Support NeoGAF

[Visual Rhino]

I'm a fan of open world games and I think the new consoles will make them even better.

 

[NoMoChokeSJ]

I don't mind open world games.. i just don't like needless filler. GOT being the most recent example. Great game but you don't need to search for this needle in a haystack in this area or look for 49 foxes. The game is long enough without this filler. Spiderman.. great game with filler redundant side missions. Cut the fluff by 1/2 and the game will stand taller IMO.

 

[tassletine]

Counter point: Most linear games suck. Open world games give developers + players more choice so open world games have more potential.

Choice has nothing to with quality or the potential for it.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Minecraft is still the open world standard to beat.

At any moment, you can interact with the world where you are standing in 10,000 different ways. You can dig, you can build, you can plant and harvest, you can mine, you can herd animals, you can focus on improving your armor/weapons, you can make roads and waypoints, you can build contraptions, etc etc Yet you can also travel in any direction (even straight up) without sacrificing a quest or erring away from the Main Mission. And at any point of the game you can start working toward The End (again, from any position on the map).

How can you pair limitless exploration and mechanical interaction with simplicity and immediacy? Breath of the Wild got closer but I still think Minecraft is the standard.

I think the secret is to make our future open-world games less narrative drive and more system driven. The old Ultima games were a lot like that even though they were RPGs. The main story was so simple and straightforward, but the world was a living part of the experience, something that you could play around in and discover for yourself.

 

[PapyDoc]

Choice has nothing to with quality or the potential for it.

It is, even on a basic things like how to apprehend a situation on games, combat or dialogue. It's not for nothing even the most cinema like games give you at worst a semblance of choice, like the telltale game.
Having a choice is a step in the right direction if you want to make a good game.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Choice has nothing to with quality or the potential for it.

Quality? Debatable.

Potential? Lol, no.

 

[HaveButOneLife]

What's better, linear games that hold your hand and have boring gameplay?

 

[Rikoi]

I don't think that they suck, I love them, but they are too long and too much repetitive.
Open world games need less checkboxes and more free roam.

 

[yugoluke]

I think that as long as we issue praise to games for the amount of choice and options that are present within, this trend will continue.

AKA - 100x larger than the GTA V map!!!!! / 10 billion weapon combinations!!!!!

These developers have discovered that touting customization, size of map, and options, options, options! makes them appear as consumer friendly while at the same time being able to get away with putting out an uninspired product. We are selling ourselves short and falling prey to the marketing departments of these publishers.

Games should have a core competency that they explore and excel at showcasing during your play through. If a game attempts to be a jack of all trades and master of none we should use our dollar to change development behaviour. We have to make clear that the gaming public sees through their ruse and will take a proud declaration volume/size/amount as a misallocation of resources into parts of a game that actually matter.

Personally I just get overwhelmed and just get turned off to games that make completing said game in it's entirety an impossibility.

 

[Goro Majima]

I'd much rather have open world games than ultra linear games which inevitably have the "oh shit the way forward is blocked, better go the long way around" trope.

 

[SF Kosmo]

Open world games are fine when there's enough bespoke mission/level design. They don't all have to be fetch quests. If you look at GTA5 there are a lot of tight setpieces still, even if you can fart around and do your thing between stages.

The hyper-linear design that became so dominant last gen with all the CoD and Gears of War clones was really lame. The boom of open world games is kind of a reaction to that, I think. There exist some in-betweens though ("wide linear").

 

[Rikoi]

I'd much rather have open world games than ultra linear games which inevitably have the "oh shit the way forward is blocked, better go the long way around" trope.

That's an issue.Between a huge open world game or a limited linear game, if these two are the options, then I will always choose the open world game.
I hate all the fetch quests that are there just to increase game time and that add nothing to the game though.

The hyper-linear design that became so dominant last gen with all the CoD and Gears of War clones was really lame. The boom of open world games is kind of a reaction to that, I think. There exist some in-betweens though ("wide linear").

They were an answer to all the people that complained about developers asking 60$ for a 5 hours game.
Believe it or not, many people see this as a scam and there is a market for open world games that last long, making them feel worth their price.

 

[Fbh]

I definitely prefer more linear games with good level design. I've yet to play an open world game that gives me the same sense of rewarding exploration as Dark Souls.
But I do enjoy a fun open world every now then.

I hope next gen we see more interactive worlds with more physics to them. It's weird that Breath of the Wild on Switch of all systems has an open world that feels more interactive than the vast majority of the ones you find on more powerful hardware. Even simple stuff like being able to cut most trees or how you can set grass on fire and use the updraft to reach higher places was beyond what you get in a lot of other open worlds, which basically just function as a nice but static background.

