Poll started by Henley with 4,793 votes and 56 comments. Browse the poll archive.
Linear (Faster than Light) (776 votes)
Non-Linear (Mount & Blade) (2317 votes)
Competitive (Natural Selection 2) (414 votes)
Emergent (Project Zomboid) (1286 votes)
Well, i could vote up Mount & Blade, but is so bad optimized even for gaming PC's that Project zomboid is my choice, because it haves a better history, but is bad made commercialy without any releases, not even bugged RC's are released.
You should be voting on the game type rather then the examples given.
Yeah, but if you think about it, Project Zomboid isn't linear either, so i voted right.
I don't believe you get the point of this poll.
No, if you read it neither are linear. You didn't vote right because you're supposed to vote for the genre rather than the example.
This comment is currently awaiting admin approval, join now to view.
By competitive I assume they mean multiplayer? I rarely play any games anymore unless they are multiplayer. If I am going to be doing something by myself, I would rather be coding 8P. A lot of people might flame me for saying this, but playing a game by myself feels completely unproductive. At least when I play with my friends (like once a week at the most), talking on Skype, I am building/maintaining relationships.
Nothing wrong with that! And no reason for flaming, aren't we all friends here on indieDB after all?
I think you're completly wrong, playing a game is no different than watching a movie or reading a book, don't get me wrong, i love playing games with my friends, but it's much less productive since i learn much more playing story driven single player games, that's how i learnt english by the way.
Of course learning another language is productive, but it is the exception. What else of use can you learn playing a single player game? Also, I agree with you about the movie part, but not about reading books. Reading a book is more productive than most things, especially playing games. It doesn't really matter what book it is, reading exercises your mind.
"What else of use can you learn playing a single player game?"
Have you ever played any real simulation game?
You will be amazed how much detailed some simulation games are. I learnt a ton about planes, GT racing cars, history and experienced lots of things I wouldn't be able to experience in real life. And that's all single player. I am not sure but from the things you have typed here you sound like a casual gamer to me. If that's the case, then yes you can't learn anything from a shallow, arcade, casual game.
I suppose I should have specified non-simulation and non-educational games. I really just meant to include your typical mainstream games, like stuff you can get from Steam or Desura.
Yes, games from that category are mostly oriented towards just fun.
Along this thread of conversation, playing games, even casual games, develops quite a bit about a person, even if it isn't "educational." The simplest arcade games develop hand-eye coordination, memory, problem solving, etc. I don't believe that any game is "unproductive." It might be that you're unaware of what has been trained in you because you are so accustomed to having the skill. But compared to someone who hasn't logged time playing these casual games, you would probably notice some major differences in what gamers consider "foundational" skills.
I completely agree with you. I think you have made a very good point. Even the most simple casual game makes you better at something even it's too little to notice at first. And as you have said I always notice people that are not very familiar with computers are having trouble with the most basic actions like having a good control over mouse or basic windows functions etc which are like second nature to people who use computers frequently. Although the same thing is valid for almost every activity. Like sports, driving a car, cooking etc.
@Arethrid - Learning these things isn't exclusive to computer games, you can learn the same 'skills' doing almost anything on the computer. All you are doing is coming up with excuses to justify your time playing games.
Nah, I know playing games is mostly wasting time. I am not trying to justify it. I play games simply because I enjoy playing games. I don't need any other reason to play. And I do sports (tennis), I have plenty of friends and I read everyday. Playing games doesn't stop me from doing those things either.
Well thats good. I'm not saying theres something wrong with playing games, I'm just calling it what it is. "Everything in moderation"
@Lithare - Thats bull, you don't play games to learn these 'skills', you play games for entertainment. If you were really interested in developing those skills, you would know that there are many better ways to do so. Games are unproductive because there is always a better way to spend your time. You can make something, exercise, read a book to learn something or to develop a new skill, socialize with friends or meet new people, the list goes on.
I have a suggestion for you, don't go loosely giving life tips for everyone, especially on the internet, people usually have different opinions in what is less or more valuable for them. ;)
You're assuming there's no reading needed in video-games? the list of games that actually requires reading is imense, if you've spent less times playing online shooters with your friends (i guess :P) you would probably know this, also learning new languages were just an example i gave you of what one can learn by simple playing a videogame, i thought you would have guess it yourself..
