Aren't all RPGs "linear"?

I always found this "demerit" strange.

You always have to do A,B, and C in the main storyline to get to D in an RPG. I feel that when people say as RPG "isn't linear", they're really trying to say, "It has a lot of sidequests and diversions to make clearing the game easier". That's all well and good, but you still need to follow that corridor of doom to complete the story after all that is done."

True, but some are the equivalent of rail shooters where all you can do is go forward.

I always found this "demerit" strange.

You always have to do A,B, and C in the main storyline to get to D in an RPG. I feel that when people say as RPG "isn't linear", they're really trying to say, "It has a lot of sidequests and diversions to make clearing the game easier". That's all well and good, but you still need to follow that corridor of doom to complete the story after all that is done."

KhanBloodsucker

Not necessarelly. From point A, you can do point B or point C, which in return will allow you to achieve point D or point X, respectivelly. Bethesda's and Obsidian's RPG games are non-linear RPGs. And the above "pattern" is true for the main quests not the side quests.

The main story is linear.

All games, are linear it's just how it's presented is the problem. In most RPGs you don't have to move forword to grow your characters.

The main story is linear.

wiouds

How could you say that though? Try Fallout New Vegas's main story or Alpha Protocol's main story. So many different endings, paths to take, options....

The main story is linear.

wiouds

Most games are linear, what's your point? RPGs are the least linear out of most of the genres out there, for the most part. People only complain about "linearity" when it's just so overwhelming apparent in an RPG. Past RPG franchises set a certain standard with their games and when those same developers axe something like exploration or side-quests or towns (if we're talking about FFXIII) then the fanbase gets upset, rightly so. Maybe diversity is the correct word, though.

Do you think any of the side story as being part of the "non-linear"? I do not think of any thing side as making the game "non-linear".

Do you think any of the side story as being part of the "non-linear"? I do not think of any thing side as making the game "non-linear".

wiouds

I think side-quests make an RPG feel less linear, but if you want to be technical: the game design is still linear, but who cares about that? A to B and all that, but that's really not the point.

The problem is people use the word linear for different reasons. I mean I've always used it to describe a game where you don't have choice in the story. So to me the majority of JRPGs are linear. But people seem to be using it to describe gameplay now as well, even though gameplay can't really be linear or else it would be a movie, but what ever.

Bethesda games are generally the most open, but even some of their games are linear to an extent, like the main story of Oblivion was pretty damn linear, and short. However you could do other quests while doing it.

I do not really think of any game as "non-linear".

There the linear story where main even happen in a preset order.
There is the disjointed where the main can split into some section that the player need to continue. Some may branches may not be allow if the player pick another branch.
Side mission are not part of this.

RPGs in video games are linear, for the most part. Few games actually implement the use of branching storylines, but this isn't to say all of them are linear. Though you're most likely to pick an RPG and get a linear one.

Linearity isn't a bad thing, though. Matter of taste: some people like to have an active part in the story being told, while others are more passive. I myself am a more passive individual, I like the story to be told and not necessarily require my input to make it better or worse.

RPGs, notably the JRPG, is similar (read that twice, guys, SIMILAR) to reading a book. The only difference is you have to earn the right, so to speak, of proceeding to the next page.

Not really. You can go where you want in alot of modern shooters, and many really open up after beating the game these days.

All RPGs with plots are linear to some extenct. However some are less linear than others.

In regards to linearity, I put them in different groups.

Linear: A->B->C->D->E (Final Fantasy XIII)
Megaman Esque Linearity: Do A, B, C, D, ect in any order you like, then do X. (Bioware)
Branching Paths: Linear storyline, then the story branches, dephending on a choice you make, it may end up branching again. (Tactics Ogre, The Witcher)
Predefined goal with multiple solutions and paths: The game gives you a beginning and a final goal how you get there is up to you (Fallout)
Set your own goal: You can have multiple entry points and the goal is set up by yourself and not the game, they usually dont have much of a story however. (Escape Velocity: Nova, Mount and Blade, Sid Meier's Pirates, Space Rangers 2)

Story wise games are linear, there is a story to be told and throughout the game it gets told no matter what choisies are made, even if there are multiple choisies or endings there is still a linear story.

Gameplay wise FFXIII is a very linear game because you go from point A to B to C etc without being able to wonder off and do anything else and you are forced to go that path. This only changes slightly once you get down onto the planet, then the game becomes slightly less linear as you can decide if you just want to go on with the story or if you want to wonder round finding all the things you can and doing the side quests.

Oblivion on the other hand is a very open game, yes there is a story that you need to do to complete the game and you can just do that if you wish which would make it very linear, but you don't need to follow the story straight away. Say your next destination is to the North, you can go that way and continue the story but there is nothing stoping you from going South and doing a whole lot of things that way before you move on. Then there is everything in the other directions that you can do. You can play the game for hundreds of hours without continuing the story and not got bored as there are towns and caves that you wouldn't come across if you just followed the story.

So story wise all games are linear but that doesn't make all games linear.

When people talk about linear, I think that means that you have no choice but to just go forward. You can't explore, or do anything different. You have no freedome. And in an RPG, that is a very stupid thing to do. Especially now a days.