Also, weird as it might sound, I'd like to see open worlds that make it harder to move around. One thing that always takes me out of it is when I can easily reach any place in the world. There's so many open worlds where a mission will tell you to go somewhere and you can reach that place almost literally just looking at your minimap, everything is so streamlined and automated that you basically don't even have to look at the game world to "explore it". In a game like Assassins Creed Odyssey it doesn't matter where you want to go you basically just need to hold down L2 and move the analog stick in the desired direction and the game will get you there.
Give me more physiscs, give me platforming with some skill or stamina management, make smaller but more intricate worlds where I actually have to look at the world and figure out a way to reach my destination.

 

[Woggleman]

Just make good games open world or otherwise.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Also, weird as it might sound, I'd like to see open worlds that make it harder to move around.

Give me more physiscs, give me platforming with some skill or stamina management, make smaller but more intricate worlds where I actually have to look at the world and figure out a way to reach my destination.

Death Stranding. You have a radar that overlays the terrain with blue (easy), yellow (challenging), and red (difficult/impassible) pips, showing you at a glance where you can go. You will often have to scale cliff-faces and cross deep rivers and you cannot simply bring 100 ladders and ropes.

 

[StormCell]

I find the modern game design paradigm to be what's disappointing. Publishers, and more specifically company stakeholders, have concluded that there's a lot more money to be made by having developers craft a huge sandbox setting with some content (think 4 year development cycle) and then once the game is out the development team, or perhaps a B team, will continue to churn new content into the existing product for more money. These are games with longevity, and it's easy to shoehorn in multiplayer modes.

If games can live on for 8 or so years with 4 year development cycles churning out new sandboxes, I figure the average open world game is probably earning much more than the average $60 msrp. Although I'm not sure how the market becomes such that I buy HZD Complete for $12 a year after its release... shrug.

Furthermore, consumer attitudes towards linear experiences or even replay type games doesn't help matters. There should be some sort of optimum price/type where it makes more sense to produce a Donkey Kong Country every year or two as opposed to once every 5 or 6 years. Instead, what i mostly see from gamers are remarks to the effect that said game should be about $5 and looks like a mobile flash game. lol Is it really any wonder why we're getting a lot of copy/paste open world games and not much else?

 

[Rikoi]

I hope next gen we see more interactive worlds with more physics to them. It's weird that Breath of the Wild on Switch of all systems has an open world that feels more interactive than the vast majority of the ones you find on more powerful hardware. Even simple stuff like being able to cut most trees or how you can set grass on fire and use the updraft to reach higher places was beyond what you get in a lot of other open worlds, which basically just function as a nice but static background.

Old but still relevant.

Spoiler

I wish more games would take open world interactions more seriously like BOTW does.

 

[Kamina]

As long as it is like Ghost of Tsushima i take open world all day every day.

 

[Makoto Niijima]

The bestselling games of the generation (RDR2, TW3, BOTW, AssCreed) are open world.
The highest rated games of the generation (BOTW, RDR2) are open world.
Most GOTY winners of the generation (Dragon Age Inquisition, The Witcher 3, BotW) are open world.

Sorry buddy, you’re in a hell of a minority.

 

[Abear21]

I think there’s too much information given to the player in open worlds. If devs just left the question marks and icons off the maps it would feel more realistic. I really think I would enjoy discovering these things on my own, or not at all, and have an experience without feeling like I have to go to a certain spot because it’s nearby or just to eliminate the marker off the map.

In fact, do away with overlays explaining everything as it comes up and tutorials entirely too. Just drop me in and let me figure it all out on my own, I think this would add a greater sense of discovery to an open world and actually make me want to walk around in it.

When you know there’s something to do to the right and a clear path of “nothing“ to accomplish to the left, I’m always going to go right. Stop telling me where everything is, make the world smaller and more dense, and I would love that open world way more than a sprawling one filled with icons.

 

[Makoto Niijima]

I think there’s too much information given to the player in open worlds. If devs just left the question marks and icons off the maps it would feel more realistic. I really think I would enjoy discovering these things on my own, or not at all, and have an experience without feeling like I have to go to a certain spot because it’s nearby or just to eliminate the marker off the map.

In fact, do away with overlays explaining everything as it comes up and tutorials entirely too. Just drop me in and let me figure it all out on my own, I think this would add a greater sense of discovery to an open world and actually make me want to walk around in it.

When you know there’s something to do to the right and a clear path of “nothing“ to accomplish to the left, I’m always going to go right. Stop telling me where everything is, make the world smaller and more dense, and I would love that open world way more than a sprawling one filled with icons.

You should play Breath of the Wild, since it seems to be almost exactly what you’re asking for.

 

[Redlancet]

Minecraft is still the open world standard to beat.

no its not,thank god

 

[Redlancet]

Old but still relevant.

