Linear games are dead

Linear games are dead

There's nothing wrong with linear games

There's a shitload wrong with linear first person shooters, they're so extremely dumb to play

They're right

Except how come all of their fucking games seem to be linear shallow trash who's only redeemable quality are pretty graphics?

They're not wrong

When you equate cinematic shit like Last of Us "Linear" then yes that's true.
Self fulfilling prophecy by AAA

>games as a service

Nobody likes shitty games.
Linear or not.

Completely wrong.

But when they say this they think we want multiplayer only p2w games, which we don't. Plus EA was never good at making a well designed linear game.

>People taking corporate spin as EA's honest beliefs

The kind of people that like linear games are simple minded

Even Cuphead has an overworld

People like good linear games, not bad linear games. But that's what you get from people who "listen" to fans and developers of those games.

overworld =/= open world

What is the real reason

A linear platformer like Sonic 2 or Bubsy or Contra 3 are level to level

Cuphead's overworld makes it a much bigger and better game than those 3

Yeah I'm sure if Dead Space 3 had been non-linear it would have met that 5 million sales quota, EA.

Reminder that Dead Space is now buried 6 feet under and the day it comes back, the series' will be further tainted by EA again.

Legendary plasma cutter damage upgrade mod only available inside Unitology Golden Chests!

Amy Hennig was working on a single-player Star Wars game where micro-transactions would not be necessary. So EA being the bastards they are, closed the entire studio.

A lot of the backlash is coming from the gaming community itself, because she was one of the only hopeful things about the company.

EA just shoveling more shit to favor the narrative to there investors whom only care about those loot boxses and overall growth. Not expecting a rebound of the unwashed masses.

The Last of Us was great though, overrated but well done.

>pressure studio into making a linear game
>close studio because people don't like linear games anymore

Does really no one see anything wrong with this?

Since like like 2006 the vast majority of linear games have been mainly story driven though.
Half Life, Mass Effect, Bioshock, every CoD game, every Battlefield game, every Halo game, Metal Gear Soild 1-3 etc.

Reminder that these are the types of people deciding what we like

I'll believe that once call of duty stops selling

Holy shit, the out of touch boomers are real

...

Not entirely relevant
I would very much like a legend of Zelda in traditional more focused design which is why BotW seems a disappointment for me
No other game makes me feel the same getting a new item
And now you just collect piles of shit like any other game
A new sword or tunic in LoZ used to feel huge

And it will happen to you user.

Star wars battlefront 2 feels linear and casual tough

Boomers are whats killing the world.

Remember 5 years ago when games were all linear garbage and nobody liked it?

Thank god gaming got better with open world design now.

These people are completely out of touch with reality and have no business working in any industry.

>I would very much like a legend of Zelda in traditional more focused design
Then play any other Zelda game

I'm surprised dabbing isn't on that list.

Fuck off EA.

I want to say open world games are shit but AC Origins, BoTW, and Mario Odyssey are all some of if not the best games in their series so.

All I'm reading is "EA will keep their grubby mitts away from my single-player games and only online multiplayer shit will be tainted by them."
That sounds fine to me.

>"hey let's buy Visceral Games, so we can fuck up their games!"
>"soooo, let's close this shit, we got bored"
Fucking EA I swear.

"Making top selling linear, single-player games is not as much of a guaranteed cash cow as making games that allow people to spend actual thousands of dollars"

This is literally fucking painful to read.

>2013
>dabbing

Sony making The Dabbing Movie is a Sup Forums meme already

It's their own fault for joining EA.

ok?

/thread

Dead Space already died with 3 faggot

hey, Fuck you jackie

Im getting increasingly worried for the Titanfall franchise.
Preemptive RIP to Respawn studios

EA bought it, it's already dead.

Waiting for the day the Dead space series gets a reboot 20 years from now

>EA's biggest failure in recent years is BF2
>Close down some other studio next

I hardly expect them to close down their baby DICE, but cmon now.

>western "gaming"

why has EA been shitposting on a daily basis for like the past week? what the fuck is going on

rather, players don't spend as much money on linear games as on competitive online games with loot crate mechanics

Damage control like we have never seen before.

How do we slay this monster, bros? Who can stop EA?

westacucks have hated liner games, innit?

at least they looked down on all the liner games from japan last gen and praised only open world games and multiplayer ones from the west

you just get what you wanted

That's actually one of the few times they are right. Linear =/= single player. People don't really like Linear games anymore. Just look at the best selling games released in the last 5 years.

>A lot of the backlash is coming from the gaming community itself
t. neofag poster

That's fucking simplistic as shit and you're no worse then EA.

attempting Damage Control here is pretty laughable. I doubt the majority of people here have bought a game in over a decade.

When has EA been right about "people like/don't like X?"

Nobody asked for an online-only SimCity game, yet that's what EA pushed and defended.

wasn't Visceral originally founded by EA?

They don't sell like mobile shit, which is what normalfags deserve for supporting the likes if Bethesda and blizzard.

What's wrong with linear FPS's? The point of an FPS isn't exploartion, that's not necessary whatsoever, so there's no real reason for it to be non-linear. Are you saying a game like Halo would suddenly be better if it was non-linear?

I guarantee you that the same number of people like linear games now as they did before. It's just that the influx of filthy fucking casuals who like cawadoody or asscreed bullshit has made the RATIO of people who enjoy linear games decrease.
Never listen to EA's lies and obscuring of facts.

But linear games are shit and don't sell as much as non linear or even multiplayer focused titles. The comment son linearity is right here, people don't really like those anymore.

they're right
Prey and Wolfenstein 2 bombed because players don't want single player games

Dead Space 2 was one of my favorite games of all time.

