I absolutely think it depends on the players, and than also (though less so) on the DM. As a player and and DM I have taken great joy in the flexablity of both styles. It is great fun to take an obvious storyline and run with it(if your DM has a sense of humor, that is) and have often played a hack and slash game by making friends with the monsters I'm suppose to kill and joined forces with the bad guys I'm suppose to destroy. I try and be grentle with DM's that simply aren't prepared for someone to run south when all the signs point north, but as a DM I can run either style. Some players simply don't know what to do without hooks, others hate being "lead" and like to excercise their "free will." The best way to have this flexiblity is to a) have a well developed and detailed world with "world events" (what previous posters have called an Uber Plot) something the PC's can get involved with or, if they think their characters wouldn't care, can ignore at least until it effects them personally. b) the other key is to pay attention to your players. Have they made up interesting characters with back grounds and plot hooks, or have they simply recorded stats and skills? Is one player roleplaying more than the rest? Is one player strangely quiet during the games? Do you players use game mechanics talk during combat rounds or do they just describe what their character wants to do? These things can give you clues as to whether the PC's need more or less direction. The First game that I ever loved was the one where the DM gave my character a special task that *only* she could do. The worst game I ever played was the one where the DM told me what my character should be feeling. Two sides of the same coin.