When people talk about linear, I think that means that you have no choice but to just go forward. You can't explore, or do anything different. You have no freedome. And in an RPG, that is a very stupid thing to do. Especially now a days.

rewind83709

It is funny because I think of the story as being linear. No matter how much exploring if the main story is linear then I call the game linear.

The amount of choices are not related to if the game is linear or nonlinear, You can still have many choices even if the game is linear and other games you can have game that is nonlinear and still havw few choices.

No.

Linear in that they all have a beginning and an end? Yes. Linear in that they offer little to no freedom? No, not always. Typically they grant the player the choice to diverge from the storyline and partake in side-activities or quests, which makes it non-linear in a lot of respects as you aren't just progressing the story. It's only when a game gives a straight path forward that cannot be strayed from that it is considered linear and therefore a negative, in role-playing games especially.

ofc stories are linear, you want a big mess of a story? i like a linear progression instead a bunch of side stories like mass effect

You can't really fit them in the same boat like that. Final Fantasy VII, with its air ship and special chocobos, had a lot more to do and secret places to find. With this setup, exploration was rewarded. Now take Final Fantasy XIII, where you essentially run down a giant hall, kill stuff and watch cutscenes. Lumping them together is like comparing a stream to a lake because they both have water.

ofc stories are linear, you want a big mess of a story? i like a linear progression instead a bunch of side stories like mass effect

Krelian-co

ME is a mess of story? The decisions you make in ME is what gives the series replayability. Unlike FF games. No offense don't want to start flame war.

If there a huge area with lots to do then I say it is an open world, or a progressively opening world. There is where having lost of side quest and such goes.

It is why I say a linear game is when the key event happen one after another.

[QUOTE="Krelian-co"]

ofc stories are linear, you want a big mess of a story? i like a linear progression instead a bunch of side stories like mass effect

RECON64bit

ME is a mess of story? The decisions you make in ME is what gives the series replayability. Unlike FF games. No offense don't want to start flame war.

I have replay JRPG more often than WRPG since the combat is more fun.

Back to the topic. ME's disjointed plot set up also hurt it since the main plot pause for smaller plot to kick in. There is a trade off for each type you pick.

A linear allow for a more complex main plot.
While a branching Linear has it where there are a few way for the plot to happen but since there are many smaller plots that take resources from the larger ones.
disjointed linear has main plot pause for smaller plot to kick in. Some time the smaller plots does not link well to the main plot.

[QUOTE="Krelian-co"]

ofc stories are linear, you want a big mess of a story? i like a linear progression instead a bunch of side stories like mass effect

RECON64bit

ME is a mess of story? The decisions you make in ME is what gives the series replayability. Unlike FF games. No offense don't want to start flame war.

All of them are linear to a point but the ones that are frustratingly linear with narrow corridors or pathways you're forced to follow are truly linear.

Examples, Mass Effect 1/2, Dragon Age 1/2 vastly overrated action games. 10 years ago they'd be considered good platformers.

[QUOTE="RECON64bit"]

[QUOTE="Krelian-co"]

ofc stories are linear, you want a big mess of a story? i like a linear progression instead a bunch of side stories like mass effect

greendayR0cks

ME is a mess of story? The decisions you make in ME is what gives the series replayability. Unlike FF games. No offense don't want to start flame war.

In your opinion? Perhaps. But that argument will continue to be debated, no matter where.

That being said, I think that all RPGs, in some fashion, are linear. Sure, there are multiple endings and such, at least in those games, but some of the older titles, like Final Fantasy IV, had you go from point A to point B, although the game would be longer if you took the time to find everything. It's why I play RPGs that interest me longer than my original playthrough, because I want to find as much as possible before completing it.

I always found this "demerit" strange.

You always have to do A,B, and C in the main storyline to get to D in an RPG. I feel that when people say as RPG "isn't linear", they're really trying to say, "It has a lot of sidequests and diversions to make clearing the game easier". That's all well and good, but you still need to follow that corridor of doom to complete the story after all that is done."

KhanBloodsucker

All games, whether RPGs or shooters or combinations of the two, are pretty much linear to some extent, but some have more depth than others. Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas both have game ending quests, but there are multiple paths to getting there, and some choices preclude others. Those games probably have more branches, thus more depth than most. Other games such as GTA IV and RDR have inevitable finales that you meander into depending oh how you play out the preceding missions, and there is an alternate ending in GTA IV depending on the choices you made earlier in the game. The worst one for linearity, IMHO, is L.A. Noire. Ultimately, nothing you do has any effect on the progression of its story or the final outcome.

By linear, FFXIII for instance was linear to the truest extent for the first 10 chapters because you literally walked from pretty much left to right or one side of the screen to traverse the game. There was almost nothing to explore at that point. No towns to go buy new gear (you did that from a save station), no side quests, no going out of the way for anything.

The same thing can be said about most other RPGs, but its the "freedom" of a town in some or going back and forth that gives a sense of nonlinearity. But yes, in reality, you go to town A, finish Dungeon1, move to town B, finish dungeon 2, maybe go back to Town A since the path opened then move to town C.

While Oblivion may be more open world since you can travel everywhere you want, you have to complete a storyline or guild in a proper order giving it some sense of linearity.

Shooters are linear, platformers are VERY linear (Start here, end here... even if it is in 3D).

So yes, in fact most things are "linear", it's a colloquialism of the word that makes people think there is literally no other path you can take that brings the word out in a negative context.