So basically EA is telling us "Hey pals good news!
no more Dead Space 4 or a bunch of Dead Space sequels shittier than the third one for milk everything they still can from morons.

Good fucking job EA.

Don't know what you're on about but Nu-Prey is actually pretty good.

What do people even mean by linear and non-linear? Is a game like Fire Emblem linear because you go through levels in a set order or is it non-linear because you can make lot's of choices about constructing your team? Does it only count as non-linear if the choices affect which levels you go to/which order you go to them in? If a Fire Emblem game let you choose the next level at one point like how Advance Wars does it would it suddenly become non-linear? If so that seems really stupid since that choice is hardly any more significant than all the other choices you make in the game and the game would be pretty much the same whether that choice was there or not, so linear and non-linear hardly even mean anything at this point.

it's definitely this
EA doesn't want low risk cheap games that a good niche of people enjoy and can be hyped about. they want high risk games that are meant to have people coming back to pay all the microtransactions, dlc, and etc...
i can guarantee you a game like Deadspace 3 is nowhere near as expensive as something like Battlefield 1 or the Sims 3. but they wanted their Deadspaces to make the same money as those other games

Actually I just looked up the wikipedia article on nonlinear gameplay and it seems like the only games that are actually linear are rhythm games or any other game where there is only one correct way to play. Even modern FPS campaigns have many different ways you can get through any given encounter. This whole discussion about linear vs non-linear is retarded

...

lay off the cocaine user, but this is what people mean by linear, it has a beginning and end. publishers don't like linear games because they seek ways to make players continually pay over and over again rather than paying for a single product. unchecked corporate greed is what has affected the quality of video games over the years and its only going to get worse as long as people keep buying FIFA and madden and the same old schlock every single year.

until the inevitable point where they push so hard and so far that people stop buying it, and what happens when people stop buying the product en masse? the AAA industry falls apart, and all that will remain amongst the rubble will be largely indie developers. screencap this.

They'd compare Ratchet and Clank remake making 2 million a bomb compared Battlefield 1 making 6 million (on ps4 not even counting xbone and PC)

Capcom also thinks like this since they view Resident Evil 7 (a short survival horror game) making 2 million (only counting PS4) below sales expectations

>There's a shitload wrong with Half-life/Left4Dead, they're so extremely dumb to play
Okay

>make shit game
>people dont like linear games

They're right.

How many times do you see a post on Sup Forums and They list a game
>linear
As a negative?

they killed visceral to have the cashflow to buy respawn so nexon couldn't buy them

there were a bunch of successful single player games this year, not all of them were open world and the ones that were are mostly good games. EA doesn't want to admit they're going after that FIFA ultimate team money which means making a bunch of multiplayer "games as a service" filled with lootbox microtransactions

What are these lines supposed to represent though? This doesn't mean anything to me. Do they represent player inputs, as in linear games only have one set or viable inputs a player can make while still winning while a non-linear game has many? Does it represent gamestates, as in a linear game only has one sequence of possible gamestates, which assuming gamestates arise form player inputs is basically the same thing as the line representing player inputs, if gamestates don't arise from player inputs then it's hardly a game at that point is it. Either way it seems like the only games that can ever be called linear are rhythm games and other games like them that are purely execution and don't let you make any decisions.

They're talking about something like dead space 2 compared to an open world game, dumbass.

Linear is like sonic where you just go through the levels, or like half life where the path never branches and you just move along the story in a set way.
Linearity is more like an adjective on a continuum that starts at linear but goes to infinity. Meaning there isn't really another extreme on the scale. There is no ultimate non-linear path.

What EA is talking about is single player story driven games like Dead Space or Prince of Persia or whatever.

nu prey flopped because it was a bad game with shitty marketing. Prey isn't linear.

>people don't like linear games

I wish these fucking corporate idiots would stop telling people what they do and don't like. I tell you right now if disney takes away EA's license, gives it to some other publisher that actually gives a fuck and they make fucking Jedi Knight 3 with the gameplay of previous games and the graphics of today it would be a fucking smash hit. this isn't fucking rocket science this fucking suits will never look away from their charts and graphs and just make a game people want to fucking play. AAA publishers are the SOLE REASON video games are such a fucking drag for the most part nowadays, and why they all look the same.

>there were a bunch of successful single player games this year
which ones were linear and not open world

Yes

I just youtube (the ones w/ no commentary) the movies disguised as games so I don't have to buy them myself.

...

>two poorly marketed Bethesda games bombed so nobody likes single player games

lol at these westacucks crying over what they themselves pushed in the last gen

you reap what you sow

So does linear/non-linear really just refer to the story and the presentation, rather than the gameplay? From a gameplay perspective there's not much difference between me replaying a Sonic game to get to a certain level I want to play vs trecking through an open world to get to a certain area I want to visit.

Translation: we can't put lootboxes in linear single player games.

I know you guys like hating EA but they really aren't wrong with this statement. Linear games, and I do mean linear rails tier games, are not that popular anymore. You can look at steams top 50 best selling games any only a minority of them are even remotely linear and the ones that are have multiplayer on top of it.

You can look at Nintendo Ir sales as well to see that most of their best sellers, especially recently, also fit that category. I can't comment on Sony or Xbox because they don't have anything like this, but looking at the supposed best sellers for the PS2 and the Xbox 360, the best selling games weren't linear titles (mos tof them, anyway).

>actually using the term millennials in a work environment
ahahahaha what the actual fuck

name 1 linear game that succeeded this year

Look at Black Ops 2 - even though levels were more or less linear, which has sense, it had actual choices and a bit of linearity was removed that way. Also, side missions which were basically "learn this multiplayer map" having impact on overall story was pretty neat.

Cuphead

buh buh buh but you can pick which boss order to fight out of 3 so it's non-linear