The State of Open World Games, Your Thoughts?

DISCLAIMER: I love video games and I don't want to come across as one of these whining "what is happening to my favorite hobby" kinda of people. I am simply wanting to see how other people who love video games (that's why we're here, right?) feel about these things. I'll try to keep this short. (EDIT: or not)

Long-Boring History (Read at Your Own Risk) of My Love and Dislike of Different Sandbox-Open World Games:

I love open world-sandbox games. My favorites being third-person ones. I also love arcade racing ones and like first person ones. My question is why do some open world games feel great and others not so much? I've been gaming for about 20 years (didn't get into gaming until I was 7 or 8) so I know that I do not need a review or other people to know whether or not a game is good. While I have often agreed with reviewers, other times I have disagreed. I watch gameplay videos to see if a game looks like something I'll enjoy.

I never played a Grand Theft Auto game (the grand-daddy of open world video games). I did not enjoy the first Assassins Creed. But loved the second one. It is the first game I platinumed. Assassins Creed: Brotherhood was also amazing and I loved the one-big-open-world without the smaller areas all connected by fast travel points. I love Burnout Paradise. It remains one of my favorite open world racing games to this day.

I love Red Dead Redemption. I love Batman Arkham City. Perhaps some of the best open world games to date. Engaging stories, fun things to do, lots of loved poured into each of those games. Both were some of the most engrossing games I have ever played. I enjoyed the infamous games because of the powers and abilities of the character where as the open world elements never felt up to par. The Amazing Spider-man was fun thanks to the webslinging and great robot-boss fights in the streets of NYC. Sleeping Dogs was tons of fun thanks to fantastic combat, a great story and robust driving. Elder Scrolls: Skyrim was another wonderful game I sank hours of my life into even though I never played an elder scrolls game before it. Kingdoms of Amalur was another fun game that never made me wish I could fast travel because the combat was engaging and the rewards for exploring were immense.

However, Assassins Creed III, Need for Speed: Most Wanted and Batman Arkham Origins were all fun, they each felt lifeless. AC:III had interesting ideas but were in my opinion sloppily executed. With so many new ideas it easily felt like one of the worst Assassins Creed games. NFS: Most Wanted felt like a complete copy and paste of Burnout Paradise just with cops which was fun but otherwise the game seemed to completely lack soul. BA: Origins had a fantastic story but the game-play just felt like a sloppy copy and paste with a few meaningless tweaks.

I never enjoyed the Far Cry games but I platinumed Far Cry 3, that's how much I loved it.

Assassins Creed 4: Black Flag was a master piece it totally felt like a breath of fresh air for the series. I sunk far too many hours into that game especially with the open-world-sea-ship combat. The story was needlessly terrible but the game was so fun that it didn't matter. Need for Speed: Rivals took what was fun from Most Wanted (2012) and Hot Pursuit (2010) and remains one of my favorite Need for Speed games to date. Watch Dogs was fun because it overcame the "formula" with fresh ideas such as the hacking and the fun side activities/missions. Infamous: Second Son was fun again because of the powers and the cool-engaging combat and not so much because of the open world missions. Shadows of Mordor was tons of fun due to the engaging combat and nemsis system, I loved that game and recently platinumed it as well.

Ok, the end of the history lesson...Back to Present Day...

(Summary of above, I love open world games even though there have been some duds.)

Earlier this year we got the Amazing Spider-Man 2 that was somehow baffling a step down from the first Amazing Spider-Man game that felt slapped together without care. Now I'm playing Assassins Creed Unity and it just feels somewhat formulaic. The open mission design is fun, the co-op has tons of potential but overall it just lacks anything fresh or engaging. I also popped in Far Cry 4 and it also feels formulaic. It feels that developers were forced to make sequels and without interesting-new stories But when I think about it there are other games that felt generic or formulaic that I had tons of fun with such as Batman: Arkham Origins, Need for Speed: Most Wanted (2012), Infamous: Second Son all lacked either good stories or anything really new to the table yet I completed them all and for the most part had a lot of fun. What is about open-world games (whether action, adventure, rpg or racing) that allows them to be fun or prevents them for doing so?

