Support NeoGAF

[plutoknight]

I think I'm quickly becoming a fan of the open playground instead of the open world.

This seems super weird, but, well, FFXV made me like this, too -- I almost wish the game was a series of smallerish, "open" areas instead of a big open world. It would've made the 2nd half of that game a little less obvious, and I think the pacing would have benefitted from it. You can see they tried that with how the land opens up, but I think it ultimately failed.

Actually, this is how I see modern MMOs handle their quest design -- WoW and FFXIV do this to varying degrees. You take a big open area, divide it into, say, 4 chunks, give each chunk a purpose, and have the story progress inside of those chunks. The "open" world gets smaller, but it's more focused.

FFXIII's Archilyte Steppe is a good example of this, too, I think.

But, I think there's a lot of benefit to thinking small in open world games nowadays. The scale and "content" don't do much for us, anymore -- there needs to be a meaning behind it all.

 

[Kayhan]

Gothic 2 NotR is still the prime example of how to do an open world right. No filler or padding. Decent size world that is well designed, interesting to explore and full of content. The Stalker, Risen, and Divinity series of games also do it very well.

How do I upvote this post into the heavens?

Only thing I would add is that these games could have larger and emptier worlds and I would probably love them even more.

 

[More_Badass]

He is wrong you know.

Open-world games don't have to be stuffed with ACTION THINGS TO DO in order to be compelling.

Size is a quality all by itself. Trekking and exploring is its own reward.

Immersive, exploration-based huge open sandbox worlds are The Holy Grail of Gaming™

And Fast Travel and minimaps is not allowed.

Stuff to do and busywork can also hurt the game. The more focused Mafia 2 versus Mafia 3 is a perfect example of this. Noah Gervais' analysis of the Mafia series really made that clear, and made me appreciate Mafia 2's approach even more

Totally. Especially the Ezio games were pretty great about this.

Partially why I dislike the series going more modern. I still want a Sengoku era Japan Assassins Creed. Ninja Assassins and Samurai Templars, it writes itself

 

[Ooccoo]

I remember writing reviews or just playing games thinking 'this is too linear.' Now I wish games would go back to being less sandboxy in design.

 

[JORMBO]

TW3 is a good open world. MGSV was not. I agree with the video that some games would be better off if they remained linear.

 

[Jito]

Well, good for you. But that's not what Jim is saying here from what I could gather from actually watching his video.. He mentioned several titles that are doing it right, no?

This seems awfully defensive, what gives? And from watching the video he is complaining about the over abundance of lazy open world games so your absurd defensiveness is for nothing.

 

[Neoleo2143]

I had a blast with Xenoblade X's superb world design though it's quest design wasn't the best at all. Different open worlds excell differently.

 

[TheBowen]

Can't watch video at the moment, but this has been something thats annoyed me

feels like the huge success of gta v has made game devs change there game to open world, either because they feel gamers want it ( which judging by some games, they do) or in order to just check it off there to do list

Its why im loving games like dishonoured, doom, and persona for detailed areas but keeping it tight and enclosed and filling the world with lore and gameplay options

Thats why games like hitman and yakuza are interesting me more then things like ghost recon wildlands

Feel like most open world games just add 10-15 hours of needless walking thriugh dull worlds

 

[brinstar]

I think I'm quickly becoming a fan of the open playground instead of the open world.

This seems super weird, but, well, FFXV made me like this, too -- I almost wish the game was a series of smallerish, "open" areas instead of a big open world. It would've made the 2nd half of that game a little less obvious, and I think the pacing would have benefitted from it. You can see they tried that with how the land opens up, but I think it ultimately failed.

Actually, this is how I see modern MMOs handle their quest design -- WoW and FFXIV do this to varying degrees. You take a big open area, divide it into, say, 4 chunks, give each chunk a purpose, and have the story progress inside of those chunks. The "open" world gets smaller, but it's more focused.

Yeah, I wanted this too. It's more or less the format of the original Xenoblade for Wii and I really liked that. It still gives the feeling of being on a quest in a vast world but still manages to retain a feeling of moving forward through a narrative.

