are we entering a golden age of freedom?

thing i've been seeing recently - quite a lot - is developers looking at putting the tools in the hands of the player, saying you decide how to progress

just recently there's:

bioshock - a game that's all about choice, from choosing when and where to engaging in combat to choosing specific tools or combinations of tools to use and way more besides, with choice and consequence

crysis - a number of modifications for body and weapon will probably add a level of depth far greater than traditional shooters, and with the relatively open environment and phsyics and destructable environment, allow the player to be as creative as he or she wants to be in engaging enemies and progressing

medal of honour: airborne - randomised starting locations as you parachute in and reactive AI that advances and retreats as frontlines shift and control of territory moves, means that every battle starts differently and is different for the entire fight, all random, all dynamic - it's like the polar opposite of call of duty 2

splinter cell: conviction - doing away with the light/dark stealth systems of old, the game is now set in daylight, in crowded areas and the player has to make creative with distractions or manipulate crowds (into panic, or whatever) to achieve goals - meaning players will be able to choose from various environmental tools in an almost puzzle-like way to progress

the witcher: a roleplaying game with a very strong focus on choice and consequence, where almost every choice impacts things in meaningful ways

does anyone else get the feeling from some of the games on the way, and probably many others besides that i don't know about, that gaming is perhaps growing up, and finally we're starting to see much more creativity and freedom in games, even as people are constantly complaining that there is far too big a focus on visuals and too little a focus on gameplay?

i mean, assuming that the claims of the developers can be trusted, of course.... 

the trend is defintely welcome by the majority of the community, and might become the mainstream ( of certain genres ) as game engines continue to develop. while the premise sounds interesting, it occurs to me that sandbox mechanism often lacks the coherence to provide a thoroughly engaging experience. you mentions a number of games with strong emphasis on in game physics -- i would argue a strong physic engine would only provide, AT MOST, 3 to 5 additional ways to kill an enemy, under specific conditions. there are more options, yes, but i don't see how it's revolutionary.

i myself prefer carefully laid out scripted sequence backed up by strong AI and interesting environment. a game to me is like a book.....and a good book never let you wander. :)

i prefer a happy medium myself. something like stalker or morrowind is just a bit too open. sometimes while playing those games i try to figure out what to do next. i might see where i need to go for and just say "ah sod it....thats too far away...ill just stick with the main story for now and might come back to it later" there still very good games though and i enjoy them very much.

then there games like HL2 or doom 3. there is only ever 1 route and one way to solve a problem. its essentially an interactive movie. this does bring its own advantages of course such as very well scripted set pieces that are very enjoyable but imho its just a bit too restrictive.

the game that really hit the nail on the head was deus ex imho. overall the game was pretty linear but the player could solve a problem is many many different ways. 

I welcome the 'freedom' some of these games you mention are trying to offer.  However, the concepts aren't really all that new.  If you play System Shock 2 and Deus Ex, for example, you will find a great deal of freedom and depth in how to overcome obstacles and develop your character in different ways.  Bioshock is supposed to the 'spiritual successor' to System Shock 2 anyway.

In Deus Ex, you can use different Biomods to upgrade your character, for enhanced strength, speed, ballistic shield and so on and so forth - so it's easy to see where some of the ideas for the suit in Crysis comes from.  In Deus Ex you also have the choice to use stealth, go in all guns blazing, find alternative routes into buildings, hack systems, and on and on.

Go even further back, and you have games like Jedi Knight which gave you Force powers to use in addition to guns and lightsabers.

Thief: The Dark Project is one of the best sneaking games around, and you could create distractions to lure guards away from their posts and allow you to sneak past.  The same kind of sneaky principles are also evident in the No One Lives Forever games.

So it's not like freedom of choice has not been apparent in past games.  The problem for some of the titles I've mentioned is that not enough people wanted to play them at the time of release, so they didn't sell as well as they should have, and the concepts they introduced were not widely adopted in the game development community.  It seems that now developers are looking back to these older games and reassessing their merit, and incorporating some of those gameplay elements in their modern titles.  Which is a good thing - but I wish they had done it a lot sooner.