Does it take time to explore the world, level up your character, start to see progression that hooks you? If Assassins Creed Unity or Far Cry 4 seem boring after only a few hours will that change after ten hours once the story has had a chance to sink it's hooks into me and the sense of leveling-up-and-progression has got me working towards the next upgrade? Is it just that some games don't have enough fresh ideas or just that certain games don't connect with certain gamers?

What open-world sandbox games do you like, which ones did you love and which ones left you feeling "meh"? For the love of video games, I want to continue to love games and will continue to play unity and far cry 4 to see if it just takes time and investment to experience the "oh snap" moments and get engrossed into the game. I will always love video games and am loving all the open world sandbox games we're getting. But what is the future of open world video games?

Well... I do want to come across as whining, but I'l keep it short. ;)

Open World games have been shitty ever since their inception, particularly because of the heavy scripting and linear design of Campaign Missions.

But The Phantom Pain is coming and all will be made right ! :p

Well... I do want to come across as whining, but I'l keep it short. ;)

Open World games have been shitty ever since their inception, particularly because of the heavy scripting and linear design of Campaign Missions.

But The Phantom Pain is coming and all will be made right ! :p

I think devs have been a little too focused on adding too much without fixing the mechanics. That, and reducing the context of each activity you're able to do. Open world games are less about narrative and more about exploring and uncovering the world yourself. If devs can make exploring more engaging and allow the world to let you make your own story within its lore and have it mean something to the overall progression, then these game will get better.

I am really enjoying Far Cry 4. I have sunk a lot of hours in to it and I am not even half way with the campaign missions . I have just been enjoying the stuff you can do around the world.

What makes a brilliant open world game is the depth of feeling the fictional world evokes in me. I really liked Infamous: Second Son, but it didnt quite scratch that itch. The world looked good, but too much of it seemed closed off. It may also have something to do with the fact that you can essentially fly everywhere and don't get a full sense of the atmosphere on the ground.

Opposite to that you have the new DA game. Everything seems alive and open and doesnt seem to care that you are there. People are just going about with their lives and this really pulls you in to the game.

I think an awesome open world game needs to a) make you believe in the fictional world and b) be entertaining.

Good read, chief

@mastermetal777

That sounds like a novelist's approach... I think Open world games can do better than Exploration and Discovery.

The progression, the leveling up abilities, the freedom to go wherever is what hooks me.

Im really enjoy AC unity and Far cry 4 because of this. I spent so many hours in both games and Im not even close to touching the main missions yet.

@marcheegsr

"The progression, the leveling up abilities....."

Linear games have that. Infact games with absolutely no perceivable world have that.

@Lulu_Lulu: You're confusing an open world game with a sandbox. There is a difference between an open world game and a sandbox game. Without exploration or discovery, and open world game falls flat. A sandbox game just allows you to let loose and have fun with everything they're giving you. And sandbox games are wide open from the start, whereas exploration based open world games open up the more you explore and progress. It's a common mistake, confusing those two types.

Ubisoft can't be bothered to fix the mechanics of the AC games, but instead, want to prevent people without mobile devices from completing their games.

@mastermetal777

Yes, and whats left once you've discovered every nook and cranny ?

The only reas an open world game would fall flat without those things is because they have nothing deeper underneath the experience of seeing stuff for the 1st time.... Its all flash and no substance.

An Open World's game's true trump card, is the complexity of its ecosystem and how it factors into completing your objectives.

A single level from Hitman Absolution has far more depth than GTA V and all of its 5 minute Distractions.

Shadow of Mordor and The Phantom Pain are on the right track, more so than The Witcher, which I assume the only reason they opted for such a large world is for the sake of Discovery and Exploration.

@speedfreak48t5p

Damn, this whole app thing is really getting on your nerves.

I can empathise, I'd like to 100% an RPG without leveling up and Upgrading anything.

@Lulu_Lulu: it only works when they pack content that's worthwhile instead of empty space. And Hitman suffers from aggressive linearity at points, even with all the possible execution methods in some sections. Can't say about Shadow of Mordor though cuz I haven't played it yet.

@mastermetal777

You mean like loot and gear or a pretty building or some type of dungeon?

