Why do people like "exploration" or "maze" games?

[opa-opa]

I think there is quite a lot of difference between the "exploration" in games like Morrowind and the "exploration" in games like Metroid.

I think in Morrowind, it's more like "non-linear exploration". Which means the game itself is non-linear, and you can go anywhere you want, do anything, and you can still progress in the game.

On the other hand, the exploration in games like Metroid is linear. You cannot go to point B unless you have gone to point A first to find item X. They are more like treasure hunts.

I don't mind exploration if its of the former type. What I can't stand is the "fake" exploration in games like Metroid or Resident Evil. It may "feel" like you're exploring, but in reality all you're doing is following a strict path the game designer has preset for you. Unless you follow it, you cannot progress in the game. There is no true freedom, so there is no true exploration.

I mean let's say I'm a game designer, and I put a door in the game which requires a key to open. If I decided to put the key in a room far away so that you are forced to "explore" to find it, instead of putting it in the same room so that you can find it faster and easier, have I actually made the game "better"?

[Victrix]

That's not quite true. Yes, you have to accomplish certain tasks to progress, but uh, that's true in Morrowind also if you want to finish the main story (or any quest). You must accomplish the tasks the game designer preset for you. No difference. If you just want to walk around and do nothing, you can do that just as well in Metroid or Morrowind.

The biggest difference is size. You can do a lot more pointless wandering in Morrowind than you can in Metroid. There's plenty of goodies you can acquire in Metroid that are not even slightly required to finish the game, just as there are in Morrowind.

Resident Evil is a lot more strict in its progression, but it was never billed as, or designed as a purely explorative game. You 'explore' in the sense that, at first, everything is new (and theoretically scary), but eventually you wind up backtracking with the blue widget to put in the blue keyhole to unlock the secret biolab containing the cliched plot, etc.

edit: as for the key example, if getting to that room to get the key was fun and interesting, then yes, you've made it better. if not, no, you've made it annoying. just depends on the game.

[SonofdonCD]

Originally posted by burgundy
I agree with you in general, but I didn't find that this plagued ED. I thought the puzzles there were perfectly logical.

I didn't say it plagued the game, but this did happen to me and a few friends in a few different points of the game. I hate getting stuck on a section or level because doing some insignifigant task which seems totally random is the trigger to continue. it doesn't make me hate the game outright, but it makes exploration games more of a chore if it happens too often.

[Tracer]

Originally posted by Victrix
That's not quite true. Yes, you have to accomplish certain tasks to progress, but uh, that's true in Morrowind also if you want to finish the main story (or any quest). You must accomplish the tasks the game designer preset for you. No difference. If you just want to walk around and do nothing, you can do that just as well in Metroid or Morrowind.

The biggest difference is size. You can do a lot more pointless wandering in Morrowind than you can in Metroid. There's plenty of goodies you can acquire in Metroid that are not even slightly required to finish the game, just as there are in Morrowind.

Resident Evil is a lot more strict in its progression, but it was never billed as, or designed as a purely explorative game. You 'explore' in the sense that, at first, everything is new (and theoretically scary), but eventually you wind up backtracking with the blue widget to put in the blue keyhole to unlock the secret biolab containing the cliched plot, etc.

edit: as for the key example, if getting to that room to get the key was fun and interesting, then yes, you've made it better. if not, no, you've made it annoying. just depends on the game.

Not so - In Resident Evil you have to complete something one way and only one way - often illogically which is what gets my perverbial goat. In Morrowind you can choose how you want to get something done.

Case and Point: Onimusha 2 (Capcom sucks in my mind because of all of these kind of games they make. Not one is good. Not one.) I need a scroll to get past a guard to get in a door.

In Morrowind - a Guard may be guarding a locked door. I could bribe the guard (depending on my speechcraft and I suppose mechantile skills) to get through, I could present him with authorization to get in and a key, I could sneak by him and pick the lock without notice (if I were a sneaky sort) or I could just kill him discretely and pick the lock and get in and do my thing. If I need to pick flowers for the Mages guild, I don't have to go to a special place to get them. Flowers grow everywhere mostly. OR... or I could not do those quests at all and just free-form it. It IS very diffrent in Morrowind.

opa opa: You sound like the type of guy who would perfer (traditionally) most western made games which non-linearity is common whereas the RE, MGS and FF style is of course largely Japanese. There are exceptions, but RPG's in Japan have progressed little from what they originally were.

[AaronChance]

There are two entirely different ways of finishing the main quest in Morrowind as well, so it's a bad example. At no point in the game are you really stuck on a fixed path. You may think you are at times, but that's your own mental problems.

Perhaps a better example would be Hitman 2, where you have set objectives that you must accomplish, but there's usually a number of ways of actually doing them. However you do it though, you must complete your objectives to advance the game.

[SearchManX]

Originally posted by TracerBullet
That would be NON linear and if you were to make a game like that, you wouldn't make in the same way you'd make a Mega Man game.

You're right, I meant NON linear.

Although they're made differently, a game that requires so many variables of possibilities is still tougher to create than a linear game like Mega Man because you need to track every possible outcome that the player may or may not try. RE0 is one example of this, because the main characters, Billy and Rebecca, each have their own special skill, Billy can move heavy objects, and Rebecca can mix chemicals. There are times where their path splits, and it would be easy for you to go down one path with the wrong character, unable to backtrack and unable to proceed any further because of your character's lack of that special skill needed. However, Capcom did a good job of tying all the loose ends so that you wouldn't get stuck.

And I don't know about you, but RE's puzzles have never "not" made any sense...

[StriderKyo]

The answer is simple. The freedom to explore a world is very engrossing. It's easier to get sucked into games that give you that sort of freedom. Some people have no patience for this sort of thing, and strangely enough, they all seem to end up reviewing Shenmue for gaming magazines.

[Victrix]

um, what are you addressing Tracer? I was talking about the exploration and linearity of those games, not the puzzles.

[Jeremy]

Good point Strider. Those with little to no tolerance for exploration, rather, a type of exploration they don't like, would be better served to get games that, you know, they might actually LIKE.

[DHG Otaku]

sorry, I too am with Opa Opa on this one...I HATE enjoying a game and then get to some stupid maze or puzzle that does nothing but upset me and give me a headache until I take it no more and have to run upstairs to hit up gamefaqs...I just wanna get back to the action or story or whatever! :P