Linearity in games

[Wolf Kanno]

As others have said, it really comes down to how well if works for the design of the game. Obviously certain games just work better in a linear format than others so I'll ignore those since this has moved onto the topic of RPGs.

It really comes down to how the game uses it. I feel there is a difference between linear in terms of the game playing in an unbreakable sequence of events vs. say a game whose actual level design is just a straight line. Take Xenoblade Chronicles and FFXIII for example, in terms of how the game moves along, both games are actually linear. The story only goes in one direction and you can only reach new locations in both games by completing story objectives in the game, the reason why no one cries fowl on Xenoblade Chronicles over the crap XIII gets is because Xenoblade's locations are built to be large, diverse, and filled many objectives and optional content whereas XIII's dungeons are simply roads with painfully few things of interest beyond the really pretty wallpaper that goes well with the music. Xenoblade's structure also strongly promotes backtracking to previous locations, while XIII largely makes most of its locations in accessible once completed. Now some games can be deceptive with this part, take FFX for example: you can, whenever you want before reaching the Al Bhed homeland, backtrack to Besaid. You can beat down the Spheremorph in Macalania Woods and then walk all the way back to Besaid Island collecting all of the Jecht Spheres to upgrade Auron's limit breaks; but the game never really tells you this is an option. The linear design of the dungeons makes hoofing it back without quick transportation a pain in the ass, so most players would opt to just keep moving forward until the airship becomes accessible instead of dealing with the long boring trek back and forth.

So first I would argue that linearity comes in many different styles which have their own strengths and weaknesses. While I have no problem with a game that proceeds in a series of sequential events that can't be skipped, I do appreciate it more when the level design is more open and filled with content other than battling, even just making large areas to explore can often be enough to satisfy me as opposed to mini-game hell. The problem with linear dungeon design is that it tends to destroy the illusion of immersion if the other elements are not up to par. If the plot and gameplay fall a bit short, then it becomes very obvious when the dungeon design is just a series of hallways and roads for the player because now you realize you're trapped and the story and random battles are your only options for entertainment which is a pretty troutty way to design a game in my opinion. Set pieces can also be an issue if it becomes too predictable which is a problem in FPS titles and some other games like Mass Effect, where the linear design suddenly moved to a big room makes you know that something is going to happen in this room because nothing ever happens in small corridor areas and something always happens in the bigger spectacle rooms. So it's certainly a design choice I feel designers need to be more aware of the inherent problems they propose to making an enjoyable experience.

Overall, linearity has it's places as a structure for controlling story and gameplay progression but when the design philosophy starts being applied to the level design itself (barring this isn't for a genre linear level design works in) then it runs the risk of making the immersion of the world fall apart because now the other elements have to pull all of the weight because you stripped away the level designs ability to be used as entertainment.