Spoiler

I wish more games would take open world interactions more seriously like BOTW does.

i love open world gaming,even in the old amiga days with hunter,on the speccy with lords of midnight,so yes..i have played a lot of them and botw its one of the most boring ones ( of the supossed triple AAA) there is a lot of shit on that game that is abhorrent,but alas,is a zelda game so ten of ten

 

[anthraticus]

I agree, I can't stand open world games, too long, boring walking miles upon miles.

It's why we use to call em 'hiking sims'.

 

[Abear21]

It's why we use to call em 'hiking sims'.

Thank god for fast travel and next gen it will actually be fast. Ghost is the first open world where I walk and run around in it even though the horse is available.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

no its not,thank god

Whew, you've changed my mind.

 

[Redlancet]

Whew, you've changed my mind.

sometimes quick responses to a lot of nonsense are more practical,thanks mate

 

[Astral Dog]

Only open world games i had fun playing are Breath of the Wild and GTA, even Witcher 3 is a slog at times no matter how gorgeous it looks.

Well Xenoblade X too, mostly for the world and combat system but i just like it, the story and characters really suck

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

sometimes quick responses to a lot of nonsense are more practical,thanks mate

That's a funny way of admitting you can't type more than a few sentences at a time.

 

[TheContact]

I like "sandbox" games more than Open World, even though the two are sometimes used interchangeably. I'm still waiting for another game like Ultima Online that doesn't suck.

 

[GaviotaGrande]

The last open world game I enjoyed was Death Stranding. So almost a year with disappointment after disappointment in this regard. I hope CP2077 will break this chain of love.

 

[Redlancet]

That's a funny way of admitting you can't type more than a few sentences at a time.

nah,im a dev myself and i have worked on several games and your whole idea that the grial of open world gaming its minecraft its pure nonsense,minecraft is its own beast,a playgorund and a sandbox,but struggles in a lot of aspects that traditional gamers want,narrative its one of them,so everytime i read people like you talk in absolutes i always found funny,thats better?

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

nah,im a dev myself and i have worked on several games and your whole idea that the grial of open world gaming its minecraft its pure nonsense,minecraft is its own beast,a playgorund and a sandbox,but struggles in a lot of aspects that traditional gamers want,narrative its one of them,so everytime i read people like you talk in absolutes i always found funny,thats better?

And yet it is the standard that other devs continue to imitate. That's what "standard" means. I never said it was the holy "grial".

If you dev as well as you type, I can see why you'd spend your time trolling on GAF.

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

To me, it seems like more companies are chasing after a trend or what’s popular over what will actually benefit their games. Open world games are normally jack of all trades, master of none. Look at most bloated Ubisoft games, Dynasty Warriors 9 or even MGS5 for example. Sure, MGS5 was considered good by most, but I feel the game suffered in other areas compared to the old games.

Seems like most people equate quality to immense environments and extreme length which I feel can degrade the quality of the game if not executed well. Whoa!! This game has over 200 hours of content with missions, fetch quests and nonsensical side missions that don’t contribute anything to the story!!! GOTY!!! Well worth your money even though the gameplay is painfully average!!!! Look at all these missions!!!! GOTY!!!!

Besides linearity, I also like a good balance like Dark Souls, Sekiro, Nier or the TLOU2 where the game’s worlds feel large, direct and structured, but not overwhelming.

 

[Redlancet]

And yet it is the standard that other devs continue to imitate. That's what "standard" means. I never said it was the holy "grial".

If you dev as well as you type, I can see why you'd spend your time trolling on GAF.

i dont think anybody who is doing open world games have minecraft as a standar.maybe the "survival genere" but not ubi,sony or rockstar,so you are so fragile that not agreeing with your nonsense is trolling? good to know,btw english its not my first language i will love o to see u writing on mine,so wellcome to the ignore list

 

[tassletine]

Quality? Debatable.

Potential? Lol, no.

Lol. Yes.

It is, even on a basic things like how to apprehend a situation on games, combat or dialogue. It's not for nothing even the most cinema like games give you at worst a semblance of choice, like the telltale game.
Having a choice is a step in the right direction if you want to make a good game.

The choice of what exactly though? As we stand currently no open world game bests a single player experience on mechanics. They all have to sacrifice something. So you have the choice of driving or playing darts or punching people but none of those are done better than a single player title, currently.
I would like the choice of not having to drive to every location or even skip the story, but that isn’t given. The potential seems to be there to fill an open world game with gameplay as good as a single player experience but in reality there is a huge amount of downtime that would never be acceptable in a level based game. It’s not freedom.
Choice has literally nothing to do with quality — which is down to the time put in by the developers.
Look at the amount of games out there... so much choice ... yet you probably only play a tiny section of those titles, much like you only play a small sliver of a GTA, before getting bored.

 

[Gamernyc78]

Goes on to bash open world's being empty but praises botw which was so empty at points it was like a walking simulator.

