Linear vs open world adventure games - A matter of degrees, definitions and immersion

[CosaNostra]

Recently there has been a lot of discussion within the video game community about open world and linear video games. Many a player has explored the expansive open worlds of the Far Cry series, the Batman: Arkham series, the Elder Scrolls series, the Assassin’s Creed series and the Just Cause series (to name just a few; the list just goes on and on). Recent titles such as Far Cry 4, and those touted for a 2015 release, including Just Cause 3, suggest that the open-world, adventure type game is at its zenith.

So surely open world adventure games trump more linear adventure games every time? An adventure game that gives the player the freedom to experience it, to explore it’s world however they desire vs. a game that holds the player’s hand or, worse, drags them from set piece to set piece through little more than glorified corridors. When framed like that, the choice is obvious, right?

I would argue that the open world vs linear adventure game debate is a little more complicated than that, however. It is a matter of degrees, definitions and immersion (I’m coining the acronym DDI right now – you heard it here first!).

DDI

Firstly, the images of the games that I painted in the ‘versus’ paragraph previously are, intentionally, at the extreme ends of the scale. Usually, an adventure game will have both open world and linear elements. For example, open world games such as Skyrim allow the player to explore the game world at their own pace, but the storyline missions have to be completed in a set order. Further, some side missions have to be completed before certain story missions to preserve a logical timeline. Although a quintessential open world title, Skyrim does therefore have elements of linearity. The same is true for many of the other open world games mentioned at the start of the article.
Skyrim door

Oh dear…is it possible that you’ve missed the side quest that would have given you they key to open this door? Or perhaps the leaver to the right will do it…

Conversely, adventure games that may be classed as linear can have “open world†elements – allowing a certain degree of exploration and side quests. For example, the God of War series is predominantly linear, with a set storyline that every player experiences in the same way, but encourages some exploration and puzzle-solving along the way. The Hitman series provides a good example of action/adventure games that straddle the categorisation – the storylines progress in a set order in the Hitman games, but the player has a plethora of options open to them for each mission, allowing them the freedom to tackle them however they wish.
Hitman 2

The not-so-subtle approach to a mission on Hitman 2.

It is, therefore, a matter of how one defines an open world or a linear adventure game (our second D in DDI). The logical approach is to define the game as either open world or linear depending on whether open world or linear features are most prevalent. Makes sense, right?

Caution is required, however, before shoehorning a particular game into either category, particularly if it means issuing potentially damming judgement. Indeed, with the wealth of great open world adventure games available to us now, it’s tempting to dismiss more linear adventure games as somehow inferior. Unless you personally have a raging dislike for either open world or linear adventure games, and are unwilling to try games out on their merit alone, I would discourage dismissing either type out-of-hand. Bayonetta 2 could be described as a linear action/adventure game, but the sheer, unbridled fun that the player has in lethally pirouetting through enemies and experiencing the next ludicrously over-the-top set piece means it is one of the best, must-play games of 2014. On the other side of the fence, open-world adventure game Mercenaries 2: World in Flames is a (thankfully) little-played sequel to the solid Mercenaries game on PS3 that is utter garbage.
Red Dead Redemption

Marston deals in Red Dead Redemption – an open world adventure game done very, very right.

And finally we come to the ‘I’ in DDI – immersion. One of the key advantages that open-world adventure games have over linear ones is that by presenting an entire world to the player, ripe for exploration at their own pace, it is fairly easy for the player to become immersed in that world. Many, many hours I lost out in the West in Red Dead Redemption, for example, as I became immersed in that gritty, breathing world. I would sit playing Texas hold ’em poker in a dingy tavern for an hour, before drinking away some of my winnings and riding off into the sunset to hunt for bobcats.

Conversely, just recently I’ve finally got around to playing Ninja Theory’s DmC: Devil May Cry, due for a next-gen update in 2015. It’s a fun blast, but you are whisked along the levels by cut-scenes and rated on how long you take to complete the level (I hate that, personally), quashing any glimmer of open-world elements and making it very difficult to become immersed in the game world.

If a developer choses to create a game that revolves around linear progression with limited exploration potential, then that’s a perfectly valid form of game design. What it does do, however, is open up the game to the potential for deeper criticism of its mechanics, aesthetics and graphics. To return to The Order: 1886, acknowledging that little can be gleaned of the story from a demo, initial impressions are that is will be linear in nature. This in itself should not be an issue, but it puts pressure on developer Ready at Dawn to ensure that the plot is sufficiently engaging, the world suitably realised and the game mechanics smooth and innovative enough to immerse the player in the game.
The Order 1886

Undoutedly pretty, but if The Order: 1886 is as linear as early play tests suggest, then it will find its gameplay mechanics and narrative very much under scrutiny.

Many open world games, Skyrim springs to mind here, are plagued with bugs and glitches. It is the expansive nature of these adventure games that allows some leniency from us players; we expect a few niggles here and there due to the vast amounts of content. Linear adventure games simply don’t have that luxury these days.

To finish, I hope that this article has prompted you to consider the degrees of linearity or openness in a game world, how you would define such a type of game, and the extent to which it has the potential to immerse you in its game world, before passing judgement on it. There is nothing inherently wrong with either type of adventure game, although due to the prevalence and success of open world games in today’s market, unavoidably more linear offerings will have a spotlight trained upon them, highlighting any flaws that they may have.

In essence, immersion is key; if a linear adventure game can sell the illusion of a living game world, maintain a strong narrative and provide enjoyment for the player, then its linearity is irrelevant. If an open-world adventure game is too ambitious or insufficiently quality assured, and is rife with bugs and glitches, then the immersion may be shattered. Whether linear or open world, an adventure game’s quality will always be the key to its success.