 

[Fantastapotamus]

Gothic 2 NotR is still the prime example of how to do an open world right. No filler or padding. Decent size world that is well designed, interesting to explore and full of content. The Stalker, Risen, and Divinity series of games also do it very well.

Yeah, to this day I still remember how to get from the town to the monastery. Fucking sheep. Gothic 2 is a masterpiece and not enough people know about.

Partially why I dislike the series going more modern. I still want a Sengoku era Japan Assassins Creed. Ninja Assassins and Samurai Templars, it writes itself

I'm shocked that we haven't seen Japan so far (not counting those 2D games). I also think Russia could be an amazing location.

 

[Harmen]

While I found some AC games to have bland open worlds, some of them are actually very good in their own way, despite the shameless collectible bloat (which I usually ignore). Especially AC3 and AC4 had a great variation of locales (despite AC3's many, many problems, I really loved the mixture of smaller towns/settlements, forests, and sea).

My personal worst offender is MGSV. The design itself was great, but they really should've just made the varying locales separate, smaller open worlds and not recycle every relevant piece of the map to death during missions. It should've been something like a series of Ground Zeroes sized maps (or a tad larger) with more meaningful/directed storycontent inbetween.

This seems super weird, but, well, FFXV made me like this, too -- I almost wish the game was a series of smallerish, "open" areas instead of a big open world. It would've made the 2nd half of that game a little less obvious, and I think the pacing would have benefitted from it. You can see they tried that with how the land opens up, but I think it ultimately failed.

Agreed. It also would've enhanced the sense of journey a lot, I feel, by separating the chunks with a longer (story filled) linear trip or something. Now getting from one side to the other is just a short trip while rocking a classic FF tune. Don't get me wrong, I really liked FFXV, but its open world design with quests having the player go all over the map did detract from the road trip vibe the story was aiming for.

This is something The Witcher 3 also does great. The first time going to a new separate area (Toussaint, Kear Morhen, Skellige) is always introduced trough a mission and a series of cutscenes. After that, you can fast travel all you want, but this structure allows to maintain a certain integrity of the story.

 

[Tuck]

Glad to see a big name talking about this. Rarely are open worlds used effectively.

 

[Jarmel]

Fully agree with the video, I've created a thread in the past about this. It's really a blight on the industry at this point.

 

[DXB-KNIGHT]

I had a blast with Xenoblade X's superb world design though it's quest design wasn't the best at all. Different open worlds excell differently.

Yeah the overworld here saved the game for me 😂

 

[Brandon F]

Xenoblade had this too, I found. While the world was beautiful, I realized quite quickly that there really isn't all that much to do in it. At least you could teleport to places you needed to be at quickly. Did they address this in the sequel?

To be fair, Xenoblade felt more like a linear trek across 'wide-spaces' than an open world. You are gated by narrative constantly and outside of tidying up sidequests through backtrack warping, the world felt rather straightforward.

Xenoblade X however does feature a more unified world, one with a conceit that plays smartly into its design(humanity introduced to a new home and learning about the harsh unknown land). You can freely explore almost every inch of its landmass at your leisure from the get-go. Some progress is gated by design of earning a mech to reach higher ground or by means of some story segments or player level. Yet the open-world was truly realized compared to the large linear journey of the first game. You can undergo quests that take you to entirely unique regions throughout its progression if you so desire and it works well. UI is a bit insufficient though despite the use of two screens which is a real problem(but fast travel is largely similar to the first game. Discover a point and freely warp from then on).

 

[Glass Rebel]

Jim is on point about "content" in the form of busywork and collectibles. Ubisoft is fucking terrible at this.

 

[More_Badass]

TW3 is a good open world. MGSV was not. I agree with the video that some games would be better off if they remained linear.