I don't agree entirely with the premise, overall Sony and its devs have shown you can make a lush, open world game, with great story and enough npcs populated throughout the world to keep ppl engaged e.g. Horizon, Days Gone, Ghost of Tsushima, etc... Rockstar of course (although RDR2 bored me to death) also goes bonkers with detail, dynamic, well populated worlds tht keep ppl engaged which is why GTA5 is ridiculously popular.

Do I think every game should be open world? Helllllll no. I prefer my souls games and other games like tlou to be more linear and less open.

 

[PapyDoc]

Lol. Yes.

The choice of what exactly though? As we stand currently no open world game bests a single player experience on mechanics. They all have to sacrifice something. So you have the choice of driving or playing darts or punching people but none of those are done better than a single player title, currently.
I would like the choice of not having to drive to every location or even skip the story, but that isn’t given. The potential seems to be there to fill an open world game with gameplay as good as a single player experience but in reality there is a huge amount of downtime that would never be acceptable in a level based game. It’s not freedom.
Choice has literally nothing to do with quality — which is down to the time put in by the developers.
Look at the amount of games out there... so much choice ... yet you probably only play a tiny section of those titles, much like you only play a small sliver of a GTA, before getting bored.

Because everyone knows TES 1-5, Zelda BOTW, Witcher 3, Kingdom Come, Fallout New Vegas, Disco Elysium are not single player game No really I think you talk about Mutliplayer games like Fortnite, and that's not the discution.
I mean, look at the game I choose, every games are games based on choice, are Open World, are single player and quite awesome.

If I don't get your point, explain it better, please ?

 

[LarknThe4th]

Damn right, giant open digital bubbles bereft of bespoke design, honestly if you have played one open world game you have played them all(or at least it all too commonly feels like this)

The worse thing is the good open world games are open for a reason, GTA for instance, there is only one real genre that will service that design brief of exploring a giant piece of Anericana whilst soaking in its culture and pedestrians at street level

BOTW that's design brief was obviously they wanted to get back to the original, to simulate an ancient colourful land, and to knock it over the top they have all those environmental sub systems

But honestly, why did a stealth game like MGS need to go full open world, "ah yeah cool infiltration mission.... just need to run to the actual mission now, I'll get there... any minute now.."

I'm abit worried about the full blown open world of Elden Ring as well, like what does it bring to the genre other than change for the sake of it, and most importantly a nice bit of PR to throw around when on press tours

 

[Abear21]

Blame Mario64, we mine as well argue 2D side scroller versus 3D. It’s what’s in the game that matters and if the content is worth it.

Devs need to be more original with issuing the content, that’s the real problem. There’s definitely a sameness these days with the way we play. Collecting items in the world to Craft a bigger satchel to carry more stuff, rpg elements, trinkets or mods that affect stats, leveling up and perks, all these tropes have been copied to death.

 

[Fuz]

Developers suck. Not open worlds.

 

[tassletine]

Because everyone knows TES 1-5, Zelda BOTW, Witcher 3, Kingdom Come, Fallout New Vegas, Disco Elysium are not single player game No really I think you talk about Mutliplayer games like Fortnite, and that's not the discution.
I mean, look at the game I choose, every games are games based on choice, are Open World, are single player and quite awesome.

If I don't get your point, explain it better, please ?

The Star Wars series doesn’t get better the more films they make.

 

[devilNprada]

I think the complaint here is open world games need to give you something to work for...

A new weapon or piece of armor, maybe sandbox type of building materials etc.
Trophies and/or just clearing areas don't really cut it.

We don't really collect just for the hell of it. There has to be benefit, even if only cosmetic.

That's why we have played the traditional open world RPGS.

Blizzard gets us all addicted to doing the same repetitive shit over and over again, whether open world or not.

 

[Halo is Back]

Nah most OW games a great to solid. It just gets tiring exploring all of them because the are massive time sinks.

 

[Arachnid]

Agreed. Open world is shit 95% of the time.

 

[memphistora]

Agree with TS. i think the only open world game which is fun is HZD.

 

[Tschumi]

I tend to agree. Hit and miss genre. Far Cry 2 was the last good far cry rarrrr

 

[iHaunter]

Since when Uncharted and TLOU 1 are open world ?

They're not, I'm saying they give the illusion of open-world. I'm saying that linear games won tons of awards.

 

[Yoboman]

I always thought of the Arnhem games as the best example of a game getting more and more open but it not improving the experience

It went from well designed linear HUB where every bit of the level design was intricate and considered to a larger hub where it was still quite detailed. But still small enough for that hand crafted feel to shine through. By the time they went full open world it just got worse and felt like another copy paste city

 

[Lanrutcon]

Most counter productive OP I've ever seen.

Says open world games suck, opens his post with a list of multiple successful open world games.

Doesn't fucking matter what you think; the numbers say open world games are cash money because they sell. And they sell because people enjoy them.