Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Free-Roaming vs. Linear Level Design

2

Comments

  • XAPKenXAPKen Northwest, INPosts: 4,913Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    ... the zone is highly restrictive on where one can go.

     

    I think the word you are looking for is Tiered not Zoned, as tiered content is what created the "cattle chutes". Whether the game world is seamless, instanced, zoned or otherwise is relatively immaterial. You can still have a seamless world and have the content tiered within it. The WOW/GW2 example above is a great example of that. 

    Much appreciated.

     

     


    Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now turned Amateur Game Developer.  I don't Forum PVP.  If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident.  Realm Lords 2 on MMORPG.com
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
     

    Maybe not harsh enough, since it's a true story. Today's players totally lack initiative and the ability to make their own decisions compared to players back when UO, EQ and AC1 were the 3 top contenders. Hell, even WoW during Vanilla times had a decent amount of free roaming, where players had to decide where to go next and were not force feed by the game.

     

     

    May be it is boring to wandering and find content. People play games to be entertained, and entertained quickly.

    I certainly *can* wander for 30 minute looking for stuff to do ... but why should i in an entertainment product?

    You are confused between "unable to", and "don't want to". Just like map making. I use to make paper maps in the time of the first Might and Magic. It is trivially easy, and not fun (for me). So while i *can* do it, why should i not use the auto-map when it is more fun to me?

    What's the difference between:

    1) The quest text says "go find the lair of the great white Lion, north west from here between the two hills".

    and

    2) The quest text says "Kill the while Lion", and you have a big arrow on your map showing the area NW between the two hills.

     

    Simple. Option 1 required a bit of observation, adventuring, logic and general brain usage. Not much, anyone with a normal IQ and average reading comprehension will find it very quickly. Option 2 is made so that no thinking at all is involved, no adventuring, no exploration, nothing. Dumbed down to the lowest common denominator, the most stupid player.

    It's just like TV, 90% of the programs are made for brainless people.

    No. 90% of the tv program are made for people who don't want to think. There is a difference. You are confused between the ability to think, and the desire to do so.

    In your case, (1) is no challenge, but NW is so imprecise that i may take more time wandering the hill to find cave. If combat with the lion is entertaining to me, but wandering between two hills is not, why would I not choose (2) even if i can follow that simple direction of going NW?

     

  • Pratt2112Pratt2112 Posts: 1,536Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

    ArenaNET gave the players a 100% free roaming game with GW2, but during the beta, many players were confused, lost, unable to think on their own and take initiative, so they had to patch in "hearts" to please those who have never known anything other than WoW clones with linear questing.

    Some people just completely lack imagination and initiative. They want to be on rails, grinding like lobotomized hamsters.

    Gotta agree on the GW2 comment. I was a serious doubter/skeptic of this game for a while (the extreme hype around it largely to blame). Finally, a few friends convinced me to give it a try (one insisting it was right up my alley). I was too focused on ARR, putting all my eggs in that basked to 'scratch that itch'.

    Well, in an interesting twist of irony, it's been a lesson learned. I was wrong.

    ARR turned out to be exactly the kind of experience I'd hoped it wouldn't be.

    GW2 turned out to be the most refreshing take on the genre I've seen in far too long. It turned out to be exactly the kind of experience I'd hoped ARR would be (not in terms of specific gameplay, but in terms of taking the familiar and finding new ways to present it, a vast world to explore, etc). The openness of it.. the "go where ever the hell you want and do whatever the hell you want, when ever you want" design of it is pure bliss for the Adventurer/Explorer in me. The world is gorgeously rendered, and screams to be explored - because there's so damn much to find (much of it not marked on the map, which is awesome).

    I've found some amazing places just by wondering "hmm... wonder where that cave goes?" and wandering off to find out. The best part is, it's not a quest that guides me there. Just my own curiosity and will to explore. There was no marker. No breadcrumb trail. The places are just there as parts of the world... waiting to be found. In that aspect alone, I place GW2 head and shoulders above any other new MMO I've personally played/tried in the last 7 years. They've created a world, not just a game - and there is a difference. It doesn't put you on rails. It gives you a world, fills it with stuff to do, says "okay.. here ya go.. have fun", and sets you loose. Awesome.

