• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • Hey Guest. Check out the NeoGAF 2.2 Update Thread for details on our new Giphy integration and other new features.

I really cant think of an OPEN WORLD game that wouldn't be better as a Wide Linear one. Its time to leave Open World games strictly to R*

RyRy93

Member
Oct 15, 2020
143
157
255
I'd trade RDR2's open-world for a story half as long, wide-linear levels and better controls without even thinking.

R* open-worlds are the very definition of as wide as an ocean, deep as a puddle.
Lots of shit to do but it's all held back by a lack of gameplay depth and poor controls.

Impressive technically sure, no other dev could produce RDR2.
 
Last edited:

bitbydeath

Member
Nov 25, 2015
14,203
23,575
1,200
Represent. Represent. Days Gone leaves all other open world titles in the dust.
 

ReBurn

Member
Dec 6, 2008
12,280
2,831
1,240
SC USA
This trend goes way back to Burnout on the PS2 days. Burnout 3 was the last great Burnout title, as soon as they went to open world, with Burnout Paradise, the franchise became stale, samey, lost focus, and fucking died shortly after.

Hate to break it to you but the Burnout series had become stale prior to Burnout Paradise and I say this as someone who absolutely loves Burnout. Paradise was at least an attempt to mix it up a bit.
 

Rhazer Fusion

Member
May 2, 2006
10,867
2,188
1,510
In my own world.
m.youtube.com
Open world games are like the automobile.

Linear games are like the horse.

The industry only benefits by exploring open world innovation. The horse has long been beaten into the ground.

Embrace the automobile.
I think of linear games as a sports car and open world games as a big bus. Sure, the open world games are bigger, longer and more explorative, but imo their gameplay is usually just serviceable and since they are typically so long or bloated, it sometimes causes them to drag on. Linear games imo feel more structured, direct and generally feature better and tighter gameplay, but their exploration is usually more limited.

Personally, I like and always liked linear games better, but I don’t think leaving open world games to Rockstar is a good idea considering they seemingly make games like every 10 years. I do feel like the open world genre is getting way over saturated though.
 
Jun 1, 2016
1,249
1,433
610
In any game where there is a story that is meant to be taken seriously, it would be better told as a wide linear game. Especially with tight level design and amazing combat. Open worlds have no focus, save for a few.

Some genres I admit lend themselves to open worlds, but the vast majority of open worlds dont need to be open world.

Ghosts of Tsuhima would have been a masterpiece with tighter focus.

TLOU 2, God of War, SSX on 360/PS3, Uncharted 4, Crysis 2, perhaps dishonored
I didn't overly like most of those.
 

wOs

Member
Sep 20, 2020
99
84
225
This is a stupid Fucking topic and I'm glad you don't run a video game company.

To any game devs out there continue to make your dreams.
 

ZoukGalaxy

Member
Oct 3, 2017
207
195
270
LOL what about NO.

Rockstar is so far away from the best open world I enjoyed the most: Fallout 3 and Skyrim made by Bethesda, exploration is so GOOD and BETTER. And I just don't care about awesome graphics and outstanding animation and life everywhere. Rockstar open world are so BORING outside of the story.

And yes, Bethesda could be renamed Bugthesda but I don't care, I love how they craft their worlds.
 
Last edited:

harmny

Member
Oct 29, 2020
1,026
2,223
375
Hey open world NPCs I'm looking at you. You'd better have meaningful interactions with me or I'm going to spam this forum till I die or get banned
 
  • Thoughtful
  • Praise the Sun
Reactions: Kadayi and Roni

MagnesG

Member
Apr 20, 2019
2,807
2,150
485
Pretty disappointed with GTA5 open world, like 80% of the world are just window dressing.
RDR2 missions != open world interactivity is pure retard decision. "Mission Failed" for every off-mission interaction.

BOTW is still the best imo.
Immortal Fenyx copying it already made the game infinitely better on exploration based compared to ACs.
Genshin Impact copying it managed to make gachas into the open world market standards, easily garnering attention to the game.
 

