I don’t know about you, but I just want to go there, kill it, save her, and move on. How do you all feel about game narratives? Do you prefer open and exploratory or something more linear?
Subscribe
I don’t know about you, but I just want to go there, kill it, save her, and move on. How do you all feel about game narratives? Do you prefer open and exploratory or something more linear?
Zelda’s quite a sandbox in and of itself, requiring lots of exploration, thinking, and backtracking to get everything. But a wide open destructible environment works for me too.
I guess it really depends on the game. In some games I love the ability to roam around free, at my own leisure and pace, with no set (or linear) goals. In other games I would rather have more linear, goal specific rules that can help to keep you on track. I’ve seen my share of games that have used both, some of which I really like, and others I can’t stand.
As for narratives, I think the expression “A little goes a long way” comes to mind. I enjoy a good narrative as long as it doesn’t bog the game down. One of my favorite games that makes great use of this is the new “Bard’s tale”. There isn’t an over-abundance of narration, but what there is helps make the game extremely enjoyable (and stinking funny).
I never did like sandboxes
I feel that the nuts-and-bolts of the gameplay are much more important than whether I can wander aimlessly. For instance, the shooting/ movement in battlefield 1942 was very wonky, and although the “big picture” gameplay of massive multiplayer assaults was enticing, I dropped the game fairly quickly because I would much rather play something with solid control/ shooting elements, such as Counter Strike. If a game nails both the control and the free-roaming elements, I am sold.
There is definitely such a thing as too open-ended: especially when things that you do don’t actually accomplish anything.
I like my games to be puzzles that I have to solve, which means that there need to be things that you have to figure out how to do in the right way in order to progress. They also have to be skill-based enough to be challenging in combat and maneuvering (not that those things should be hard to learn to do).
Memorization is boring. Understanding and solving is exciting. Mere selection is boring, trying a weapon in combat is exciting.
I think the 3D Zelda games have this balance right between action and puzzle; between open-ended and linear; between choice based combat and skill. Between leveling up and honing actual hand-eye coordination and timing.
It’s not that I’m a Zelda fanboy, it’s just that they are by far the best examples of a thing done right that I’ve played.
Menu-based RPGs are boring to me. Sandbox games don’t keep me coming back. Button combo-based fighting games aren’t worth learning.
When the game forces a choice to play one way or the other, on the one hand, I feel like I need to play the game twice, once each way, and on the other hand I feel like that’s going to be repetitive, boring, and tedious. I don’t want to have to repeat everything simply in order to experience all that a game has to offer. What a cheap excuse for replayability!
Obviously, it’s on a game-by-game basis. But I will say that I tend to never finish open-world games. I like the exploratory aspects, but I grow bored of the experience. I guess I’m a gaming masochist: I like to be told what to do.
i def like the sandbox- though i think its use depends on the overall experience being provided. GTA4 really has me captured, but Jade Empire’s fairly linear path kept the experience tight and story driven. Twighlight Princess felt like a mediocre world- filled with uninteresting puppets and the same enemy spawning endlessly in the same spot outside the castle. you’d think he’d bring backup sometime.
In fact, GTA4 isn’t sandbox ENOUGH for me. Recently I was told to get to the top of a building, and must have missed the door I could open on my way around the block, so i back a large van up to a fire escape and climb on top, but despite now standing next to the fire escape, the game wouldn’t let me grab it! argh. still, it’s a great game and i’m loving it.
I agree that some games benefit from that as they can let you do “whatever” for a little bit and have fun or even have more fun than the normal game itself. When the world is too open though I hate feeling I’m missing out on things and not knowing where to really go to next.
Tons of games have “open” worlds, but in the sandbox sense, games like The Godfather are fun cuz there’s a ton of junk you can do just to mess around, but it gets boring after a little while.
I don’t mind a more “linear” advancement if it means the game actually gains focus.
Some games work as a sandbox, others don’t. Personally, I don’t really care as long as the game’s fun.
(That being said, I’m still waiting for an Incredible Hulk: Ultimate Destruction 2. The original was one of my favorite games on the Gamecube.)
Sandbox games are number one for me. With FPS’s running a close second.
Zelda is no sandbox game. Its very linear in its storytelling and objectives. I think a better example would be GTA, Oblivion/Morrowwind, or any of the Fallout series.
The challenge presented in a sandbox game is very unique and it requires real exploration. I always respected the Oblivion teams’ ability to create a true exploration experience. Im excited about the Wii getting some sort of mythical sandbox game, or if Zelda would step up and become a little more “RPGer”.
I likes me a sandbox with a good story.
