General Zelda Why Does Everyone Like Non-linearity So Much?

[Random Person]

I, for one, don't need dungeon order to be non-linear. The rest of the game? Yes but not dungeon order because I think linearity order usually makes the story of the game more in depth. (Keyword: Usually) But I can understand the fans that think the good ol days had better dungeon methods.

Why would you not want to play a game twice because it's linear? People watch movies more than once, and that's the exact same thing every time. Linearity can be just as fun a non-linearity.

Expectations. A movie is not a game. People expect movies to be the same everytime. Some games people expect to be linear as well (like FPS). But when a game comes along that people expect to be non-linear and it wounds up linear, a Person feels their experience is now more limited than previously expected which will make them not want to play again. Also, a movie is not necessarily the same everytime because the amount of details one notices changes with each viewing. (Sixth Sense is a prime example). In a game, this may not necessarily be the case because one chooses the amount of detail to explore everytime. Which means one who tries to explore all options (ie a Zelda fan) will have likely gone through every scenario a linear experience has to offer during their first run through.

The Zelda series is known for its exploration and non-linearity. This is the part where someone says "but it's the most linear game I've ever played." Well that's nice, but as linear as it may or may not be, it is known for it's exploration and non linearity. It's something that many fans expect and therefore will gripe about when it is not delivered. I may disagree with their complaints, but I don't think they're illogical.

 

[The Heros Shade]

Personally I believe there has to be a balance between linear and non-linear aspects of a game. If a game holds you're hand too much and guides you the whole time with little or no exploration people become frustrated because they cant choose what they want to do. On the other hand if a game is too non-linear it becomes harder to convey the goal and keep someone focused on the task at hand. As well as making the game less ... how do i put it, maybe serious is the word i'm looking for.

 

[Salem]

Personally I believe there has to be a balance between linear and non-linear aspects of a game. If a game holds you're hand too much and guides you the whole time with little or no exploration people become frustrated because they cant choose what they want to do. On the other hand if a game is too non-linear it becomes harder to convey the goal and keep someone focused on the task at hand. As well as making the game less ... how do i put it, maybe serious is the word i'm looking for.

Exactly, that's what most proponents of non-linearity are asking for, a balance, a compromise between linear and non-linear gameplay. The modern Zelda games are steered towards linearity. Having a compromise will make the game more fun for someone who desires exploration and changing the dungeons orders, while at the same time don't reduce the enjoyment of those who desire a more focused story. No harm to anyone.

 

[JuicieJ]

2) They can't enjoy the same game more than once...why they don't rent these games is beyond me.

Excuse me? Do you see my signature? A very linear game happens to be my personal favorite, as well as one of the best in the series. Are you really going to tell me that I can't enjoy a linear game more than once? What a ****ing strawman.

 

[Mangachick14]

I've given this subject a lot of thought, and I still have the same opinion the kind of non-linearity everyone's been asking for. Honestly, changing the order of the dungeons seems like a pretty shallow way of 'changing the game experience'. Instead, if we're gonna go with non-linearity, I suggest that the non-linearity be in the dungeons themselves rather than the order of the dungeons. What I'm suggesting is branching paths within the dungeons, with different puzzles and enemies which eventually interlock into the different rooms with the boss key, miniboss/new item and main boss. That way, each time you replay the game, you can choose a new path to take and it would almost feel like a whole new dungeon of it's own. I feel this would work better than simply allowing the player to choose when and which dungeon they enter, because the game developer has a clear knowledge of what the players' limits are and which items you will possess at that point in time. The only problem with idea is that it is a lot to ask for, which is the reason why I really don't expect this much of Nintendo. But if I had to choose between linearity and the kind of non-linearity everyone else wants, I would choose linearity.

 

[Ventus]

Why would you not want to play a game twice because it's linear? People watch movies more than once, and that's the exact same thing every time. Linearity can be just as fun a non-linearity.

People watch movies more than once...usually to find themes or things they missed on their first run with the movie(s) in question. It's the same with games. However, you can get even more replayability by having branching paths, non-linear dungeon order (whether in sets* or all the way through), and other shizzle. Linearity is truly a limitation in itself; that doesn't mean one cannot enjoy linear games, but it still stumps much growth.

*I'll try to explain in my reply to Mangachick14.

I feel this would work better than simply allowing the player to choose when and which dungeon they enter, because the game developer has a clear knowledge of what the players' limits are and which items you will possess at that point in time.