WizeVibez

Neo Member
Dec 7, 2020
8
1
80
Red Dead Redemption 2 is Rockstar's first game since San Andreas that actually has more than just missions to meaningfully engage with. Most of the GTA series is either completing missions or causing chaos. At least Bethesda open world games allow players to engage with the game world in a multitude of ways. RDR2 is a huge step in the right direction for their type of game to allow more ways to engage with the world that feels as fun as just playing through the scripted storylines.
 

THEAP99

Banned
Mar 16, 2020
3,628
9,543
670
I agree with you. 95% of open-world games don't justify their existence as an open world. They're all the fucking same bloated crap!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Represent.

Dark Star

Member
Jan 14, 2018
1,094
1,336
565
I do agree that more games should be tightly focused and linear in design. They're just more fun and you can actually finish them in a timely manner. Most open world games are bloated with content, the maps are too big, and they take your average person like a year to finish lol. Whereas as nicely paced linear game will actually be finished in the "20 hours" it's supposed to take, because the player is on the edge of their seat totally engaged moment to moment, chapter to chapter. Resident Evil games are a great example even though there's a lot of backtracking and you're given a lot of space to make your own playstyle choices.

But I do think many developers do open world just fine compared to Rockstar, and there should be strong competition to make them more refined. I personally just don't enjoy the slog of many open world games, including Rockstar games like RDR2. Boring, loose story/missions, no reason or desire to finish it. It's been installed on my PS4 since November 2019 and I've yet to get even past the 4th chapter lol. I just don't have the time or energy to traverse that huge map and get sucked into hour long missions that are only 0.5% of the main story. It's so "meh" even though the writing and graphics and everything else is top notch (well, everything aside from the sluggish, clunky, heavy and stiff controls)
 
Last edited:

Cyberpunkd

Member
Dec 16, 2020
833
1,312
405
Assassins creed. Watchdogs. I don’t give a fuck. Witcher. Fallout. Skyrim. Spider-Man. Ghosts of Tsushima. All Ubisoft titles.
Ballsy claims there.

For one thing I give Rockstar credit - nobody does convoluted control schemes like they do - RDR2 is pure garbage here.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Kadayi

UltimaKilo

Member
May 17, 2006
5,354
664
1,525
Florida
I’m sos sorry that OP has missed out on so many games like GoT, Xenoblade series, Zelda, heck, even Sea of Thieves, that they have no idea what they’re talking about. Sad!
 

Sentenza

Member
Dec 3, 2011
14,780
2,137
970
It's a stupid claim, but not without some (incidental) merit, because a lot of "open world" games as the triple A industry imagines them are actually bloated shit without a single care in the world about making their sub-systems work properly.

That said, I STILL generally disagree with the notion that linearity makes for a better game. If anything, the opposite. I can't think of any excellent linear game that wouldn't gain something from a revamp expanding its horizons and inserting more systemic core mechanics (environmental navigation, NPC behavior, etc) rather than scripted moments.
STALKER would be a better game if the "Zone" would be a seamless environment rather than a series of separate maps, Vampire Bloodlines would be an even better "vampire sim" if exploring LA and interacting with more than a handful of major characters was a bit more seamless, etc, etc.

Some of the greatest RPGs of all time (Gothic 2, Risen 1, Ultima VII) shine precisely when their sub-systems allow for spontaneous emergent narrative over pre-scripted interactions.

On a side note, one thing I'm absolutely confident about is that almost any modern game would be immediately better without their fucking bloated itemization systems inspired by the dreadful looter shooter genre.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CleverCaviar

Icymanipulator

Neo Member
Nov 27, 2020
42
48
145
West coast
It’s too bad the OP didn’t actually form any argument of substance because this is a
worthwhile subject. Also, formatting your post spacing for emphasis is cringe. Make a good argument, not a fancy looking post.
 