Anyway, videogames are the main reason i've got interested in also traditional/digital art, coding and actually reading books, I gave The hobbit a chance after playing the old pc game lol :P, i have to confess that books didn't seems interesting to me before..
And that is just my experience, i'm sure there are others to share their experiences on how games were useful in their lives.
I suppose it depends what game you are playing. Playing COD is probably less productive than playing minecraft, but then again, doing real stuff out of legos or the like is more productive than playing minecraft.
Yea but when your young like me you have nothing but time to kill and videogames are usually the only way unless you have a friend that lives 5 minutes away, but when you don't have much time i agree with you
Yeah I get you, I was young once too lol. However, if I had the experience then that I do now, I would not have wasted the peak of my learning and creative ability xd
This. This is how you get far in life.
'By competitive I assume they mean multiplayer?'
no. by competitive they probably mean competitive....otherwise they would have said.....ya know... multiplayer.
natural selection is a competitive game, counter strike is a competitive game.
killing floor is a co op game just like dungeon defenders is co op game. all 4 of those games are still multiplayer, but only 2 are competitive.
You probably should've included more than one example per type... :P
On a side note, it's nice to see another interesting poll after such a long time.
I prefer cooperative games rather than competitive
I fully agree.
I voted non-linear, but I can also enjoy linear gameplay.
I was looking for the category "Open World/Exploration", as I find myself getting more and more hooked on these types of games.
I like cooperative games and exploration games, but every once in a while it's awesome to pit yourself in a shooting madness rampage against your best buddies ^-^
I suck at being competitive, am incompatible with replayability, so the last two are noes =D (I can play them, but aren't my preferred ones).
I prefer non-linear then. I like to be able to mess up a little while doing a semiprefixed task.
I prefer Non-Linear games.Although i play all other types of games.
I love non-linear games, but I always like a storyline to follow. I was torn, but I chose non-linear because I love having options to do whatever I want. It's like a second chance to live life in an otherwise impossible way.
Faster than Light isn't linear game, have one main goal but its many choses to make and lot of random elements. Mount&Blade don't have any goal and wining conditions, this is main deferent.
Typical game with linear gameplay is CoD, or any corridor modern shooter, usually you can play on it in only one scripted way.
Those examples were just so people can get the jist of what they mean. I think... lol
FTL is a linear game. There is some variation along the way but there is one goal and one general path. Progression is generally the same with some randomisation.
It's fun but you always go through a certain number of sectors and beat the boss ship (which is always the same).
Is FTL linear or not, and how linear it is can be debatable. They should have definetively found a better example for linear game type. Actually i think they should have found better examples for almost all types, except maybe emergent.
I feel that the gameplay isn't linear even if the path is.
I like having the choice of doing what /i/ want to do; even if it's actually linear and only appears to be nonlinear. It just makes it feel like I'm in control of my actions... but I'm an RPG kinda guy, so I suppose the RPGness in me wants to develop the character as a part of me, and not just stats and abilities.
If that makes sense.. haha
Non-linear's my main preference, but I'm good with others.
LOL everyone vote non-linear because it's Mount & Blade
I don't think so. I personally think M&B is crap, and i can't say i know anyone who actually likes that game (even though i do know the game has it's fans). They could have found a better example for non-linear game.
I don't really care about game type so much, as long as the game is well done and it's fun to play. Gameplay and good game ideas > everything else (genre, type, graphics, etc.)
I do prefer non-linear games with a lot of exploration though, but then again I'd rather play a game of the type i don't prefer over the one i do prefer if that game is done well.
Linear in a sense that it guides you with a helping hand, not just having scripted events over and over, non-linear in that you can explore the reaches of the game without the game punishing you too much, competitive in that you can race your friends, or anyone else, to that finish line and emergent in the fact that your character and its power grows substantially throughout the game.
Wait, did I just explain what the classic Zelda/Metroid/Castlevania franchises are? They have all four. **** only having one. **** these terrible games coming out now-a-days. I'm tired of ******* ********.
I'd also like to add Mario to this list. Not only does it still have the first three, but he stays the exact same through out the game. YOU grow. How emergent is that?
It is really dependent on the game cause with certain games its better when its slower.
for me it depends sometmes i love games like gtaIV or sometimes cry of fear the list goes on....
Only registered members can share their thoughts. So come on! Join the community today (totally free - or sign in with your social account on the right) and join in the conversation.