BlackGauntlet wrote:Only way to make a game to be impossible to do speed runs is to make it freaking linear.
Well, that's not entirely true. Like I said, I'm not opposed to speed runs, and you've articulated why people enjoy them quite well in this thread, which I thank you for, because the mindset is a bit foreign to me
However, I think a game could be expanded and possibly made impossible to speedrun without being made into an "on-rails" game where you must do what the developers imagined. Like, perhaps at one point whatever it is that one must do to complete the game doesn't even exist in the world and something is either created or arrives later on in the game. Maybe you find out an army is marching from the north and it's up to you to save the Wastes (Or tell everyone to screw off, or even try and join the invading force. Just using this "invasion scenario" as an example, here). I don't think this idea of the game having "phases" is "making it linear". The only thing linear about it is time
which I believe has been linear since the start of it. In fact, I'm fairly certain something like this would do a lot to emphasize the "changing world" a lot of us call for, where the RPG doesn't entirely feel like it's waiting for the PCs to arrive before things start to happen.
However, I guess unless there was an arbitrary timer on it like the Waterchip deadline in FO1 which doesn't seem to be a popular idea as it limits your playtime in the sandbox, then these "phases" would probably be activated by events the PCs trigger and a speedrun would still be possible, but perhaps not in the ~20 minutes other RPGs allow.
Like I said in my post's forward, I'm not really trying to argue against
speedruns here, simply saying that the idea of the game not being completable in the beginning doesn't necessarily
mean it's linear.