Am I the only one that can't stand these games? They are so restrictive in their gameplay, so linear! It feels like watching an interactive movie more than playing a game.
When it's done well, I'm willing to embrace the cinematic nature of these games. Like a movie, the game is taking me on an adventure, but unlike a movie, I am responsible for whether my character succeeds or fails. If I don't jump at the right time, or deal with the attacker coming up behind me, my character will die and it will be my fault.
Sure, I'm aware somewhere in the back of my mind that everything has been laid out for me, but in my favorite games, I'm able to suspend my disbelief. However, if I can't figure out where to go, or if the game is too hard and I die too frequently, or if the game is too easy and I don't feel a threat, or if the pacing gets bogged down by optional side quests and bullshit skill trees... it's very easy for any of these things to break the illusion.
I'd actually hold up Portal 2 as the best example of a linear cinematic experience done right. The pacing is perfect, the difficulty is perfect, and there's no distracting side quests or experience points. Combined with the first person perspective and the mute protagonist, I really feel like I am Chell, trapped inside Aperture Science and talking to Wheatley.
So, I actually suspect that this was intentional, and kind of clever.
When games don't have a penalty for dying, players will sometimes fall back on a trial-and-error approach, where each individual attempt stops being meaningful. Some experiences, like Celeste, are designed around this type of gameplay loop, but it usually doesn't work well in a cinematic experience.
The most common penalty for dying is lost progress, but this also doesn't work well for cinematic games, because the experience looses its magic once you know what is going to happen.
So Tomb Raider takes a different approach. Checkpoints are frequent, but the death animations make you really, really not want to die!
I'm very squeamish, so I always had to close my eyes when I died. But even the chance that I might see something was a good incentive!
Linear games are better in my opinion. Linearity isn’t the problem though. Mario is linear and very fun. Tomb raider just sort of takes away you doing anything. You have no real agency for a lot of it. Just told what buttons to press indirectly and then you do it.
There's linear gameplay and then there are linear games. Linear games are preferable, for many games, because there is a story that you can impact in meaningful ways, but with 'an' outcome. That outcome will morph or change based on inputs you make and decisions you make throughout the process. Linear gameplay is boring, in that you don't get any agency. You are simply completing a series of steps to feel a sense of accomplishment, when in reality all you have done is push the approved buttons at the appropriate time.
Linear game that's awesome: Pillars of Eternity.
Linear gameplay that's not awesome: Tomb raider games.
Or maybe different games are made for different people. That could also be an option.
I like the distinction you make. Though I don't think Pillars of Eternity is a very strong example of a linear game that's awesome -- I played this game for a good 20 hour at one point without following the main storyline.
They require different design skillsets or experiences. Elden Ring and Zelda are designed to be more non-linear and they work, but have completely different strengths and focuses vs. a linear approach. More based on creating an engrossing world and mechanics that allow you to play most sections out of order and create your own adventure vs. the control you have over story nuances when you make a linear title (e.g. Half-Life 2).
I feel elden ring really failed on the non linear aspect to be honest. It was frustratingly open ended up front, and then very linear at the end.
I started the game, went to margit, found him too difficult, and then, with no particular alternatives, pretty much explored the entire map aimlessly, wishing for a clear direction on level appropriate content. It was hard to find the next thing to do. I didn’t want to skip through things with ashes or multiplayer. I didn’t want to farm.
By the time I actually found this content there was nothing left to do besides warp to bosses and murder them, or look up the obtuse quest lines and warp around to complete those. A huge floor on character progression is finding the flask upgrades. But since they’re just lying around you just go from having none of them to quickly finding more than you need for 80% of the game.
Like… dark souls would just be a worse game if every door and elevator was open from the beginning. It would just be confusing and frustrating if you started making “wrong” explorations.
I would greatly have preferred elden ring with pretty much the entire open world cut and instead just a tour of the legacy dungeons. The open world just compounded on some of dark soul’s weaknesses. Like finding even more cool weapons that you can’t practically try without farming a ton of upgrades and changing your build.
Playing through Elden Ring made it clear to me how impressive Breath of the Wild was in retrospect. Even without any meaningful awards (or because of?) the exploration in BotW is just so much more memorable and dynamic.
I think I could not get past this after a couple of cinematic sequences in Uncharted 2. I just wanted to go to youtube and watch the cinematics stitched together uninterrupted.
There was this point in game development where a big technical goal was to make the transition from cinematic to gameplay and back seamless. Now that it's a given in games I personally am not wowed anymore. Maybe for each of us the balance of challenging gameplay and rewarding cinematics/feel of accomplishment lies on this spectrum and these type of cinematic heavy games went too far on the spectrum towards interactive movie and just don't appeal to some of us. I am reminded of Dragon's Lair in arcades which was all quicktime events and was appalling to me for the 2-4x the price of other arcade games but other people I went with loved this type of challenge.
You're not alone. These sort of games offer very little opportunity for players to creatively express themselves. This is more like watching a movie than playing a game.
It can be fun to express yourself, and some games get plenty of mileage out of offering people various opportunities to do just that. But sometimes you want to "play" a movie, and there's not necessarily anything wrong with that. I had a lot of fun with the Tomb Raider games despite the lack of creative expression -- the mechanics were fun, the story was dumb but entertaining, and there was a lot of spectacle to soak up. I don't need to engage every part of my brain all the time.
Hmm, I like them. The only times in TR that I do not like are the ones in which you have been completely kicking ass, and then inevitably get knocked out during a cutscene.
I found it annoying in Uncharterd, but The Last of Us made it work somehow. They had just enough freedom and side content to have it be a game while also telling a compelling story that very much demands linearity.
