No, it's not meaningless. Your story is your story and that's the way it should be. But the story of Tamriel is bigger than your heroes. I know that seems to be contradicted by the idea that you're saving the world, etc., but that's the reason the games always start out with you as a prisoner born at a certain time of uncertain parents. The Prisoner is an archetype. That doesn't mean your story wasn't unique- in fact the concept of player freedom means there are many, many iterations of the game, not just the 3 or 5 or 20 end states that a developer decides should be possible.
As much as I liked Skyrim, and although it's true that some of the sidequests can end in different ways depending on your actions, I have to admit that @freakie1one is right. The main story is indeed linear, as it will always end in one way, the one the developers have written.
It's worth mentioning though, that obviously no game can be COMPLETELY non linear. You can't perfectly emulate real life events. Even in The Witcher, yes you get to explore different branches of the story depending on your choices (and THAT is what we can consider non linearity in a game), but those branches are still the ones that the developers have written before.
It's worth mentioning though, that obviously no game can be COMPLETELY non linear. You can't perfectly emulate real life events. Even in The Witcher, yes you get to explore different branches of the story depending on your choices (and THAT is what we can consider non linearity in a game), but those branches are still the ones that the developers have written before.
Last edited:
Yep, in order to get rid of some of the current restrictions in RPG's it would require more intelligent AI; NPC's would need to be capable of actually making their own decisions and choices--have their own goals and objectives--and also be capable of changing how events unfold in the game. And in order for this to work then you'd need to get rid of the rigid quest system which most all RPG's to date use. The only game I'm aware of that is currently attempting what I've just described is the game Sui Generis. This will allow for truly dynamic and non-linear gameplay, something not possible in most RPG's.
Last edited:
I forget that when people talk about Skyrim, they're talking about the main quest. To me the main quest is optional and not terribly important.
I've had multiple characters who've pretty much never even touched the main quest after a certain point where you really don't need to. The missions themselves are mainly linear, yes, but you don't typically play them as such, or at least I don't. I've never played straight through any main mission or whatever, not once. That's what roleplaying does. You fall off the beaten path regularly.
I also had multiple characters for each of the guilds. It was silly if one character was head of all the guilds. Certainly some quests were non-linear but having the choice to do a quest later or now (without it having an effect on the quest) is still linear.
Not for the entire game, it isn't. FPS games for instance are linear because there's one path, one goal, and the levels are more or less going in one direction. That's at the far end, the far extreme of linearity in gaming. On the far right, would probably be something like fallout new vegas. Because you do what missions you want, there's many sizeable missions to choose from besides the main quest, and the quests themselves usually have multiple ways to complete them. And the main quest has a lot of ways to end it.
Right behind that is Skyrim. The missions available are linear, usually, but there's many missions to choose from that are more than simple sidequests, how and when you finish them's of course up to you, the game doesn't end when the main mission is over, and who you are and who you associate with, all completely up to you. Skyrim simply does not offer you a linear experience as a whole. If it did, people's experience with the game wouldn't be so different. You can't really tell someone else how to play the game.
Right behind that is Skyrim. The missions available are linear, usually, but there's many missions to choose from that are more than simple sidequests, how and when you finish them's of course up to you, the game doesn't end when the main mission is over, and who you are and who you associate with, all completely up to you. Skyrim simply does not offer you a linear experience as a whole. If it did, people's experience with the game wouldn't be so different. You can't really tell someone else how to play the game.
My main character was not a dragonborn, but a thief/assassin who dabbled with the daedra.
Did the same. Would never have one character do everything.
That's still choosing to do a quest now or later. Who you associate with doesn't make the game non linear since it doesn't affect and of the other factions.
for something to be non-linear there has to be a choice where one door opens and the other closes. right? If you joined the Companions it doesn't close the door to Thieves Guild. Stormcloaks vs Imperials kinda does but the quests are basically the same it might as well be linear(lazy bethesda).
