While the differences may seem obvious at first, Linear and Open World games are vastly separate concepts. Other than controlling a character in an environment, the premise behind every game, the differences are huge.
Linear games, like The Last of Us, are heavily story driven and usually composed of a series of challenges the player must overcome or figure out before he or she is allow to proceed. Therefore the player must follow the path layed out by the game's developers if he wants to continue to THE END. Choice is very limited, the path is narrow and outcome always the same. Thus, linear games are basically intelligence and manual dexterity tests set in a world the player can navigate.
Open World games are less story driven (though a basic story usually unlies them) and are far more free roaming and choice driven. As such, open world games can be much more realistic (depending on the storyline) and because the player can approach the game from any direction and move the game forward based on his or her choices, these games have a far longer shelf life.
I point this out only because, as good as TLoU is, most linear games tend to be forgotten soon after being completed while open world games are still being played. In the interests of economy (I mean the reatively high cost of video games) I do hope ND as well as other developers might consider making their games more Open in the future. Just a thought.
FORGOTTEN!?? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? I forget most of the stuff I do in open world games. Games like The Last of Us will ALWAYS stick with me. Open world games are more like "oh hey, that was fun. Now what?" You don't get as emotionally invested into the characters. People like to use RDR to counter this but still. After the entire duration of the game, I was still not as emotionally attached to Marston as the characters in "linear" games.
I'd have to disagree. my most loved games have always been linear games. While I do enjoy open world, I find that stories, characters, and moments are far less memorable than a focused linear game.
I can understand where you are coming from as far as replayability, but games like God of War 3,
the Uncharteds, Metal Gear Solid 4, Demon's Souls, etc. I've played half a dozen times over. I'll be putting the same number of replays into the Last of Us. and the multiplayer is actually quite good and adds to the replay value for those who aren't wanting to replay the campaign.
for all the critical acclaim that the last of us has received I don't see how it could possibly be forgotten anytime soon.
He never said Last of Us would be forgotten. He said MOST linear games are forgotten.
Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future.
- John F. Kennedy
Elder Scrolls has some of the best open world games out there on the market and although the stories in them are interesting and keep you engaged they are not very deep. Elder Scrolls pretty just relies on a questing system instead of a traditional storytelling method. Most of the quests are not connected to each other in anyway
And that is what's beautiful about videogames, the variety. You've got to understand my friend, that a game like The Last of Us wouldn't fit in the open world genre and that Naughty Dog has specialized, since Uncharted, in making very fun linear games. And to give you an example of how TLOU will not be forgotten I'll tell you that I'm completing the game for a 5th time. Not many games have the power to do that, not even Red Dead Redemption.