What you are describing is essentially total non-linearity in dungeon design. It's not a bad thing. However, what I think you're looking for is the thing I call "non linearity by sets". If you've ever played a game in the Kingdom Hearts series, chances are you'll know that you have to complete three worlds in order to move onto the next set of worlds. Well, there is usually no predefined order except that you MUST do SET 1 > SET 2 > SET 3 > SET 4 in that order. But what it really looks like is this: (SET 1: 1) > (SET 2: 2, 3, 4) > (SET 3: 5, 6) > (SET 4: 7, 8) (SET 5: 9) . Worlds, or in this case dungeons since we're trying to get back to Zelda, in a set can be completed in any order. However some sets comprise only one dungeon, and for story purposes that dungeon must be completed at whatever point in time for the player to progress.

So, while total non-linearity may not be appealing (dunno how considering we've never seen it in the 3D world), set-based non-linearity might raise your eyebrows.

 

[Salem]

what I think you're looking for is the thing I call "non linearity by sets". If you've ever played a game in the Kingdom Hearts series, chances are you'll know that you have to complete three worlds in order to move onto the next set of worlds. Well, there is usually no predefined order except that you MUST do SET 1 > SET 2 > SET 3 > SET 4 in that order. But what it really looks like is this: (SET 1: 1) > (SET 2: 2, 3, 4) > (SET 3: 5, 6) > (SET 4: 7, 8) (SET 5: 9) . Worlds, or in this case dungeons since we're trying to get back to Zelda, in a set can be completed in any order. However some sets comprise only one dungeon, and for story purposes that dungeon must be completed at whatever point in time for the player to progress.

That's kinda how non-linearity works in alttp and LoZ.

 

[Ventus]

That's kinda how non-linearity works in alttp and LoZ.

Almost. LoZ is literally (SET 1: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ,6 ,7, 8) > (SET 2: 9). Obviously that means practically total control over what you do and when.
ALttP is more (SET1: 1, 2, 3) > (SET 2: [Dark world dungeons]) > (SET 3: Ganon's Tower). Correct me if I'm wrong, of course, because there may be a dungeon in the Dark World whose item is required before another dungeon can be completed. ;p

But even so, it's that sort of non-linearity that obviously works well, and just takes "a little bit" of ingenuity on the developers' parts. Rather than spend 5 years for MOTION CONTROL, they could spend 3 years for player choice and deeper gameplay decisions.

 

[Salem]

Almost. LoZ is literally (SET 1: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ,6 ,7, 8) > (SET 2: 9). Obviously that means practically total control over what you do and when.
ALttP is more (SET1: 1, 2, 3) > (SET 2: [Dark world dungeons]) > (SET 3: Ganon's Tower). Correct me if I'm wrong, of course, because there may be a dungeon in the Dark World whose item is required before another dungeon can be completed. ;p

But even so, it's that sort of non-linearity that obviously works well, and just takes "a little bit" of ingenuity on the developers' parts. Rather than spend 5 years for MOTION CONTROL, they could spend 3 years for player choice and deeper gameplay decisions.

In alttp, the light world dungeons must be beaten in order.

The dark world ones, level 1(Palace of Darkness) must be beaten before the rest. Swamp Palace(level 2) must be beaten before the Misery Mire(6), that one is needed for Turtle Rock(7), Turtle rock also needs The Skeleton Forest(4) to be completed first, Ice Palace(5) needs 4 to be beaten first.

You interpret how those sets work from here.

I'm not familiar enough with Loz to give you info about it though, sorry.

 

[DarkestLink]

I'm fine with an open overworld, but I prefer some restrictions. It lets me know what's good to explore and what's off limits due to my lack of items.

Excuse me? Do you see my signature? A very linear game happens to be my personal favorite, as well as one of the best in the series. Are you really going to tell me that I can't enjoy a linear game more than once? What a ****ing strawman.

1) I didn't say a non-linear game couldn't be your favorite, so calm your tits.

2) I fail to see how I committed a fallacy when I was not in an argument with anyone.

3) If you want to start an argument, don't try to sound intelligent by reciting fallacies you learned from general ed in your community college. Talk like a normal human being and explain the logical problem rather than pulling from a list of 99 fallacies. Even politicians seldom reference fallacies.

