Do you have an opinion on play and indie design for the three world types.

Open
We know open style worlds are fun to play in and explore. But they are hard for Indie Developers to build. They often feel tied to linear stories that give a false openness. It feels like you can follow the story path or ignore the current task and do a side mission. Player leveling helps hold you in the linear path. After all even if you can go to 90% of places and missions - you can't really do them. It's a suicide march. Open worlds just feel like small open areas in a world of open areas.

Linear
This is the time tested Indie game path. A world that starts at a point and follows step by step to the end. It's a helpful limitation for Indie Developers. It allows more focus on story, character and environment development. Sure if feels like a park ride, on a track. But than so does every movie you watch. For the most part it's an enjoyable ride. Within games it's also an interactive ride.

Branching.
Branching worlds are like linear worlds. They start at a point and lead to an end. The branching path is dotted with nodes. So getting through the Blind forest lets you choose from 2 or more branches on the path to the end. It's linear and there is no going back to go the otherway. But by being branching to opens up replay to not only new locations but hopeful a new story path. Branching seems to be a pain for players. I often hear how the branching was worthless for replay. That it left the player feeling the second play through was a waste of time. I've been told branching is a waste of development time.

Bonus -
There is procedural worlds. Wrapping a loose story around an ever recreated world is a type of game. It's almost a simulation type. But it is an idea worth exploring.
++ A little light reading http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/18185...n_your_game.php

What world style would you choose to build a game around?
Which do you enjoy when playing small-studio games?
What path would you follow in your next project?