instead of a passive spectator) and immersed in the game world (see Sleeping Dogs) but not overwhelmed by the insane amount of pointless stuff that gets thrown at you (see Watch Dogs 2, AC Odyssey).

 

[ClickyCal']

It kinda depends on the game.

I love both the linear "follow the road" gameplay of TLOU2 and the "go wherever you like" of BOTW. But I think both games would be much worse if they switched gamestyle.

Click to shrink...

Well there are examples for switching both. For tlou2....days gone. For botw....any other 3d zelda.