    Now, as for a preference for Linear versus Open. I can enjoy a linear game world, if it's well designed and the content is fun/interesting. By far, though, I prefer a more open world design. Open world means more possibilities... more options for places to go, fewer places (ideally) indicated on the map and more left there to be "discovered" by a curious adventurer such as myself.

    I like to think I'm the kind of player world designers are hoping to target when they create their worlds... because I absolutely love exploring them. So, the more to explore, and the less of it that's pre-indicated on the map, the happier I am.

     

     

     

  • ArclanArclan Chicago, ILPosts: 1,494Member Uncommon

    I like adventuring, not reading instructions; so I prefer Free Roam. Loathe linear games and quest-hub games; in fact the terms are synonymous.

    Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
    In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit

  • HelleriHelleri Felton, CAPosts: 927Member Uncommon

    I think it's funny that I can be so very specific about what I mean when I use a term in my opening post (presenting my terms and at least for the purposes of this thread how I am choosing to define them as a guide for the discussion). But, still see semantic opposition on it.

     

    ...can't win image

    image

  • waynejr2waynejr2 West Toluca Lake, CAPosts: 4,473Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Helleri

    I would like to know:

     

    • If you have a heavy preference to one style or the other for MMORPG's you play; And why? Also is this a general preference (if you do have one) or conditional on what you feel like doing at the time?
     
    • If either of these is a turn-off for playing a prospective MMORPG for you; And why?
     
    • If you can think of any exemplary games that employ either style (either well done or poorly implemented); And, describe how they went about it, towards the end's of where it set them apart in this respect.

     

    To start this off right, I am going to give some very clear definitions of what I am referring to in the title:

     

    Free-Roaming.

    You can go most any where you see. While there may be some limitations they are largely reasonable within the context of what you are capable of (such as the physics of a game not letting you climb more then so high up on a mountain, because it simply becomes too steep. Or not being able to get on a building rooftop, only because you can find a group of items that are correctly sized and heighted to allow you to jump up). When moving between areas, the transition is virtually seamless. Often even having an intergradation area between biomes for the flora and terrain present in either adjacent area. Though mostly very open there are still often some areas (such as buildings in a town, or dungeons) that may present a loading screen.

     

     

    Linear.

    Movement is generally free within set boundaries. You can see plenty of places in the distance. But, it is likely a backdrop that you cannot reach or a visual representation of an area you will be able to load eventually. There is a high degree of polish to objects which makes them difficult to interact with in any other way then was strictly intended (characters auto-running or glitching through a fence when you try to ranged attack something in a way that attempts to use the fence as a shield for instance). There are often many invisible barriers preventing you from going to undeveloped places or simply beyond the reveal. Movement between areas often involves loading screens, and adjacent areas tend to look very different from each other.

    ...So, thoughts on this?

    I don't think either ultimately matters to me.  I hear your question as if it were "is a book you are reading better with a blue cover or a red cover?".  There is fun in both.  You can explore in both.  The real issue is other issues in the game such as game mechanics.

  • Kevyne-ShandrisKevyne-Shandris Hephzibah, GAPosts: 1,946Member
    Originally posted by Helleri

    I think it's funny that I can be so very specific about what I mean when I use a term in my opening post (presenting my terms and at least for the purposes of this thread how I am choosing to define them as a guide for the discussion). But, still see semantic opposition on it.

     

    ...can't win image

    Maybe it's the BIG TEXT and orange type that does it! lol

  • mmoguy43mmoguy43 , CAPosts: 2,439Member Uncommon

    I'm definitely the explorer so I like the freedom to go where I please. So open ended level design suits me better. I still can enjoy more linear levels but the story has to be amazing as well as everything else to make up for it(thinking SP games here).