Kathanan

Member
Jul 20, 2015
126
42
340
I think the problem is that the maps gets bigger and bigger.. keep the map size like in GTA IV and pack it with stuff to do.
 

Aidah

Member
Jan 6, 2019
1,119
1,236
385
Rockstar makes good looking dense open worlds with a lot of cool simulation. Then they don't know what the to do with it and you end up with generally uninteresting gameplay and activities.

While I agree that a lot of games use open worlds in order to be able to substitute quantity for quality, when I think about games that made the best gameplay related use of the open world concept, Rockstar games wouldn't get a mention.
 

Business

Member
Mar 22, 2018
656
1,073
430
Wide linear tries to go for best of both worlds but personally it feels like worst of both worlds. Not a fan.
 

Bartski

Member
Jan 15, 2020
1,836
4,093
550
Katowice
My main issue with open-world games is usually the economy and how heavily exploration is incentivized by the need to collect tons of trash aka "resources" to then sell or use for crafting to make progress, instead of environmental storytelling or just handcrafted, unique, and interesting locations.

I'm not saying there should be no resource collecting etc, it's about the balance and how as a player you are being conditioned to automatically focus on scanning the environment for pick-ups, rather than curiosity and sense of visiting an interesting place in the game.

Too much pointless shit to pick up too few interesting things to see and experience in short.

edit:
Also, simulation and emergent systems become more important the more "open" the world gets, and depend on what kind of freedoms the game provides the player with.

The game simply needs to accommodate for the fact you're able to drive a car into a crowd or start shooting at NPCs, so the world reacts to what you do in a way that doesn't take you out of the experience. Which to me seems way more difficult to achieve in a modern or futuristic setting than a medieval or wild west setting just to use that one hot example of recent.

This is where wide linear games excel as they generally provide the player less freedom, therefore execute on the limited freedom they give in a more accurate and convincing way.
 
Last edited:

GigiFusc

Member
Oct 18, 2017
322
179
300
Strange point of view. I’m hoping it’s more a bit of light heartedness as opposed to you really believing it’s true. Seems incredibly tunnel visions to me.

oh also wanted to add that I find linear games af. I end up stopping them after the first few hours.
 
Last edited:

Represent.

Member
Jun 22, 2010
3,113
3,139
1,010
Rockstar games are literally the best example of games that should not have been open world dude.
I have no idea how one could ever come to this conclusion. Especially comnparing it to other games in the genre...
I’m sos sorry that OP has missed out on so many games like GoT, Xenoblade series, Zelda, heck, even Sea of Thieves, that they have no idea what they’re talking about. Sad!
None of those games are special. Especially bland ass Ghosts of Tsushima.
It’s too bad the OP didn’t actually form any argument of substance because this is a
worthwhile subject. Also, formatting your post spacing for emphasis is cringe. Make a good argument, not a fancy looking post.
"Cringe"? Go back to Era lol. This was a rant, not an argument.
I make my shit easier to read so people actually read it. And my rant made perfect sense. Its all laid out in bold.
How about you read it.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: UltimaKilo

brokenduck

Member
Dec 20, 2018
921
580
340
Bethesda’s games are perfect for open world, especially the way they support robust modding. I played at least 400 hours for every one of their single player rpgs. 350 hours dedicated to modding the open world and character. Unless they are not badly done like death stranding or cyberpunk, I usually love playing open world games than linear ones.
 

Guilty_AI

Member
Apr 12, 2020
3,420
6,031
680
I have no idea how one could ever come to this conclusion. Especially comnparing it to other games in the genre...
I explained one line below. They're useless for what their games usually focus on, which is linear storytelling.

The only way they're good most of the time is if you like wandering around for hours doing nothing or hunting for easter eggs, in the case of GTA also exploding stuff.
RDR2 should've been set in smaller hub areas similar to Yakuzas and Deus Ex's.
GTAs should've developed game systems similar to what they did with GTA2.
 