“What the hell are you talking about, Lite?”
I mean, a good adventure with an advancing plot, explorable enviroments, linear/non-linear gameplay, the ability to sidequest, backtrack, and maybe even multiple endings. Metroid, and especially the Prime games, pulls it off well, but there’s always something better, right?
To me, I like some of the sandbox games. Harvest Moon is a good example, even though AWL and ANWL were the only games that have an ending. And I agree with Lite. The Metroid Prime games were VERY good. SSBB is another game that I like.
I like sandbox games as much as any other good game.
It really depends on the game.
My favorite game of all time is The Legend of Zelda. I think they pulled off the open-world game very well, if not the best of anyone. Call me strange, but besides that, I normally prefer linear titles like Resident Evil, God of War, and Half-Life.
I guess I do like sandboxes, but usually more like Sims or Animal Crossing. Are those sandboxes?
It’s weird but I do not feel like zelda was a sand box game. Most sand box games rely on reality it seems. Making a believable world to roam in and do what ever you want. Zelda is an RPG. Saints Row, GTA, and others are snad box games because that is their main point. For this reason FPS, RPG and any other game that is 3d with a large expansive map or level is not a sand box game to me.
I also do not like lots of sand box games. They often get boring due to the false sense of reality just to see most things can not be done. I’ve never been a fan of simulators just for the sake of simulating stuff. Makes me feel like I’m wasting time.
I like goals in my GAMES. A sand box game is like putting a gamer some where and telling them to find their own fun.
In some ways Sandbox gaming is just a gimmick. In some ways online play is a gimmick also if the game play is not deep enough.
PokeMon (yes, PokeMon) and Zelda are two good sandbox games. Sidequests and open-world enviroments don’t detract from the main story.
I don’t know why people don’t like PokeMon. Seriously. I mean, it’s what got me into gaming. There’s a ton of stuff you can do in it. There’s even a post-game in the newer ones.
Bloom blox was a terrible game I was so unimpressed! Everyone made such a big deal and the game is shit! Yea ok ill admit the physics are good for Wii and impressed me, but that is not enough for me to buy a game were all you do is build and destroy block forts with rectangular animals, I hate to say it because I hate this word but its kiddy, everyone hyped it up and its shit, I am happy I did not spend my money on it. De blob, same thing, it just does not meet the criteria the way Mad world, Zelda, Okami, or Mario Kart satisfy ones soul beyond all belief.
Pokemon, sims, animal crossing, are you serious? For me it all depends on the game, I like open and exploratory, I like narrative, I also like rails, just depends what game and how I feel at the moment. People make such a big fuss about on rail shooters I want to slap them in the face so it stays red for at least a good day. I like on rail shooters because I don’t have to worry about where to go next, I don’t have to duck and hide, I just have to focus on shooting. That is why rail shooters can be a nice break from open games. I don’t like 360 or PS3 games because some open games get WAY too complex and it looses the fun, because I am so focused on the millions of things to do in a game and pushing one of the 13 buttons on the 360 controller that it looses the fun. I played this one zombie game for the 360 (cant remember what it way) but if one of the fat zombies pukes on you it blurs your vision allowing other zombies to attach. I could not stand that game because there was WAY too much to do and WAY to many buttons controls to worry about, and having to stress over which button to push takes the fun out of the game, I feel like I was mindlessly button mashing. I can’t stand 2 left buttons, and two right buttons and two analog sticks. As a person who has a life, some games take up way too much time. I like deep games that are simple yet challenging, and the Wii gives me that. PS3 and 360 are just too much, to the point where it becomes way too time consuming and therefore not worth my time. When I see people playing 360 or PS3 games they become mindless, because the game gets so in depth, they become innate vegetables, which goes to prove my point. When I see people play Wii they can play an in-depth and challenging game yet are still coherent and can put down the controller without being addicted to it. I love the Wii remote and nunchuk its simple and has the right amount of buttons and controls sticks. But I also cant say that I completely hate those games but I cant play them all the time, just like I cant play on rail games all the time, but I still like them. For me its a 50/50 depends on my mood and what I feel like playing. A Wii remote in light gun pointed at the screen is far better than holding a shitty 360 or PS3 controller in my lap like a mindless douche. I just bought house of the dead overkill, dead rising, onechanbara, and mad world, maybe not all great but all fun. I am looking forward to Conduit. So I like all kinds of games, but depends on my mood, and what I feel like playing at the time.
@ Daiymo Nintendo:
What’s wrong with PokeMon?
The concept is overrated, but it can work.
I dislike the way sandbox is always assumed to be good, and “linear” to be bad.