    Most MMOs aren't so linear by level design though because the environment you play in is rather large and you usually have several options of what to do or where to go. It is more about how the quests are laid out and the developer's intent for you to follow that trail of quests. It more noticeably feels linear when everyone starts in the same spot and everyone follows the same trail of quests to get out of the starter area and the same trail for each new zone.

    What I'd like to be able to do is just wander around the world and stumble upon a quest. At least that way I feel satisfied to have found it and completed it. Sure, Developers get more "use" out of feeding us quests from hub to hub but the entire experience feels underwhelming. I'm certainly no feeling like an adventurer at that point.

     

    Linear and poor replayabilty: Aion, WAR, SWTOR, etc

    Non linear quest hub branching and many starting locations, good replayability: Vanguard, EQ2

  • MultibyteMultibyte Los Angeles, CAPosts: 76Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

    ArenaNET gave the players a 100% free roaming game with GW2, but during the beta, many players were confused, lost, unable to think on their own and take initiative, so they had to patch in "hearts" to please those who have never known anything other than WoW clones with linear questing.

    Some people just completely lack imagination and initiative. They want to be on rails, grinding like lobotomized hamsters.

    Rather harsh, isn't it?

    Maybe not harsh enough, since it's a true story. Today's players totally lack initiative and the ability to make their own decisions compared to players back when UO, EQ and AC1 were the 3 top contenders. Hell, even WoW during Vanilla times had a decent amount of free roaming, where players had to decide where to go next and were not force feed by the game.

    Exploration, figuring out what to do next, using the brain and the imagination... nah. Everything has to be obvious for even the most stupid of players, god forbid if they had to think for a minute before moving to the next content of their choice.

     

    +1 for the cartoon. :)

     

  • XAPKenXAPKen Northwest, INPosts: 4,913Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Helleri

    I think it's funny that I can be so very specific about what I mean when I use a term in my opening post (presenting my terms and at least for the purposes of this thread how I am choosing to define them as a guide for the discussion). But, still see semantic opposition on it.

     

    ...can't win image

     

    I pulled a win out of the thread.  It provided a bump to get me thinking about how much or how little world design relates to content gating and progression.

     

    The concept that I've been banging on for a while is how far can typical MMORPG mechanics be stripped down and still be an MMORPG.  I've already eliminated XP entirely, driving levels based on skill training.  I'd like to see if I can remove levels completely and gate content solely on the individual's preference for easy or difficult gameplay.

     

    I'm thinking linear world layout might provide structure to make this possible, as opposed to free-roaming which would appear to the player as more chaotic.

     

    Sorry you can't win, but thanks for helping me.  image

     


    Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now turned Amateur Game Developer.  I don't Forum PVP.  If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident.  Realm Lords 2 on MMORPG.com
  • HelleriHelleri Felton, CAPosts: 927Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by UNATCOII
    Originally posted by Helleri

    I think it's funny that I can be so very specific about what I mean when I use a term in my opening post (presenting my terms and at least for the purposes of this thread how I am choosing to define them as a guide for the discussion). But, still see semantic opposition on it.

     

    ...can't win image

    Maybe it's the BIG TEXT and orange type that does it! lol

    Your just jealous because your text is tiny and uncolored. And, it's to late to change that now and have people buy it. Because, you have established a norm...btw, it's light salmon and pale turquoise.

    ...If your gana rip on my swag at least get it right.

    Originally posted by ZombieKen

    I pulled a win out of the thread.  It provided a bump to get me thinking about how much or how little world design relates to content gating and progression.

     

    The concept that I've been banging on for a while is how far can typical MMORPG mechanics be stripped down and still be an MMORPG.  I've already eliminated XP entirely, driving levels based on skill training.  I'd like to see if I can remove levels completely and gate content solely on the individual's preference for easy or difficult gameplay.

     

    I'm thinking linear world layout might provide structure to make this possible, as opposed to free-roaming which would appear to the player as more chaotic.