4) Back to the point, whenever I have tried to understand the appeal of non-linearity, I have been told that replayability is the main factor. Apparently doing things in the same order is just "Playing the same game over and over" which--somehow--gets boring. And non-linearity--somehow--spices it up and makes it like a "whole new experience". I don't understand it. I never will understand it. I'm not going to try to understand anymore...but that's what I've been told.

 

[Salem]

whenever I have tried to understand the appeal of non-linearity, I have been told that replayability is the main factor. Apparently doing things in the same order is just "Playing the same game over and over" which--somehow--gets boring. And non-linearity--somehow--spices it up and makes it like a "whole new experience". I don't understand it. I never will understand it. I'm not going to try to understand anymore...but that's what I've been told.

What you need to understand is this; other people like different things in video games, you just have to accept that.

I myself understand that some people might like cutscenes in video games, but I can't for the life of me understand why would someone ask for MORE cutscenes?? As if SS didn't have enough??

Ya see?

 

[HyruleHistory10]

SO basically for me I do not like Non-linearity because I feel that it restricts the PLOT. I am worried that if they make this new Zelda U game to non linear then the plot will then suffer. Think about Skyward Sword. How would visiting the Dungeons in different order affect the PLOT that was put forward in the game. Ghirahim's character would have been met at different times and the weight of his actions would have been different.

The reason The classic Zelda and ALTTP got away with it is because they did not have a dynamic plot. The plot is put forth and until you accomplish said task the game does not feed you more info.

That would be like reading the lord of the rings out of order. It would destroy it. As much as I would like to do certain dungeons in different orders I am worried the plot will suffer.

 

[DarkestLink]

What you need to understand is this; other people like different things in video games, you just have to accept that.

I myself understand that some people might like cutscenes in video games, but I can't for the life of me understand why would someone ask for MORE cutscenes?? As if SS didn't have enough??

Ya see?

I realize different people have different opinions.

There are some I agree with and understand.

There are others I don't agree with but I understand, such as love for toon style, not liking motion controls or touch controls, not enjoying cutscenes, and wanting BEV games to stay.

And then there are opinions I don't agree with and I can't understand them. The only two that come to mind are enjoying Wind Waker's sailing and non-linearity. Therefore, it's hard to explain to someone else why someone would feel this way when I myself cannot understand their view on this.

 

[JuicieJ]

1) I didn't say a non-linear game couldn't be your favorite, so calm your tits.

No **** you didn't say this, and it's not what I said you said. Your direct quote is, "They can't enjoy the same game more than once." Whether you care to realize it or not, that means it's not possible for someone like me to enjoy a game like Skyward Sword or any other modern Zelda game after one playthrough, which automatically implies it can't be my favorite.

2) I fail to see how I committed a fallacy when I was not in an argument with anyone.

Implying it's impossible to commit a fallacy outside of an argument.

3) If you want to start an argument, don't try to sound intelligent by reciting fallacies you learned from general ed in your community college. Talk like a normal human being and explain the logical problem rather than pulling from a list of 99 fallacies. Even politicians seldom reference fallacies.

Excuse me? You're going to use an even BIGGER strawman in response to me calling out a gaping hole in your severe generalization? This is why no one takes you seriously.

4) Back to the point, whenever I have tried to understand the appeal of non-linearity, I have been told that replayability is the main factor. Apparently doing things in the same order is just "Playing the same game over and over" which--somehow--gets boring. And non-linearity--somehow--spices it up and makes it like a "whole new experience". I don't understand it. I never will understand it. I'm not going to try to understand anymore...but that's what I've been told.

I don't agree with a game being a whole new experience unless it's a game where you can be a completely different character in subsequent playthroughs, like in most good RPG's. Replay value is still a key factor, though. If executed right, it can offer varyied experiences, which further entices an already highly replayable game to be even more replayable. It's not complex to understand.

 

[CynicalSquid]

I can understand the argument on both sides.

Linearity can limit certain things in the overworld. Being on a strict, one way path may get boring after a while. I think replayability is a factor in this. Doing the same thing over and over again can get boring after a while. I don't understand why it's a big deal on the first play through though. It makes sense to go on one strict path when you are first playing because that's how it was meant to play. Experimenting with certain paths might be enjoyable after the first playthrough though. I also understand why it could be a problem with dungeons. Some dungeon items are used once or twice and forgotten in the rest of the game sometimes. It makes some items feel pointless because other dungeons don't use them and having to use that one item in that one part in the certain dungeon limits experimentation and exploration.