• Just a reminder that providing specifics on, sharing links to, or naming websites where ROMs can be accessed is against the rules. If your post has any of this information it will be removed.
  • Ever thought it'd be cool to have your art, writing, or challenge runs featured on PokéCommunity? Click here for info - we'd love to spotlight your work!
  • Which Pokémon Masters protagonist do you like most? Let us know by casting a vote in our Masters favorite protagonist poll here!
  • Red, Hilda, Paxton, or Kellyn - which Pokémon protagonist is your favorite? Let us know by voting in our poll!
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.
    Register

Progression and World Design

What do you prefer?

  • Total voters
    30

Varin

Storm'd at with shot and shell
    • 25
    Posts
    14
    Years
    • Seen Mar 24, 2013
    How do you like your progression and world design? It seems to me there are two categories of progression, which combine with several world designs to make up the basic feel of the game.

    The categories of progression are linear, and non-linear. In linear, you have to progress through a set path - Event A then Event B then Event C. In non-linear, you can pick which ones you wish to attempt - Event A OR Event B OR Event C. More recent Pokemon games have been more linear than the older ones. For example, in Pokemon Yellow, you have to Brock first, but you can do Misty or Lt. Surge in either order, and you can do Lt. Surge, Erika, Sabrina and Koga in any order, and you can do Lt. Surge, Erika, Sabrina, Blaine and Giovanni in any order. In contrast, in Pokemon Diamond, you have to battle each and every gym leader in the order they come in, with no deviations.

    As well as applying to events, this also applies to locations. You may be able to visit Route 1, 2, 3 AND 4 at any given point, or you may have to progress through Route 1 to get to 2 to get to 3 to get to 4.



    As well as progression, you have world design. The concept people will be immediately familiar with is the "hub-world" design. This is where there is a central feature of the map players constantly return to, with other areas acting like spokes around it. To transition between areas, you return to the hub world and select the new area. This is seen in the 3D Mario titles, especially so in Super Mario 64.

    Next, you have the "open world" design. This concept is seen in Zelda games. The world is large and there are few immediate obstacles. Most areas connect fairly easily, and it presents a linked up, coherent world. Most Pokemon games follow this open world trend more than anything else.

    After that is the "labyrinth" design. This is seen in Metroid games. The world is made of several small and constricted areas that connect and intertwine in a maze-like pattern. Areas connect, but discovering how they connect is often difficult.

    Finally you have the "world map" design, featured in quite a few older RPGs. You navigate a much larger world map, and zoom in to play important locations. This method can offer a sense of scale not seen in the other world types.


    So, how would you like to see Pokemon games? Most of the series has been linear open world, but there has been non-linear open world (RBY and GSC to a lesser extent), linear world map (Mystery Dungeon series), and so on. Which is your favourite?
     
    Before I actually say anything, I would like to point out that the gym leaders were still meant for you to fight in a certain order, and Surge is the only one that you can really battle out of order (because Fly is nonessential as a HM). This is the same in GSC/RSE/BW (although in the latter, no HMs are essential...)

    Also, I would add that the Mystery Dungeon series is more of a linear hub-world thingy thongy like Super Mario 64; the guild/rescueteam base area being the hub from which all other areas are visited.

    Anyway, back on topic; in most games, I prefer a linear design. Having a big, wide world to explore kind falls flat on me because I get lost and I start wondering where the heck everything is and what I should be doing next. It doesn't really matter to me whether it's based around a hub, whether it's open-world, a labyrinth or works off a world map. Linearity makes it feel like a game to me, not some kind of choose-your-own-adventure novel. That translates into my hacking and the hack becomes a mostly-linear affair. Of course, directing your exact course of action gets annoying, so there is usually some level freedom, with side-dungeons and all that (except for, uh, in Fire Emblem where most games' systems don't allow for non-linearity). There will always be a clear main path, though.

    anyway, hacking non-linearly is hard because it's hard to decide where to cut the demo versions and what to leave in or out. It's much clearer in linear games where you can just cut it at a certain milestone in the main path, but with non-linear things... which areas are you gonna cut, etc.
     
    Last edited:
    My hack uses the linear world map for a couple of key reasons. The linear nature is due to my game's plot - because plot is such a heavy focus on the game, it doesn't make sense if you can go visit places you're not really supposed to be at yet and have things happening that shouldn't be happening yet. It's just much easier for me to have the player do everything in order so the story can unfold naturally, the way I intended :) I use an old-school world map for a sense of scale (you travel a LONG way throughout the story, and what better way to show it?), and also because I can't map routes to save my life ^^' The world map just takes the place of all those pesky routes, letting me focus on the caves, forests, plains, mountains, and dungeons that populate the game's landscape. :)
     
    Linear over non-linear any day. I hate having to go back and forth through different towns and cities over and over and over again, as it just becomes really boring and repetitive. I like moving on to a new place and discovering new things.
     
    I honestly have to say that I don't prefer any of them over any other. They all have their merits, and I enjoy playing all types. So, I'm just gonna go ahead and vote for all of them. lol
     
    I would say I prefer linear. However, I like a bit of backtracking, but mainly linear movement is the best in my opinion. When stuff gets too non-linear, the game doesn't feel as Pokémon-like. :3
     
    I'm partial to a linear open world in the beginning of a game, then once you progress further it becomes a semi-non linear open world, where you can kinda choose what you want to do, and the story changes based on your actions, ala Fallout New Vegas.
     
    0m3GA ARS3NAL said:
    I'm partial to a linear open world in the beginning of a game, then once you progress further it becomes a semi-non linear open world, where you can kinda choose what you want to do, and the story changes based on your actions, ala Fallout New Vegas.
    Click to expand...

    that pretty much somes up how i feel aswell.

    it surprises me that pokemon is, as you say, becoming more linear, where you'd expect with all the technological improvements it would become less linear.
     
    Shasjas said:
    that pretty much somes up how i feel aswell.

    it surprises me that pokemon is, as you say, becoming more linear, where you'd expect with all the technological improvements it would become less linear.
    Click to expand...

    It's almost 100% linear as of yet, with pokemon Black/White, the game is VERY linear, you can still explore SOME stuff, but most of the secrets or places you can go only open up after you've beaten the main story...
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top