     

    Sorry you can't win, but thanks for helping me.  image

     

    Well, at least I didn't make it poll, huh.

    image

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,650Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by UNATCOII
    Originally posted by Helleri

    I think it's funny that I can be so very specific about what I mean when I use a term in my opening post (presenting my terms and at least for the purposes of this thread how I am choosing to define them as a guide for the discussion). But, still see semantic opposition on it.

     

    ...can't win image

    Maybe it's the BIG TEXT and orange type that does it! lol

    The formatting does definitely get in the way of reading it. 

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • XAPKenXAPKen Northwest, INPosts: 4,913Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Helleri

     

    Well, at least I didn't make it poll, huh.

     

    1. Free-Roaming - 97%

    2. Linear - 0%

    3. WTF is the OP asking? - 3%

     

    *grin*

     


    Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now turned Amateur Game Developer.  I don't Forum PVP.  If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident.  Realm Lords 2 on MMORPG.com
  • HelleriHelleri Felton, CAPosts: 927Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by UNATCOII
    Originally posted by Helleri

    I think it's funny that I can be so very specific about what I mean when I use a term in my opening post (presenting my terms and at least for the purposes of this thread how I am choosing to define them as a guide for the discussion). But, still see semantic opposition on it.

     

    ...can't win image

    Maybe it's the BIG TEXT and orange type that does it! lol

    The formatting does definitely get in the way of reading it. 

    Pastels in a slightly larger font is harder to read on a dark background? Are you legally blind? Color theory would hold that it should be in-fact easier on the eyes.

     

    Originally posted by ZombieKen
    Originally posted by Helleri

     

    Well, at least I didn't make it poll, huh.

     

    1. Free-Roaming - 97%

    2. Linear - 0%

    3. WTF is the OP asking? - 3%

     

    *grin*

     

    +1

    image

  • Kevyne-ShandrisKevyne-Shandris Hephzibah, GAPosts: 1,946Member
    Originally posted by Helleri
    Originally posted by UNATCOII
    Originally posted by Helleri

    I think it's funny that I can be so very specific about what I mean when I use a term in my opening post (presenting my terms and at least for the purposes of this thread how I am choosing to define them as a guide for the discussion). But, still see semantic opposition on it.

     

    ...can't win image

    Maybe it's the BIG TEXT and orange type that does it! lol

    Your just jealous because your text is tiny and uncolored. And, it's to late to change that now and have people buy it. Because, you have established a norm...btw, it's light salmon and pale turquoise.

    ...If your gana rip on my swag at least get it right.

    You already took my orange type, that's why (orange is my guild color and deck all my pics with)! :p

    The interface won't even apply text color (seriously this site needs a new forum. It was new in 2008, now it's old old). :(

  • HelleriHelleri Felton, CAPosts: 927Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by UNATCOII
    Originally posted by Helleri
    Originally posted by UNATCOII
    Originally posted by Helleri

    I think it's funny that I can be so very specific about what I mean when I use a term in my opening post (presenting my terms and at least for the purposes of this thread how I am choosing to define them as a guide for the discussion). But, still see semantic opposition on it.

     

    ...can't win image

    Maybe it's the BIG TEXT and orange type that does it! lol

    Your just jealous because your text is tiny and uncolored. And, it's to late to change that now and have people buy it. Because, you have established a norm...btw, it's light salmon and pale turquoise.

    ...If your gana rip on my swag at least get it right.

    You already took my orange type, that's why (orange is my guild color and deck all my pics with)! :p

    The interface won't even apply text color (seriously this site needs a new forum. It was new in 2008, now it's old old). :(

    Did you try clicking more colors (the option isn't really that noticeable)? Granted their are not much more when you click it...But, there are a few more.

    As far as the site goes, I would settle for right click copy pasting and right click spelling corrections (so I don't have to keep google open in another tab).

    image

  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard La BarrePosts: 3,546Member Uncommon
    Just a hint... people who write popular books or even just articles don't need fancy colors, it's their writing which is good. Using colors and fancy formatting just looks like artificial means to hide the poor writing to many of us.

