For single player, do you prefer open world or linear games?

[tinnyskillz]

Watchdog 2 was the best "Watchdog" game. at Watchdog Legion.

Yo, i'm actually kind of elated that Watch Dogs 2 is getting some praise in this thread. I always said that game was underrated. They need to soft reboot the series and bring Marcus back as the main protagonist for the next 3 games. Don't change the protagonist each game, just change the area. Have Deadsec slowly take over the country. If it was up to me I would make the next game:

NY
Back to Cali (same areas as 2 and more expanded/different areas as well)
End it in Vegas (Nevada)

 

[IsThatBrothaMouzone?]

Bumping this thread after seeing posts about this topic on other sites.

Personally, I think people with ADHD tendencies tend to prefer linear games. Those that want to 100% all the achievements quickly, also want linear.

The two things people say about open world are: it's boring and lifeless....OR.....it's overwhelming. A bit contradictory but those are the common gripes. Either too much or not enough.

I think linear is great at giving you a tight story and offering a lot of detail within a confined space. Lots of set pieces. Sorta like a soccer game with mostly corner kicks and penalty kicks.

Open world (for me) is about the build-up and exploration. Finding the random easter eggs and side missions. When done right, it's more immersive. Enjoy being able to tackle a problem in different ways and engaging the story in my own way. Biggest drawbacks are bloat and being given limitless options that have zero impact on the story.

 

[threattonature]

Bumping this thread after seeing posts about this topic on other sites.

Personally, I think people with ADHD tendencies tend to prefer linear games. Those that want to 100% all the achievements quickly, also want linear.

The two things people say about open world are: it's boring and lifeless....OR.....it's overwhelming. A bit contradictory but those are the common gripes. Either too much or not enough.

I think linear is great at giving you a tight story and offering a lot of detail within a confined space. Lots of set pieces. Sorta like a soccer game with mostly corner kicks and penalty kicks.

Open world (for me) is about the build-up and exploration. Finding the random easter eggs and side missions. When done right, it's more immersive. Enjoy being able to tackle a problem in different ways and engaging the story in my own way. Biggest drawbacks are bloat and being given limitless options that have zero impact on the story.

I disagree with those being contradictory. We've all played open world games that have repetitive side quests and missions that end up being boring and lifeless because of how redundant it all is and how it seems they are thrown in just to pad the overall play time. But it can also be overwhelming because you don't know which of those missions are necessary for the main story or to get an important piece of gear so you feel overwhelmed by having all these mission choices to make.

 

[iceberg_is_on_fire]

I love a good narrative that tells a fire story but even then, with the jankiness of a Crimson Desert, let me tell the story in the order that I prefer.

 

[Jaguar93]

Open-world games lost their luster once they became oversaturated and basically Ubisoft clones. Good level design in a linear or semi/wide-linear game. shyts on yo generic open-world game with an unnecessary checklist of BS to do in empty spaces. Some of these open-world games don’t even take advantage of their open-world. Just a chore list of things to do to pad out the game lol. Linear, well-designed sandboxes with a lot of content and options. Will always beat gigantic empty open worlds.

 

[DapMeUp!]

As a kid I would have loved these 60-100 hour open world games because I had a limited selection.
I couldn't go out and buy every game so these would have been value for money.

Nowadays with the endless amounts of affordable games I can access at the click of a button, and the...i dunno...2 decades of backlog to catch up on Give me a linear 30-40 hours that I can complete in a decent amount of time, have my fun and move on to the next.

 

[WhenWeWereKings]

Everything does not have to be some grand scale open world slog fest.

Too many games are open world just for the sake of it. The world is open but empty and bland.

There's nothing wrong with a tightly woven linear game.

 

[Ezekiel 25:17]

Depends on the developer.

CDPR/Rockstar? Give me open world.

Ubisoft? I don't even bother buying their trash anyway.

 

[NotAHotep]

Linear. I've be exhausted with open world games when most of it is just empty.

 

[Diunx]

I mean its a weird question it depends of the game, people are gonna hate but something like Ghost of Tsushima 1 would had been better as a linear game since the open world while beautiful really had nothing to do other than write poems and some Far cry style outpost liberation but the story, cutscenes etc are pretty good.

Elden Ring on the other hand has shyt to discover, secret locations etc so they make the open world worth it.