I have to say that I’ve stopped buying new games as they are railroading the player more and more.
I do understand that linear story telling is easier than non-linear but to me a game is good if it is non-linear. I don’t want to be held in hand when I play a game. I want to explore and find myself what works and what does not.
I will buy at full price if it’s a sequel to a game I really enjoyed. I trust that the follow-up will have more of what I want, and that’s worth the price. Assuming it’s a reasonable price.
I will also pay full price if it’s under $20, as that seems a reasonable price for a video game, no matter how complex or simple it is. In my old-fashioned head, all games ought to be around $20. And that’s AU dollars.
There are thousands of games released every year with quite a variety - I have no doubt you can find some old school game of any sort you want.
I dunno, I think we’re in a golden age of sandbox games if that’s what you’re into.
But you’re right that storytelling and sandboxing are at odds with one another. The more freedom you have, the less story you have. Some games try to thread the needle by offering a few distinct options within a set framework (Dishonored comes to mind), but those are still options leading you down a single linear path.
Truly open games - stuff like Rimworld, No Man’s Sky, Kenshi*, Dwarf Fortress - invite the players to make their own stories as they play. The game might generate events and scenarios, but it’s up to the player to decide whether those moments will inform future gameplay.
Other big open sandbox games are multiplayer, and the storytelling again comes from the players. There are roleplaying servers for games like Red Dead Redemption and Fallout 76.
*so I understand. I haven’t played Kenshi yet, but I’ve seen it mentioned on the Rimworld subreddit as a “do whatever you want” type of game.
You ought to try “Dead by Daylight”. It’s a fantastic game, and they’re STILL putting out serious business DLC for it, some five years after release.
Sounds interesting.