    Playing now: WoW, Landmark, GW2, The Crew, SotA

    Top 3 MMORPGs played: UO, AC1 and WoW

    Honorable mentions: AO, LotRO, SW:TOR and GW2.

    ----------------

    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn. After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that neither does the ability to write.
    So if you notice that I'm no longer answering your nonsense, stop trying... because you just joined my block list.

  • WizardryWizardry Ontario, CanadaPosts: 8,436Member Uncommon

    This is a big topic but  i will try keep it shortish.

    There are a LOT of factors when thinking or looking at it and i cannot start listing them all.Every single game has a boundary,there is no infinite space on maps.

    Just because some game allows you to go everywhere,does not mean anything to me.The reason is as i said MANY reasons.If for example i am making a game with real good combat and do not want players to find exploiting areas that they might be able to jump or climb to,i won't allow them to target those areas.

    Then you have games that just add a ton of 2d fake buildings so that you can't see any further,ok so they allow you to go right to that building,but whippty doo,not like i can even enter that building anyhow.So you see one does not allow yo u to walk to the last visible pixel and one does but the one that does,might have well not bothered,if you can understand my point?

    Here is another way to look at it as well,ok so i can walk right to that building ,the last visible pixel,what is on the other side of that building?Your hiding that from me,so again,i rather have the nice visible shoreline and water than some fake scenario.A lot of games will also just make a mountain side straight up so no way you can scale it.So that is no different than the game showing me this nice backdrop.

    Point is EVERY single game is hiding something from you in the background,there is no such thing as real space like we know it,they are just maps in a game engine.


    Samoan Diamond

  • HelleriHelleri Felton, CAPosts: 927Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Just a hint... people who write popular books or even just articles don't need fancy colors, it's their writing which is good. Using colors and fancy formatting just looks like artificial means to hide the poor writing to many of us.

    So, it's not that black ink on white paper is the cheapest way to print books and articles. It's the publishers honoring the good work of such prestigious figures by not muddying it up with, god forbid, a little color....Am I getting this right?

    You just jumped in the plywood box of someone who was picking on method because they had nothing better to say. Keep pushing this fail button. It has not worked out so far but I am sure good ole' Skinner will pay out eventually.

    Originally posted by Wizardry

    This is a big topic but  i will try keep it shortish.

    There are a LOT of factors when thinking or looking at it and i cannot start listing them all.Every single game has a boundary,there is no infinite space on maps.

    Just because some game allows you to go everywhere,does not mean anything to me.The reason is as i said MANY reasons.If for example i am making a game with real good combat and do not want players to find exploiting areas that they might be able to jump or climb to,i won't allow them to target those areas.

    Then you have games that just add a ton of 2d fake buildings so that you can't see any further,ok so they allow you to go right to that building,but whippty doo,not like i can even enter that building anyhow.So you see one does not allow yo u to walk to the last visible pixel and one does but the one that does,might have well not bothered,if you can understand my point?

    Here is another way to look at it as well,ok so i can walk right to that building ,the last visible pixel,what is on the other side of that building?Your hiding that from me,so again,i rather have the nice visible shoreline and water than some fake scenario.A lot of games will also just make a mountain side straight up so no way you can scale it.So that is no different than the game showing me this nice backdrop.

    Point is EVERY single game is hiding something from you in the background,there is no such thing as real space like we know it,they are just maps in a game engine.

    Make an Active Worlds account and fly around alphaworld or awteen at full speed. After 5 hours of still loading content built as far back 1995 by users, tell me again there is no such thing as infinite image

    Server side maybe...but older client sides are an entirely different realm. But, I can see the point. Sometimes you would rather be restricted and tantalized by machinations of the possibilities off in the the supposed distance, then to actually go there and be let down. Makes sense.

    image

  • jazz.bejazz.be Sint-NiklaasPosts: 820Member Uncommon

    The way it's described here I'd choose heavy free roaming.

    I wouldn't define as you did (free roaming vs linear) but it doesn't matter.