I think the Witcher is amazing, but I think it suffers in areas as well. Especially in being a witcher and slaying monsters. I like the different monster designs and concept of prepping for battle, but the overall structure becomes rote after your first dozen

Witcher does a good job at defining Geralt's character through gameplay (no classes here, he's a sword-slinging mutant badass) and story/writing, but the "tracking" is very weak. It isn't tracking. It's "examine the necessary objects then follow the markers to the next objective you unlocked"

And you could do more with it. Ideally, I'd wish the monster hunting was more like Dragon's Dogma where the creatures and big beasts aren't mainly found in just quests, but roaming the world.

That part in the beginning where he cuts the griffin and then follows the blood wouldn't be scripted, but an actual gameplay tactic you could do. Or have special crossbow bolts that drip glowing liquid/visible smoke.

Monsters could have certain diets (just like they have weaknesses) and you'd have to hunt specific animals or buy herbs and chemicals to make bait to lure a monster out.

Stuff like that

 

[Rexatality]

I fully agree with Jim on this one. It upsets me there are some people who think games with open non-linear level design like Dishonored, Deus Ex and Hitman would be much better as open world in the vein of Elder Scrolls/Fallout or Ubisoft open world games.

Seriously, get the hell out with that bullshit.

 

[Griss]

That's the best part about Ubisoft games, especially Assassins Creed. Nobody else explores or recreates those eras and places with that kind of detail and polish. Honestly I treat the AC games as historical tourism with a side of murder

I can absolutely enjoy a good linear game like The Last of Us or Uncharted.

But when I'm shopping for a new game, the thing that's in my mind is visiting some new massive world. I reckon many people feel the same, and that's why open world games have done so well over the last decade.

I fudge it, though, in that I consider any game with large interconnected levels - any Metroidvania - to also be open world as it scratches that same itch in my mind. So the Soulsborne and Metroid series both qualify in my mind, though I know that's not accurate to how others see them. I even see Alien Isolation in that same vein.

 

[ArgyleReptile]

This is why Saint's Row 2 is still my favorite open world game of all time. Not even it's sequels lived up to the world. There was always something to do, little secrets to find, and the world felt alive, with NPC's doing all manner of things.

I love open world games, but, lately, they have felt rather empty.

 

[Zomba13]

I want to say, as much shit as Ubisoft deserves for their bland openworlds full of the same thing over and over, they did a great job in Watch Dogs 2. The side quests were actual side quests and while a lot of them did follow the same kind of mechanics as the main missions (hack this point with the drone or physically, solve this maze thing etc) there were stories tied to each mission and those stories were interesting enough that I did all of them except the "paint billboards" and "hack ATMs" ones because I got the ida from those two after doing two of them because they were the same old Ubisoft idea of "do this one thing a billion times all over this map".

OH, and the collectables (of which yeah, there are a bunch of) only show up when you are close, so while there are sprays and t-shirts and money all over the map, you only know about it whne you are close and it becomes less of a "welp, time to slog through getting all these collectables" and more of a "oh, there is some money close and I could use some money" so I felt more inclined to try and get that stuff.

 

[R_thanatos]

That's the best part about Ubisoft games, especially Assassins Creed. Nobody else explores or recreates those eras and places with that kind of detail and polish. Honestly I treat the AC games as historical tourism with a side of murder

True in the case of assasin creed but i feel that it's untrue with watchdogs or the division.

At least watchdogs 2 put actual content on the map that time , but the division shouldn't have been open world IMO because it's one of the best exemple of open world that was boring as heck

 

[Soulblighter31]

Yeah, to this day I still remember how to get from the town to the monastery. Fucking sheep. Gothic 2 is a masterpiece and not enough people know about.

it was extremely popular in europe, almost to the point of religion in some countries. But seems that americans never really got the wind of it. Its really strange. I mean it should have been like Witcher 3 is now. Sequel to one of the best games of its kind ever made. Expansive. Richly detailed. Open ended world, go anywhere, do anything. Its better than Witcher 3 in nearly every way honestly. You know how most people say they liked the story in witcher 3 but than say the gameplay is poor and combat very poor. Gothic 2 has god tier gameplay in adition to the best designed world, solid combat, factions, quests. Its a masterpiece.

 

[Neoleo2143]

True in the case of assasin creed but i feel that it's untrue with watchdogs or the division.

