By now I imagine everyone has played, seen, or at least heard about the phonomenon known as GTA IV. If you haven't, I have no idea how you accessed my blog in the first place. Regardless, GTA IV is only another entry into the rapidly growing genre that is the freeform or sandbox-style game sector. Lately the flavor of the past few years has been giving the player as many choices as possible within a single game. But how much choice do we actually have and why do gamers as a whole prefer this over a more linear gameplay style?

Lately, it seems that the L-word (linear) has become the mark of doom upon most modern games. Gamers and reviewers seem to expect the ability to make multiple choices that impact the end result of the game, or at least the oppurtunity to engage in something different from the "main story". I think that ultimately that gamers want to be given the option of doing whatever they want, but I think rarely do they actually do all of these seperate adventures, gameplay modes and such. Simply put, in the first decade of the new millenium, games have become all about 2 things: choices and possibilities.

Elaborating on the first point, choices, I draw examples from big hit games Mass Effect, Bioshock and the Orange Box. Each are a very unique take on the choices a gamer can make. Bioshock is the game that tends to focus on the big picture, namely do you you kill the little sisters and harvest thier ADAM, or do you let them go free? This is pretty much the only decision of the game and is the deciding factor of what kind of ending you get upon game completion. Mass Effect, on the other hand, lets you contol many of the finer inconsequential points of the game (like the conversations) while the game's true outcome is never truly altered. Then threre is the Orange Box, which presents it's choice in the form of 5 great games, making the player spend a good 5 minutes at the main menu deciding which game they want to play the most. All 3 of these games have a few big things in common: they have all come out in the past 12 months, they all present you with an intriguing set of choices and all 3 have been crtically acclaimed. Coincidence? You decide?

The second big force in games is possibilties that lie within the game. The Elder Scrolls: Oblivion. for example, is one such game where so much freedom and so much potential for adventure exists that it can be actually quite overwhelming. Yet the game was a critical and financial success because of how many options were available from he get go. GTA is another game that sets you free in the early stages, often astounding you with its incredible breadth and scope. Often, in Oblivion, you have so many amazing quests available to you that you decide to just pick flowers or ride around the country side. In GTA, you are far more likely to embark on a mass-murdering spree than an actual mission. In the end, people are in love with just the thought that they live in a world where mysteries exist so that they never become bored of the same half dozen things they do over and over again.

When I was in elementary school, the sandbox was not a popular place, hell, it was just a plot of sand where the loser kids did who-knows-what. In fact, these freeform games are more apt to be called "playground games" because, unlike a sandbox, the playgroud was aplace full of a plethora of activities and games (monkeybars anyone?). Today, just like the consumer who wants more than fries with their burger, the modern gamer is no longer satsfied with just killing whatever flies across the screen. Today's gamer wants to make decisions or at least the option to make a few once he's done killing hookers with baseball bats.