No... linear is a straight path, one path. Non linear is not... Just like the definition of rpg, people have created their own definition of things related to gaming and it's just plain wrong.
A linear game is a game that offers little or no choices. Skyrim gives you a world of choices. It may not be there within the quests themselves, but the quests themselves, are the choices. Just because you CAN play all the missions, which is something I'm not a fan of, doesn't mean you have to. Yes I understand that standard can loosely be applied to a more linear game experience like dragon age 2, but the difference is these missions aren't focused on like a main quest. I see it like a chamber with eight hallways in every direction like the corners of an octagon. There's nothing at all that is linear about that setup, just because the hallways themselves are a straight path.
FPS at the far extreme? One path. Level 1, level 2, level 3... and so on. Skyrim on the other hand is "Which door do you want to go through? Door number 1, door number 2, door number 3.... and each door when you open them potentially has more doors to go through. Those are the many side quests you find and discover along the way. Or through exploring.
Right, when I hear "linear" I consider it a game that forces my hand constantly to do what the developer thinks I should be doing. Skyrim is the exact opposite of that.
I know my opinion is generally not welcome around these parts but I'll chime in nonetheless since you guys mentioned "linearity".
You really like telling people they're wrong. Linearity does not just mean a line, not in engineering, not in math, not in science and (because of that) not in gaming.
A particle system is not linear if each element's behavior can be drawn as a line, but rather if it satisfies the properties of linearity. Summarizing, a linear system is one such that f(Ax) = xf(A) and f(a + b) = f(a) + f(b). This means factors may be extracted and applied later (1) and it can be separated into parts (2) with either operation leading to the exact, same results. A linear game is not just one where you follow a predefined line (like, yes, many FPS's) but one where factorization and separation have no effect whatsoever in the game world or game state. Many "open world" games of this sort are simply a bunch of "little lines" that you traverse one at a time if you will, each of them contributing just as much as they would to the world otherwise, if you had done them in any different order. Performing one task before another doesn't change anything, and of course there is no compromise. Rarely will you be confronted with the requirement to choose either one or another. Also, in how many ways can you actually complete missions in such games? Can you, for instance, change the terms for quest completion completely if you happen to find new information? Are you taken to places/people/scenarios that are completely dependant on your actual choices, and wouldn't have been there otherwise?
I understand the way you play Skyrim and I think it is cool. You make your own story in a virtual world and have a great time. Nothing wrong with that. But Skyrim is essentially f(a + b + ... + z) = f(a) + f(b) + ... f(z) where you happen to choose a subset of missions that match your current character. The game does not respond however, you cannot reach a unique state describing or encompassing all you've done. But this is alright because clearly the goal of TES games is not to be cRPG's, but to be sandboxes to "live another life, in another world".
Just please understand why we say it is linear, and largely static. Compare that with cRPG's and even decision-heavy games like The Witcher 2, where the game gives you opportunities based on what you did before. These actual gameplay elements wouldn't be there otherwise, there would be something else or nothing at all. Not just in terms of locations, but in terms of world states.
Edit: Just wanted to add that we are commenting on the actual video game, the product that Bethesda developed, published and sells. The game YOU personally get out is dependent on your expectations and your style, you make the RPG with your personal approach using the video game as a tool. Choosing to avoid certain tasks because they do not match your character is fine but that is part of the game YOU create, where game, story and characters are in your head. The game Bethesda made is one where everything goes and your actions do not matter. It is a sandbox, that's what they do. We might as well approach GTA with these same standards and "role play" the hell out of it.
You really like telling people they're wrong. Linearity does not just mean a line, not in engineering, not in math, not in science and (because of that) not in gaming.