At least watchdogs 2 put actual content on the map that time , but the division shouldn't have been open world IMO because it's one of the best exemple of open world that was boring as heck

At least until Survival mode recontextualized it into something really great.

 

[metalslimer]

There are only a handful of developers that can afford to do an open world right and if it's coming out yearly then it isn't one of them. The thing is in the AC games they create such a great sense of atmosphere that I want to be there but it's a shame I can never replay these games.

I was actually thinking about no more heroes recently and how much I hated the open world, but at least they had the kindness not to litter the game with a bunch of meaningless crap. I would rather barren over meaningless which is what I hope Breath of the Wild does.

 

[More_Badass]

True in the case of assasin creed but i feel that it's untrue with watchdogs or the division.

At least watchdogs 2 put actual content on the map that time , but the division shouldn't have been open world IMO because it's one of the best exemple of open world that was boring as heck

Actually, been really enjoying Division's world. Wintry ruined post-exodus New York is a refreshing change from the usual open world version of Manhattan, and it oozes atmosphere. I almost never fast travel because I like the feeling of moving through these streets, cutting through buildings, and alleys, the tight car-choked canyons. The lack of extranous side stuff is a plus IMO. Plus the missions that pop up do give it a dynamic feel that I like

 

[Sanctuary]

I think the Witcher is amazing, but I think it suffers in areas as well. Especially in being a witcher and slaying monsters. I like the different monster designs and concept of prepping for battle, but the overall structure becomes rote after your first dozen

It also absolutely murders the pacing of the narrative. That's one thing I just couldn't reconcile while playing through it. Do you logcially follow the narrative, which is actually fucking urgent, or do you play the "Witcher Simulator", which is what 95% of the "open world" of the game actually is?

 

[IcyRhythms]

Someone gifted me The Division during the current(about to end)Steam sale and I think I may love that game. A lot of these open world games have felt empty with fuck all to do, but that's not what keeps me playing. As long as there is a lot to do in terms of main missions and a few side quests, albeit repetitive, and the visuals/surrounding world keep me immersed, I'm there. I actually bought the season pass for The Division a few hours after playing and I NEVER buy season passes.

 

[BumblebeeCody]

FFXV and MGS V open world is a joke, it's empty as fuck, especially MGS V

But in a world full of monsters roaming around you're expecting the world to be populated outside of Insomnia? This is a part of the world where civilization is outside of the wall and therefore it would make sense to be quite barren. I haven't played MGS V but if you look at the context of the story, I'm sure some could argue the same.

What is the issue exactly? That FFXV is too empty but Assassins Creed has too much? Also maybe people should spaces these games out? Last year I played Fallout 4 extensively, then throughout all of 2016 I've played everything else but "open-world" game. Then a year later I started up FFXV which is a different take on exploration but I'm not burnt out on it because I don't play these types of games all the time.

 

[More_Badass]

Someone gifted me The Division during the current(about to end)Steam sale and I think I may love that game. A lot of these open world games have felt empty with fuck all to do, but that's not what keeps me playing. As long as there is a lot to do in terms of main missions and a few side quests, albeit repetitive, and the visuals/surrounding world keep me immersed, I'm there. I actually bought the season pass for The Division a few hours after playing and I NEVER buy season passes.

Here the "empty" feeling is thematic appropiate which is kind of why I feel it works. Also the side quests and missions are all focused towards a single overarching goal, so it comes across as more cohesive. Your goals as a player and the missions available coalesce

 

[Griss]

It also absolutely murders the pacing of the narrative. That's one thing I just couldn't reconcile while playing through it. Do you logcially follow the narrative, which is actually fucking urgent, or do you play the "Witcher Simulator", which is what 95% of the "open world" of the game actually is?

Looking for Ciri was clearly important, but not urgent. It wasn't urgent because
a) There was no deadline on it, and
b) Your leads were extremely vague and the search was clearly going to take a month no matter what you did.

It wasn't inconceivable that Geralt would do some side work while his leads were cold etc etc. That never bothered me. Once Ciri is found and things actually get urgent, then you're locked into the story missions as you should be.

