| 
Linear | 
Open World | 
| 
Creating the vision  
(+) Generally
  a simpler planning process for the end-to-end experience that can be
  storyboarded, planned, communicated and pitched to executives and team before
  production begins. Achieving team buy-in and agreement on what you are going
  to make can make the production process a lot smoother.  
(-)
  While it makes the production process smoother, it can certainly be more
  monotonous and devoid of creative decisions later on. | 
Creating the vision 
(-) A
  lot harder to communicate non-linear structures since it is more about
  putting simple rules into place that when put altogether create unpredictable
  experiences depending on how the player is interacting with them.  It takes a lot more time to prototype and
  to achieve buy-in for the game vision. The pressure from the team and execs
  to prove the fun increases exponentially the longer this process takes. 
(+)
  Once the core game systems and architecture are in place, often production
  experiences a hyper rapid improvement on the quality of the fun factor due to
  the ability to adapt and iterate. | 
| 
Core gameplay and validation 
(+) Easier to provide a high quality and
  consistent delivery of story, action and pacing.  
(-)
  Control can be a disadvantage as it is a lot harder to create and contain a
  player in a scripted environment without breaking the suspension of
  disbelief. Scripting can become
  overly complicated very quickly, leading to odd cases that you hadn’t
  considered (the more you try to control the player, the more events are
  likely to break). 
(+) Testing
  gameplay is more complete as it’s more about the minute-to-minute
  play-through and functionality. The ability to focus on one path makes it
  easier to validate the fun factor and design goals from beginning to end.  
(-) As
  the amount of gameplay hours offered increases, so does the amount of time
  for it to be validated. | 
Core gameplay and validation 
(-) Harder
  to write and create a cohesive narrative experience when player choice has a
  huge impact on the order of the content they receive. Often auxiliary systems
  need to be designed and put in place to achieve the desired behavior. Good
  pacing can be achieved, but with the additional challenge of player data
  collection and creating global managers. 
   
(+) Generally
  more interesting to make from a system design perspective as the game
  features have more depth and breadth in the game mechanics and their interactions.
  Fun problems to solve and challenges to overcome.  
 (-) Open world games often
  provide so much gameplay that it becomes impractical or impossible to test
  every minute of the experience.  
(+)
  Since systems are designed more as rules to be interacted with, there is less
  minute-to-minute gameplay to validate, but instead simple global test cases
  that validate functionality and spot breakages. | 
| 
Production 
(-) While
  planning offers a certain level of production security, when things aren’t
  working or are not fun, often the underlying systems and code are too rigid
  to change. Effectively painting the designer into a corner and making
  iterating costly or impractical.  
(+) Features
  and levels can be created with minimal dependencies that can be added or subtracted.
  If an idea or feature doesn’t work, it can be cut or replaced without
  compromising the project or deadlines. It also has a production advantage of
  being able to scale the team up/down with cheaper less experienced labor as
  needed to work on modules in parallel or even outsourced to another studio.  
(-) While
  it’s easier to outsource larger sections of the game, this also requires more
  management overhead for external communications, maintaining quality and
  integration of the work.    | 
Production 
(+)
  Good systems and architected dependencies can make the data management for
  tuning and balancing the rules of the game world easier allowing improved
  iteration time and ultimately a more polished experience with a smaller
  design team. An additional benefit is the flexibility to change as the design
  requirements and scope evolve over the course of development. 
(+)/(-) The quality of the core game requires key
  highly experienced and technical leadership in order to make sure the systems
  are properly architected. Often if a key vision keeper or talent leaves in
  the middle of the project it can have a massive impact on the production time
  and vision.  
(-) Often
  impossible using traditional content production methods to create enough
  unique content that matches the amount gameplay hours that can be expected.  | 
| 
Player experience  
(+) When
  a goal is provided it’s easier for the player to understand and strive for it.
  Getting lost or falling off course is a lot harder due to the lack of
  options. In addition, minimalistic UI and game feedback lead to a more
  immersive and less gamey experience. 
(-) Linear
  experience often can alienate players that enjoy exploration and discovery.  
(-) Lack
  of choice and decisions made by the player can feel artificial and contrived
  as they are forced down a path that they personally wouldn’t take. 
(+) Less
  filler content required allows the development team to focus on more unique
  memorable moments where the player experiences significantly less repetitive gameplay.
   
(-) Difficult
  to maintain an immersive experience as the player probes the boundaries of
  the space, the façade is easily revealed as a movie set. 
 (+)/(-) Linear
  games do not offer significant opportunity for replay-ability.  Once a player has completed the story, the
  motivation to return to the game is lost entirely.  | 
Player experience  
(+)/(-) The abundance of side content that can be
  interacted with can distract a player from the core story experience. This
  distraction may be welcomed by the player, but may also have the side effect
  of making them lose their way if not properly managed. 
(+) An open world offers a massive playground to
  explore, giving the player control and ownership over their experiences and
  solutions to challenges.  
(+) Players have more decision making moments that
  not only define their character, but also impact the living world around
  them. 
(-) Unfortunately
  most open world games have levels that are inherently hard to navigate due to
  highly reused art and content, requiring the use of abundant UI and gamey
  navigational aids.  
(+) Because the rules of the world are not rigid,
  players often discover and enjoy unintended, emerging gameplay that were not
  intentionally designed. 
(+)
  Players can enjoy new adventures and their own unique stories within the same
  game, even after completing the story. | 
 