A particle system is not linear if each element's behavior can be drawn as a line, but rather if it satisfies the properties of linearity. Summarizing, a linear system is one such that f(Ax) = xf(A) and f(a + b) = f(a) + f(b). This means factors may be extracted and applied later (1) and it can be separated into parts (2) with either operation leading to the exact, same results. A linear game is not just one where you follow a predefined line (like, yes, many FPS's) but one where factorization and separation have no effect whatsoever in the game world or game state. Many "open world" games of this sort are simply a bunch of "little lines" that you traverse one at a time if you will, each of them contributing just as much as they would to the world otherwise, if you had done them in any different order. Performing one task before another doesn't change anything, and of course there is no compromise. Rarely will you be confronted with the requirement to choose either one or another. Also, in how many ways can you actually complete missions in such games? Can you, for instance, change the terms for quest completion completely if you happen to find new information? Are you taken to places/people/scenarios that are completely dependant on your actual choices, and wouldn't have been there otherwise?
I understand the way you play Skyrim and I think it is cool. You make your own story in a virtual world and have a great time. Nothing wrong with that. But Skyrim is essentially f(a + b + ... + z) = f(a) + f(b) + ... f(z) where you happen to choose a subset of missions that match your current character. The game does not respond however, you cannot reach a unique state describing or encompassing all you've done. But this is alright because clearly the goal of TES games is not to be cRPG's, but to be sandboxes to "live another life, in another world".
Just please understand why we say it is linear, and largely static. Compare that with cRPG's and even decision-heavy games like The Witcher 2, where the game gives you opportunities based on what you did before. These actual gameplay elements wouldn't be there otherwise, there would be something else or nothing at all. Not just in terms of locations, but in terms of world states.
Edit: Just wanted to add that we are commenting on the actual video game, the product that Bethesda developed, published and sells. The game YOU personally get out is dependent on your expectations and your style, you make the RPG with your personal approach using the video game as a tool. Choosing to avoid certain tasks because they do not match your character is fine but that is part of the game YOU create, where game, story and characters are in your head. The game Bethesda made is one where everything goes and your actions do not matter. It is a sandbox, that's what they do. We might as well approach GTA with these same standards and "role play" the hell out of it.
Last edited:
Now, I really don't like doing this sort of thing, quoting definitions and such, but I must this time. I get what you're saying about the game, but you're using the wrong terminology. Sorry, but the definition of words is not something that is up for debate. Skyrim is not a linear game.
FPS games linear? Maybe if they are from 2007 onwards. Try Doom, Duke Nukem 3D, System Shock 2 and Deus Ex 1 and HR, then tell me they are linear. Of course there is progression in the sense that there are doors that need to be opened but what you do in between is non-linear. It is also a different and more meaningful kind of nonlinearity BECAUSE the world is smaller, which means that each secret and optional area is important. For instance, in the first game I mentioned there are only 7 weapons, which means that finding one is quite an event as it changes the way you approach game significantly. The more complicated secrets even allow you to find weapons before they are "officialy" given to the player which in turn gives the player a whole new spectrum of choice.
You should give these games a go, especially Doom. Do not be put off by its age, it's graphics have quite a bit of charm, especially if used correctly. I'll even recommend some of the best user maps if you wish,
Since we're quoting selectively:
You're missing the key element of philosophy and mathematics: representation. Linear systems resemble lines, not necessarily in trajectory or arrangement, but in function.
What you're debating is whether line implies linearity, which is false. What I said is linearity may imply a line, but also functional properties resembling a line (in terms of proportions).
You solve Skyrim by parts, yielding the same result everytime. I.e. linear.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LinearityIn mathematics, a linear map or linear function f(x) is a function that satisfies the following two properties:[1]
Additivity: f(x + y) = f(x) + f.
Homogeneity of degree 1: f(αx) = αf(x) for all α.
The homogeneity and additivity properties together are called the superposition principle. It can be shown that additivity implies homogeneity in all cases where α is rational; this is done by proving the case where α is a natural number by mathematical induction and then extending the result to arbitrary rational numbers.
(...)
When a differential equation can be expressed in linear form, it is generally straightforward to solve by breaking the equation up into smaller pieces, solving each of those pieces, and summing the solutions.