 

[danowat]

I think it depends on the world in question and how the core mechanics feel to the individual.

Take Mafia 3 for example, many people have, quite rightly, denounced the game due to its poor mission structure and repetition.

But me, I love it, I find the setting, driving and shooting mechanics and soundtrack just so compelling.

 

[Shredderi]

Good topic.

Used to love open world games, now I am sick to death of them.

Same, I'm still looking forward to Horizon: zero dawn for the setting alone but I have no doubt it will have the same trappings that other open worlds have, but I think I can muster enough motivation to trek through it's gorgeous and atypical gameworld.

FFXV and MGS V open world is a joke, it's empty as fuck, especially MGS V

Fucking PREACH brother. Making an MGS game be open world is propably the worst thing I can think of to do to a MGS game.

 

[Peltz]

Glad he said it.

As a Nintendo gamer, Xenoblade was one of the best RPGs I've ever played, but the repetitive side quests really stand out as a major flaw in the otherwise amazing game.

XCX was too open in comparison, and it really felt like there was no compelling content in there. Everything felt so empty and vapid, and there wasn't much of a journey in that game (at least in the 35 hours I played of it).

I'm cautiously optimistic about Breath of the Wild though. The environmental manipulation demonstrated makes me hopeful that traversal becomes a major aspect of the gameplay and that the world is designed to make it interesting.

 

[Lagamorph]

Holding up GTA V as an example of a Sandbox filled with things to do is utterly hilarious. It's one of the worst examples of an empty sandbox around once you leave the southern third of the map.

 

[IcyRhythms]

Here the "empty" feeling is thematic appropiate which is kind of why I feel it works. Also the side quests and missions are all focused towards a single overarching goal, so it comes across as more cohesive. Your goals as a player and the missions available coalesce

Yes. Agreed

Disagree with Jim a lot here. I suppose that has a lot to do with me loving a lot of these open world games, Ubi's included.

 

[Anung]

MGSV's game play loop of reconning an area, and planning your attack from your decided direction is incredible.

Unfortunately the map did not live up to the game play potential.

Oh I totally agree. Although I'd argue the game play loop is diluted and rendered boring/frustrating by the FOB, opening credits, helicopter waiting and unintuitive wandering to actually get to the good gameplay. I tried to play it recently and by the time I got to the gameplay I was just pissed off. The fact the base level design is weak for the most part just wastes all that gameplay potential.

I'll still find it baffling Jim will slate most open world games yet MGSV has some of the blandest, checklistiest and repetitive missions in the world and gets a free pass. Christ I remeber in his review he said that MGSV isn't padded out with filler content. I cannot agree with that at all.

 

[Kthulhu]

I agree. Too many games put very little content into their maps. Also a lot of these games have boring worlds in general, and some have the audacity to not have fast travel, making it all the more frustrating.

 

[Assanova]

He is on point. I could care less about repetitious open world games. Give me something to do in them.

 

[SilentRob]

TW3 is a good open world. MGSV was not. I agree with the video that some games would be better off if they remained linear.

I don't get this comparison. MGS V is a mission-based game, where you chose different levels from a menu. Yes, these levels are connected with a big Hub World you can optionally run around in, but it's not an open world in the same sense as games like Witcher 3. It's all menu-based and each mission is separate from the "open world". Rise of the Tomb Raider is more of a Open World Game than MGS V is.

 

[Emperor_Uriel]

I'd still take a good open world game over a good linear one any day, but we do have an abundance of bloated nonsense.

Morrowind is still the GOAT for me in a lot of ways, Dragon's Dogma as well. The lack of fast travel meant those worlds were tougher to explore and thus tougher to conquer. Questing didn't feel like a checklist, you really had to think about where you were going and commit time and resources to challenges.

 

[Polygonal_Sprite]

I wonder how many people will apply this criticism to Breath of the Wild.

The difference is that you will have the choice to ignore it if you want and go straight to the dungeons (I'm sure Reggie said you can do them in any order even going straight to the final boss).