    I absolutely dislike MMO game worlds with panoramic views, unreachable for the players. I absolutely love the feeling that everything is reachable, and possibly something can be found there, even if it's just a waterfall, fountain, npc ...

  • HelleriHelleri Felton, CAPosts: 927Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jazz.be

    The way it's described here I'd choose heavy free roaming.

    I wouldn't define as you did (free roaming vs linear) but it doesn't matter.

    I absolutely dislike MMO game worlds with panoramic views, unreachable for the players. I absolutely love the feeling that everything is reachable, and possibly something can be found there, even if it's just a waterfall, fountain, npc ...

    This is something I really hate in WoT...Yes, they are instanced battles. But, that red line and seeing all the places I want to take my tank off in the distance gets to me. Especially when it comes to where exactly they choose to place that "you shall not pass" line, sometimes.

    image

  • QuirhidQuirhid TamperePosts: 5,969Member Common
    Originally posted by ZombieKen
    Originally posted by Helleri

     

    Well, at least I didn't make it poll, huh.

    1. Free-Roaming - 97%

    2. Linear - 0%

    3. WTF is the OP asking? - 3%

     

    *grin*

    Like with many things, people like the idea of free-roaming, but not necessarily when its in their game. That is why you can't poll these things.

    Some time ago, EA asked what the community would think about Battlefield Heroes having a cash shop. The general feedback was negative, but when they implemented it, virtually nothing changed. Those who had voiced the strongest opinions against the changes were also still playing the game.

    What people say and what people do/want are two different things.

    I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  • QuirhidQuirhid TamperePosts: 5,969Member Common
    Originally posted by Helleri
    Originally posted by jazz.be

    The way it's described here I'd choose heavy free roaming.

    I wouldn't define as you did (free roaming vs linear) but it doesn't matter.

    I absolutely dislike MMO game worlds with panoramic views, unreachable for the players. I absolutely love the feeling that everything is reachable, and possibly something can be found there, even if it's just a waterfall, fountain, npc ...

    This is something I really hate in WoT...Yes, they are instanced battles. But, that red line and seeing all the places I want to take my tank off in the distance gets to me. Especially when it comes to where exactly they choose to place that "you shall not pass" line, sometimes.

    If that goes through your head while playing WoT, you're just plain playing wrong.

    I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,650Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Helleri
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by UNATCOII
    Originally posted by Helleri

    I think it's funny that I can be so very specific about what I mean when I use a term in my opening post (presenting my terms and at least for the purposes of this thread how I am choosing to define them as a guide for the discussion). But, still see semantic opposition on it.

     

    ...can't win image

    Maybe it's the BIG TEXT and orange type that does it! lol

    The formatting does definitely get in the way of reading it. 

    Pastels in a slightly larger font is harder to read on a dark background? Are you legally blind? Color theory would hold that it should be in-fact easier on the eyes.

     

    I was referring to the alternating colors, underlining (on a web site) and bold in odd places, and the multiple font sizes, but you feel free to continue the insults if you feel it's necessary. If nothing else it's a great example of the biggest mistake that many hobbyist devs make - mistake their memorization of theory for an understanding of application or effective execution. 

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,650Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Helleri
    Originally posted by jazz.be

    The way it's described here I'd choose heavy free roaming.

    I wouldn't define as you did (free roaming vs linear) but it doesn't matter.

    I absolutely dislike MMO game worlds with panoramic views, unreachable for the players. I absolutely love the feeling that everything is reachable, and possibly something can be found there, even if it's just a waterfall, fountain, npc ...

    This is something I really hate in WoT...Yes, they are instanced battles. But, that red line and seeing all the places I want to take my tank off in the distance gets to me. Especially when it comes to where exactly they choose to place that "you shall not pass" line, sometimes.

    If that goes through your head while playing WoT, you're just plain playing wrong.

    WOW seemed to me to do a good job with the zone boundaries. I never felt "penned in" despite there only being a handful of ways in and out of each area. Searching for that experience in a lobby game like WoT, though. That's odd. 

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

2
Sign In or Register to comment.