@Lulu_Lulu: as long as it keeps the player busy instead of pushing them through. Hate when open world games don't let me go where I want for the sake of the plot. Let me explore and find something to do. Let linear games or choice-based games handle a narrative driven gameplay experience. I just want to do stuff in an open world and be a part of that world as I play.

Yeah, I think two things about open world games needs to change. 1) There needs to be less repetition. Instead of a tower/viewpoint opening up the map, maybe make each district/area open through a different method such as finding a map, interrogate an informant, take over a stronghold ETC. In fact just change up the missions in each area so that they're NOT so predictable/repetitive etc. 2) There needs to be more player-centered story such as approach how you want (without needless linear-mission-obligations-fail-if-you-step-out-of-line-restrictions) such as better openness and giving the player the ability to approach everything as they see fit with more response from the game (such as the nemsis system).

@mastermetal777

Thats what we all want, but it would be better if it had more to offer.

And it doesn't just apply to Open World games, its at the very core of game design.

@jasonredemption

I partially disagree about the Repetition thing but you hit the nail on the head with the freedom of completing objectives

@Lulu_Lulu: more does not always equal better.

@mastermetal777

More what, specifically ?

Or are you just making a hollow statement ?

@Lulu_Lulu: you're talking about content, correct? More content doesn't always make a game better. I'd rather a game play well based on its genre than be able to do more with simply serviceable gameplay.

@mastermetal777

Depends, we still haven't established what "content" means exactly.

@Lulu_Lulu: besides the obvious "stuff you can do within the game as an activity" definition?

@mastermetal777

Well then, that should be determined on a case by case basis.

@Lulu_Lulu: And that's more obvious to people and developers than you realize.

Open world works great for many things but I find it also causes as many problems.

I have yet to play a FPS where the open world is as good as more linear shooter.

Obviously I want a world that feels fun and engaging, with tons of side activities to distract me, but I also still love a good looking environment like in Far Cry 4. The game also has to give me a lot of tools to use to have fun. If i'm just placed in the world but don't feel like I can go out and cause chaos, i'm going to get really bored really fast, and thus the game has failed its goal

@mastermetal777

And yet Open World games are still quite shitty.

@Lulu_Lulu: they're flawed, but they're not bad. I love a lot of open world games. Hell, one of my all time favorites is open world.

@mastermetal777

Nope... They're bad....

@Lulu_Lulu: only to you. They're not objectively bad by design. Just because you don't like them doesn't mean they're a bad genre. Flawed, yes (all games are inherently flawed due to human error), but not bad games at all.

@mastermetal777

I guess I just have higher standards and am not as easily fooled by gimmicks.

And I never said I don't like'em nor did I say they were a bad genre....

And I totally agree about the human error part.... That human being you, not me.

@Lulu_Lulu: all humans make mistakes, and you're no less susceptible to them than anyone else. And errors happen even to the best games. And I love when people use the word gimmick cuz half the time they're using it wrong.

@mastermetal777

Yes... But they don't make mistakes all the time or at the same rate.

As for the word gimmick, feel free to replace it with "filler content".

The Amazing Spider-Man 2's biggest mistake was forcing you to respond immediately to street crimes, or be deemed a menace if you don't. That greatly stifled exploring, swinging around just for fun and looking for comic pages. The rest of the game was fine, but I seriously loathed the crime fighting to the point where I didn't even bother with it anymore.

OP, if you love sandbox games, you need - absolutely need - to play the GTA games. I'm having a serious blast with GTA 5 right now.

@JustPlainLucas

So if you're deemed a menace, do you lose anything ? And if you let people get beat up and robbed then aren't you a menace ?

Better now than ever in history. Remember Omikron, Deus Ex..etc. You had these large open areas with nothing in it and very little detail and was made large only to serve as a way to kill time in traveling. Today we have lush and rich details, far more NPC's and greenery.

What's needed imo is more improvements to A.I. and fully destructible environments.

@Lulu_Lulu: filler content is the exact opposite of a gimmick. If it is a gimmick, it is a selling point that is advertised to gain publicity for any form of media. Not all gimmicks are bad, since every game technically has its own gimmick.