So many open World games force you into doing the bland and boring side missions to progress through the story.

 

[muteki]

I have a pretty negative opinion on open world games, but I don't really play the games that are more naturally suited to the format. The only ones I have played are in franchises that are not historically open world and in each case I think those games were worse off changing formats and taking all the compromises that come with it.

 

[bj00rn_]

This seems awfully defensive, what gives? And from watching the video he is complaining about the over abundance of lazy open world games so your absurd defensiveness is for nothing.

At least my post wasn't just a big stinking pile of ad-hominem..

I fully agree with Jim on this one. It upsets me there are some people who think games with open non-linear level design like Dishonored, Deus Ex and Hitman would be much better as open world in the vein of Elder Scrolls/Fallout or Ubisoft open world games.

Seriously, get the hell out with that bullshit.

Is anyone actually saying that though..?

FFXV and MGS V open world is a joke, it's empty as fuck, especially MGS V

For some reason I never felt that MGS V was actually open world, more like somewhat large open spaces.

 

[ViciousDS]

God I am so glad he fucking mentioned Ubisoft and the zooming out of their maps.

Assassins creed and far cry 4 both were shit off within hours of me getting the game due to how much shit liters the fucking map just so you can go and collect it.

Witcher 3 doesn't do that. Outside of a few points of interest the game pretty much is littered with amazing side quests with their own stories and actually has an excuse for their open world due to how good it is.

Wild lands or whatever the hell its called is an instant wait for me since it looks like it's going to be another bore as fuck Ubisoft world where it's big for the sake of being big.

 

[family_guy]

Yep. Ultimately that was what hurt FFXV for me. Open World hurt the game in many, many ways.

Jim didn't specifically mention burn out, but I'm definitely burnt out on them.

Final Fantasy series was pretty much open world to begin with. That's what the world map was.

 

[M.W.]

Love me some open worlds.

 

[Jito]

At least my post wasn't just a big stinking pile of ad-hominem..



Is anyone actually saying that though..?



For some reason I never felt that MGS V was actually open world, more like somewhat large open spaces.

What is your position then? That they were wrong to say they're tired of open world games? Isn't that their opinion, how would you know how they feel? You're getting called out for being a dick, deal with it.

 

[plutoknight]

Yeah, I wanted this too. It's more or less the format of the original Xenoblade for Wii and I really liked that. It still gives the feeling of being on a quest in a vast world but still manages to retain a feeling of moving forward through a narrative.

I can't believe I totally forgot about the original Xenoblade during that post! Yes! Xenoblade handles this very well. Xenoblade X almost does it, too (I feel like XCX could've used a little more railroading though after a certain point -- I think Chapter 4-5?)

That's another thing that open world JRPGs love to do -- here's a few chapters of narrative then BAM open world -- then BAM oh a narrative again.

Agreed. It also would've enhanced the sense of journey a lot, I feel, by separating the chunks with a longer (story filled) linear trip or something. Now getting from one side to the other is just a short trip while rocking a classic FF tune. Don't get me wrong, I really liked FFXV, but its open world design with quests having the player go all over the map did detract from the road trip vibe the story was aiming for.

This is something The Witcher 3 also does great. The first time going to a new separate area (Toussaint, Kear Morhen, Skellige) is always introduced trough a mission and a series of cutscenes. After that, you can fast travel all you want, but this structure allows to maintain a certain integrity of the story.

I haven't touched Witcher 3 yet (just picked up the complete edition), but that's good to hear. I feel like, with FFXV, they wanted you to have this "long road trip between quest areas" filled with banter and good times and that road trip feel. But then the game mechanics fight against that -- the long travel times, 'fast travel' (with long-ass travel time loading), and the lack of expository banter.

 

[Greatest Ever]

Yep, the problem definitely lies within integrating them well within the gameplay. MGSV does this brilliantly with its outposts, but then falls flat for miles between them. If anything the sheer popularity of them shows that instead of trying to flat out eliminate them, we should actively try to improve them. A good sandbox is always a sign of good player involvement, key for an interactive medium.