Umbral

Member
May 7, 2020
1,532
2,687
390
Because they are the only ones that get it right, consistently. They simply just do it better.

This trend goes way back to Burnout on the PS2 days. Burnout 3 was the last great Burnout title, as soon as they went to open world, with Burnout Paradise, the franchise became stale, samey, lost focus, and fucking died shortly after.

Rockstar Games like RDR and GTA, they are quite frankly the only developers that get open world RIGHT.

Almost all open worlds are lifeless as fuck. NPC's are always janky and goofy in their movements. They say stupid shit, have terrible AI, towns are always empty and quiet. Layout is trash. Repetitive missions. Lack of intensity and a sense of urgency in the story. HUGE, REPETITIVE maps, collectathons, big for the sake of being big. Overly bloated with copy and paste content. Open world game design is Corporate trash meant to check off boxes.

Assassins creed. Watchdogs. I don’t give a fuck. Witcher. Fallout. Skyrim. Spider-Man. Ghosts of Tsushima. All Ubisoft titles.

None of these dudes can make an open world like Rockstar. And it's time they stop trying. Focus your gameplay and narrative and produce Wide linear games. Games will be better for it.

Other devs simply don't have the R* magic. None of their open worlds are even close. None of their graphics are worth a damn when you compare it to RDR2. CDPR had fucking 7 years to make a competent, living breathing city, and the citizens in that city cant even drive around a stopped car. Pathetic really. Just focus on wide linear.

The stories they're trying to tell are all worthless in comparison to what R* does.

You ever get lost for hours in these other games not doing missions? Just driving around the city and taking it in, taking in the world? Going on cop chases. Marvelling at random events? You ever do that in other games? Nah. You don't. You go right to a mission or side mission. Theres nothing else to do in these "open worlds".

What the fuck is there to do in Horizon Zero Dawn? The world is literally lifeless and has absolutely no personality or character to it. So WHY is it open world? It would be a much more impactful and memorable experience had it been a tighter one.

More focused wide linear with great level design, less bloated disasters with zero focus and repetition. Do it right or just dont.

/rant
If you are going to tell a story, linear or wide linear is best. You are correct there.

If you are going to go open world then one goal that is far away and then having a bunch of intertwined systems that the player can mess with is perhaps a better option. I hate that most open world games are just filled with collectibles and menial tasks to do in between story beats. Survival games do well with open world because it’s about exploring, building, surviving, etc. You always have something important to do.
Open world games are like the automobile.

Linear games are like the horse.

The industry only benefits by exploring open world innovation. The horse has long been beaten into the ground.

Embrace the automobile.
Horses are better at going off-road than a vehicle, unless that vehicle is specialized for it. Horses can go anywhere, they’re a metal gear made of meat.
 
Last edited:

GloveSlap

Member
Dec 28, 2007
2,055
335
1,180
Nah, theres plenty of good open world stuff. Just because Rockstar can afford to have to have 1000 people work on something for 10 years doesn't mean that level of detail is the bare minimum. Quite the opposite actually.
 

TheMay30thMan

Member
Aug 23, 2018
618
993
440
I think that Fallout 3, New Vegas, and Skyrim have the best open worlds in all of gaming. I know that’s incredibly controversial, and while I believe it to be true, if only Bethesda was allowed to make open world games, well... That’d be boring as hell.
 

Clear

Deer/Dur
Feb 2, 2009
12,345
7,078
1,365
Sorta curious, what exactly do people expect from an open world these days?

Also how does the world being an urban sprawl versus a sparsely populated wilderness factor in?

What I mean is there are plenty of huge real-world locations that really don't contain much at all apart from terrain and wildlife. Would accurately modelling those sort of places not be sort of cool (say Antartica) even if they didn't really justify quest and event markers popping up around you like mushrooms?
 

Tommi84

Member
Nov 15, 2013
644
143
530
Driveclub was THE best racer of last gen solely because it wasn't open-world, but nah. Dropping, open-world to Rockstar only would suck