@mastermetal777

I know.... I was using it as a placeholder until I could find something that fits.... Hence "Filler Content".

Task force starts hounding you, and for every level of menace, they get worse. It becomes really annoying. The thing is, sometimes when you stop a crime, two more crimes in progress on the other side of the island expire, so you actually lose progress right after stopping a crime.

@Lulu_Lulu: and you use the wrong word and concept, which created confusion.

@JustPlainLucas

Thats terrible game design. :(

@mastermetal777

I thought you wouldn't mind.

@Lulu_Lulu: you don't know me at all then

Haha.

@mastermetal777

I don't think you know yourself either considering I made the same argument when you told me your abysmal definition of what a game is.

@Lulu_Lulu: I know myself very well. It's you who doesn't seem to comprehend that you're not the most intelligent person on this forum. You feign intelligence with your problematic logic and your frightening clinging to outdated gaming definitions and design philosophies. And say what you will about my definition of gaming. Lots of people have my same idea about what a game should be, and that probably just rustles your jimmies so much you just can't rest until everybody sees it your way and your way only. I don't care what you think of me, I'll say what I want on the hobby I love, and you can't do anything to stop it. Lots of people have their ideas about what games are meant to be. Which is why you see so many games trying to do different things to please different audiences. Nobody all likes the same thing, and that's a great thing when it comes to gaming. Just accept it and give up your pointless crusade.

@mastermetal777

I never claimed to be intelligent, and since you still think you're right because more like minded people agree with you then I don't need to make that claim.

I've been playing a lot of the GTA V re-release, so this topic comes at a great time for me to express my aggravation. I suppose this is mostly directed at V, but could be generally applied to mostly all open-world games out there.

V, despite its technical accomplishments, has not done much to expand upon the basic foundation that was built 17 years ago. Many of the game mechanics remain sloppy and/or poorly executed, the mission structure is the same as it's always been (go here, do this, go here, do that), and the formula is familiar. It's frustrating to see such attention paid to every detail of the game world to give such a sense of freedom, yet then be precluded from having much of a say on anything. All R* does is fill their worlds to the brim with shallow, theme-park bullshit (skydiving, stunt jumps, hunting, collect-a-thons, mountain biking, SCUBA, etc) to compliment a very narrow and linear script, yet don't let the player alter the world. I await the day a GTA game arrives that gives me real options.

I want my own Scarface desk to sit down at my mansion to grow my power and run the land through intimidation or corrupt political/judicial sway. There needs to be an underlying infrastructure in place to truly take advantage of what R* has created and to give power that extends past the barrel of a gun. That's where real power resides. I understand this would be no easy undertaking (to put it lightly), but if you had told me 10 years ago we'd have seen a world so fully realized and alive as GTA V portrays, I'd have laughed at you. That was no easy undertaking, yet R* pulled it off. It's possible, and in fact R* has taken steps towards this: the drug mini-game in Chinatown Wars, the stock market V brought into play which allowed the manipulation of share prices by destroying the properties of respective opposing businesses on the map, and heists, which allowed for a tailoring of player style to take on missions. This is what's needed, but they need to centralize these mechanics into one cohesive, underlying, central core system that supports a narrative gameplay focus that progresses the story.

• allow me to extort shops for "protection"
• allow me to run a black market, smuggling drugs and weapons through the ports and adjust the prices on the streets, and set-up major deals
• allow me to hire crews to do hits or intimidation on reluctant "participants"
• allow me to bribe city officials (police, politicians) and infiltrate their organizations
• allow me to buy businesses and run them
• allow me to run drug dealers and hookers and place them on street corners

Etc, etc....

This series, despite its amazing breadth, is really starting to feel like a prison more than a playground. GTA is not much past the merest of illusions, and it's unfortunately one so impressive that it is obscuring gameplay shortcomings that have remained mired in stagnation for years. Even worse, reviewers and gamers are so blown away with each release by the technical prowess on display here that they are blinded to the lack of real gameplay progression that would make it the game it deserves to be, and thus immediately throw out 10s and accolades without a second thought. Hence, giving R* no imputes to improve on anything past the superficial. Just imagine what GTA could be if there were real options the player could do that would truly affect the world to meaningful degrees.