You're missing the key element of philosophy and mathematics: representation. Linear systems resemble lines, not necessarily in trajectory or arrangement, but in function.
What you're debating is whether line implies linearity, which is false. What I said is linearity may imply a line, but also functional properties resembling a line (in terms of proportions).
You solve Skyrim by parts, yielding the same result everytime. I.e. linear.
Hate quoting myself. You can try and apply whatever mathematical principle you want, but they fail for two reasons. One, this isn't a math problem. This isn't an equation. Having elements of linearity, especially ones as stretched as this, does not make the entire game linear. Witcher has elements of linearity. More than Skyrim arguably, because it goes in Chapters. Yet we all agree mostly that it isn't a linear game.
And two, the principle relies on the idea of you satisfying two properties, but those two properties won't be satisfied unless I myself recreate the same function. I.E. I complete two quests in the same manner and it means the same thing for me. Me completing the main quest or not completing the main quest doesn't mean the same thing for each character. Thanks to roleplay. The equations equaling the same thing is something that is reliant on you yourself and your own imagination. Your roleplay. Not to mention, the dark brotherhood is destroyable and the civil war ends with two paths that both change the setup of the world in multiple ways.
The function also relies on me adding the same variables each time to even be satisfied, when that factor is completely reliant on me in Skyrim. In an equation, you have a set amount of variables you MUST add.
Even if I excluded imagination and relied only on cold hard facts of the game, so what? You pulled the most uncommon definition of linear out there, and it's for a mathematical principle, not a videogame category of play.
You'd have to do more mental gymnastics to call this a linear game than not, and as I showed with that link, Skyrim isn't a game people would describe as linear. No one but those who detest it so much and strain to put it down any way they possibly can.
Last edited:
And just for inference in case you missed my edit, this is the biggest point that discredits using this definition of linearity to describe Skyrim:
There's not an equation in the world that you can pick and choose which variables to add. You must use each one. In Skyrim, I can pick and choose, so if I looked at it like an equation, which you couldn't, then I could control the end product. Which brings me back to saying just because you CAN play Skyrim linearly, doesn't mean it is in fact linear.
If I apply your equation to Skyrim, all it proves is that Skyrim has linearity to it. Like most games do, even ones like Witcher not considered linear. That's a wrap, really. Forgetting of course, that this isn't the method people use to look at games, and this is just all nit picky bs.
And just to make it extra crystal clear what it is that I'm saying, the fact that in Skyrim, I can choose to add the variables that would satisfy those principles of linearity, or not.... means that this property cannot apply to the game as a whole, because that definition of linearity is applied to mathematical equations, and Skyrim does not function like an equation due to the very thing I said made it non linear in the first place. Choice of variable application. Aka, how, when and if I decide to play a quest. Because again, equations do not come with choice. They come with rules, rules that must be followed, and variables that must be applied within the equation.
We're done here.
There's not an equation in the world that you can pick and choose which variables to add. You must use each one. In Skyrim, I can pick and choose, so if I looked at it like an equation, which you couldn't, then I could control the end product. Which brings me back to saying just because you CAN play Skyrim linearly, doesn't mean it is in fact linear.
If I apply your equation to Skyrim, all it proves is that Skyrim has linearity to it. Like most games do, even ones like Witcher not considered linear. That's a wrap, really. Forgetting of course, that this isn't the method people use to look at games, and this is just all nit picky bs.
And just to make it extra crystal clear what it is that I'm saying, the fact that in Skyrim, I can choose to add the variables that would satisfy those principles of linearity, or not.... means that this property cannot apply to the game as a whole, because that definition of linearity is applied to mathematical equations, and Skyrim does not function like an equation due to the very thing I said made it non linear in the first place. Choice of variable application. Aka, how, when and if I decide to play a quest. Because again, equations do not come with choice. They come with rules, rules that must be followed, and variables that must be applied within the equation.
We're done here.
Last edited: