/V/, why are open world games vastly superior to their linear cousins?
They aren't you retard
>>341946636
This
The only good open world games are the small ones with that are packed with shit to do. Like the Gothic games. There's plenty of other examples but you get what I mean.
>>341946636
>more replay value
>more freedom
>more dynamic
>less scripted
>more possibilities
Better.
>>341946897
Obviously more dense, content filled open world's are the way to go. Nothing beats a perfectly executed open world game
They are not. This is one of the few exceptions.
>>341946636
First post best post.
>>341948092
Open world
>See that mountain? You can climb it.
>hate this quest? You can skip it
>see that random event? We didn't script it.
With linear games, it can get much older, much faster. Plus sandbox elements go hand in hand with open world games.
>>341946636
i think they. linear games are boring.
They're apples and oranges. You can't really compare them because they try to be entirely different things.
>>341946636
They actually are
Any game can benefit from a well constructed open world, adds layers of immersion
>>341946584
Reminder that "open world" is a direct sacrifice of quality for the sake of quantity every time
>>341949183
Find me a well constructed open world that has all the benefits of a linear game. The only one I can think of is Shadow of the Colossus, it's structure works very well as an open world game, but lacks the depth of a linear experience.
>>341946636
Why else would every game series be/ have been converting to open world?
>Metal gear
>Legend of Zelda
>The Witcher
>Arkham series
Not to mention the countless other free roam games on the market that have high acclaim
>>341949406
Witcher 3
It was mostly story driven and the open world added a lot to it
>>341949448
To make money you stupid son of a bitch ignorant faggot niggerfucking cocksucking utter shitdweller
>>341949448
Because gamers are dumb sheep that think more must equal better. When it really means wasted resources on shallow content.
>>341949546
Witcher 3's best moments were tightly controlled sequences such as in HoS that had nothing to do with the open world.
>>341949448
Because it's hip with the teenagers these days, and the developer is judged less harshly when the actual level design and game mechanics are shit, because it's supposed to be a sandbox the player dicks around in.
I think open-world games are mostly terrible, and I almost never play them. I also look down on people that prefer them.
>>341949570
And the only reason why they know they'd make money is because open world aspects are more appealing than a linearly driven story.
Like 90% of open world games exist because they don't want to put out a game with an 8 hour campaign so they just put in a lot of repetitive quests to artificially extend the length of the game. It's a shame, because open world games can be great.
The five best games ever made:
Super Metroid
Ocarina of Time
FF7
Shadow of the Colossus
Super Mario Bros 3
None are open world. Coincidence? I think not.
>>341949737
Yes it still excelled at being a story driven game.
But the open world still added a lot of character and immersion to the game.
You can compare it to the previous games which had semi-open world
>>341949807
"Appeal" has no correlation to quality. None.
Cawadooty has immense "appeal." It is the videogame equivalent of a McDonald's chicken sandwich. Overwatch has appeal, too. it is the videogame equivalent of a McRib.
>>341950027
But SotC kinda is.
>>341950027
>"Muh opinions are fact"
Could you be any more retarded.
>>341950241
There are no "refined" video games take your head out of your ass
>>341950241
That's just great, but no one said anything about quality, just why developers are choosing the way that makes more money.
>>341949743
It's ok, the world looks down on people like you anyway.
>>341946584
Skyrim is the worst game of this decade so I would say it goes both ways
>>341946636
This. Some of the greatest games were linear level design.
>high attention to details
>secrets have some extra replay value
>unique settings and never an empty feeling
Not to mention most games that are linear pay more attention to not only the games story but also the gameplay because they aren't spending their whole damn time building a vast empty world the rehashes the same "side quests" and activities over and over. I understand the want for an immersive vibrant world, but it's kind of hard to enjoy a game that has really nothing to do in that world.
Although, some games are like a hybrid mix much like the new tomb raider that I found out to be very enjoyable.
>>341949448
I'll tell you right now that 3/4 of those games are garbage now and they've always been uninteresting rehashes. Metal gear is probably the only one that isn't and the newest one wasn't a excellent game, but it wasnt bad. The series itself was really good actually. The rest is shit
>>341949448
Witcher contracts and sidequests while moving around the world are the highlights of the game
>>341950947
ment to reply to
>>341950108
>>341950027
>Ocarina of time
Do you realize how over rated this game is?
Open world games:
>Most of the time feature boring "earth like" terrain. If i wanted that i would step outside
>Player and NPC's hit terrain issues, often hitting a patch were they're stuck in the terrain
>Walking, endless walking(which isn't fun)
>Copy pasted assets left and right
Liner games:
>Handcrafted and tightly designed for a purpose
>Playtesters will hit the same areas over and over, developers can focus and fine tune to a much higher degree
>Terrain is polished and geometry bugs are few and far between
>Enemy encounters are carefully created and well though out
If you're literally too fat to take a step outside, open world games are for you. If you actually enjoy hand crafted experiences intended to test you as a person, linear games are your thing.
>>341951436
That's all dependant on the developer retard. You know how many free roam games are fun, well crafted and uniaue, and how many countless linear games are boring, uninspired and dull? Plenty.
>>341951950
Of course it depends on the developer, what is your fucking point?
We're talking about generalities
>>341949448
>Metal gear
and is considerable worse off as a result. I would much rather have simply had a series of Ground Zeroes sized levels than giant sandboxes.
>Legend of Zelda
and it looks like shit
>The Witcher
and as a result the locations are more boring than they were in 2.
>>341952120
Not sure if it was you that posted it, but they were clearly speaking like that was the case for all games. The fact is, developers are getting better and better at designing open world games.
>>341952326
ground zeroes was more free roam than linear.
Lol get mad. It wouldn't have been number 1 at e3 if that was the case you contrarian wanna be.
Never liked the witcher, so I won't comment on that.
They're not superior or inferior. Besides the fact that enjoyment and view of quality are subjective, all the games have a spectrum of quality. The best open game is better than the worst linear, and the best linear is better than the worst open. Both are good and both are bad.
In short, shut the fuck up and stop stirring shit.
The best games ever made are mostly linear.
I think you know where this is going
>>341952790
A lot of those games were made back when tech couldn't support the idea of true open world. Plus, a lot of the best games are also open world, your point?
>>341952951
>Plus, a lot of the best games are also open world, your point?
Like?
>>341946636
/thread
Open world games are at best on-par. At worst, they are an empty landscape with "plenty" to do in the form of going from place to place, usually leaving the open world for an instanced location and doing stuff there.
But open-world on its own is not a good thing.
Example, Skyrim is not a good open-world game.
>Some groups patrol areas, in rare occasions, a group of Imperials may fight a dragon that loaded in cause you were near or a bear cause you were near
>There's a decent variety of shit to explore
>But for the most part, the world is pretty dead and everything is disjointed
>Far Cry 3 had a better open world and even then, just barely
I think people have too different definitions of linear and open world. Is Thief Gold considered linear or open world? The levels in Thief are not simple straight line paths there is a lot of intricacy, but it isn't really an open world sandbox there is a straightforward goal most of the time. You steal some shit and then get the fuck out.
>>341946584
>/V/
>>341953298
Thief Gold is Linear with good options of tact and level design.
You can do it one way or another, taking a variety of pathways to do it.
>>341953406
Okay, then I would say I like linear games better because it includes everything from Mario to Thief but open world only really includes certain kinds of games and I typically don't enjoy them as much.
>>341950027
>Super Metroid
Prime and Prime 2 were both better
>Ocarina of Time
Link to the Past and Majora's Mask were both better
>FF7
FF8 was better
>Shadow of the Colossus
Overrated as fuck, objectively a meme game
>Super Mario Bros 3
Good but not even close to being one of the best games ever
I know your post was bakt but you still made me reply
>>341953134
The elder scrolls series, the witcher 3, dark souls series, fallout series, gta, fable, the list goes on.
Bare in mind, this isn't depending on how you or I feel about these games. Each and everyone of these were successes and we'll received.
>>341953487
Open world are generally games where you can go ANYWHERE you want (or mostly anywhere) and do things as you please, in any order.
>Don't feel like doing Skyrim main quest line, go do some side quests or Misc. quests
Etc.
>>341953353
>that face
i legitimately feel bad
>>341953582
>The elder scrolls series
Marrowind? That's about it
> the witcher 3
Garbage gameplay
>dark souls series
You would call that "open world"?
>fallout series
New Vegas only
>Fable
Not open world
>Each and everyone of these were successes and we'll received.
That doesn't make them good games
>>341953535
>>Shadow of the Colossus
>Overrated as fuck, objectively a meme game
yyeep, stop posting
>>341946584
It's just the same shit with more space.
All kinds of games are fun anon
>>341953863
So you agree with me on two games. On top of that, dark souls IS open world, fallout 1 and 2 were great, and I'm pretty sure success and good reviews does qualify a game as being good, just because you're a hunch backed troll living under a bridge who disagrees with the world doesn't mean only your opinions are right.
>>341954414
>dark souls IS open world
not really, its a series of corridors.
>>341946584
>/V/
its /v/ you fucking idiot
Get out
>>341946636
fpbp
>>341947153
I played Skyrim for longer, but I think Dishonoured was still more fun
15 minutes in Dishonoured are more fun than 2 hours on Skyrim
>>341954459
Not same anon, but Dark Souls is open world. You can go at it however you wanton multiple playthroughs and your good enough
Because you are the lowest common denominator target demographic, without the mind to discern something which is actually good, or which took time or energy or thoughtfulness from something which is a randomly generated advertisement for its own sequel and made to pad out 40 extra hours of playtime
>>341946584
because you have ADHD
>>341954635
If mario 3 had all 8 stages unlocked from a fresh new game and you could do any stage in any order, it'd be open world then? Fuck off
>>341954459
With multiple passages, numerous connecting paths, large wide open areas and structures, no set path that you HAVE to follow, and numerous portions of the game you don't even need to explore to beat the game (eg ash lake, lake of cinders, etc.)
>>341946584
What do you mean by "linear"?
Uncharted "Cinematic experience" linear, or Halo/dishonored linear?
>>341954753
>Open world, free roam, or free play is an alternative term for video games where a player can move freely through a virtual world and is given considerable freedom in regards to how or when to approach particular objectives, as opposed to other computer games that have a more linear structure to its gameplay.
Fucking get lost you stupid mongoloid
>>341954815
Uncharted linear of course. Halo /dishonored linear still offers wiggle room for the player to explore a bit and have some fun outside of what the developers allow them to.
>>341954937
Well then the answer is because atleast those are games
Fucking Uncharted shouldn't count as a game, beyond MP, there isn't much replay value, no experimenting
>>341954773
There are a pretty small number of paths you can follow though, especially if you don't have the master key. For the most part everyone will go through undead burg first and continue from there pretty linearly. There is intricacy to the levels but it is still mostly linear. Even the end game only really has 4 branching paths.
>>341946584
Open world games give you room to dick around
The open worlds themselves are usually pretty shitty though mainly because devs use procedural generated everything in order to make those games, so a lot of it ends up being featureless and bland.
Skyrim is the only open world game that got the world right imo. Everything in it had unique places to visit that weren't generic buildings and landscapes generated by an algorythm.
>>341954639
Minecraft generation is starting to grow up
>>341954639
Because the nes would fry if it tried rendering a free roam game beyond the limits of the original legend of zelda...
>Open world
muh walking simulators
>Closed, linear world
muh cinematic experices
Fuck you all.
>>341946584
I think it really depends on what the player wants. It really comes down to "Do you prefer replayability/massive content or a compact/centralized experience?"
As long as the content is fun along the way I don't really care if it is open world or linear.
>>341957928
EDGY
D
G
Y
I've found that I universally do something very typical when playing open world games: I delay the completion of the main questline and I just roam around and do all kinds of shit and then level up. After all isn't this the point in open world vidya?
I dunno if it's just me, but that shit gets boring in like 10 hours tops, depending on the game's other merits. Take TW3 for example: vast world, much to do, some side quests are really interesting and you're able to find nice loot, etc. But it gets so repetitive after a while, even considering the great graphics, soundtrack and all the effort put in.
>>341955069
I've been managing to enjoy uncharted 4 for over a month.
I love to play around with the AI in combat encounters and see all the ways things can make things play out. I would do the exact same thing with all the good fights in TLOU. You try and make it look like the e3 demos; like everything that happened happened because it was pre-scripted to (even though it wasn't and you just played it to look that way)
>>341961413
>and see all the ways things can make things play out.
*and see all the ways I can make things play out.
-There is more content
-gameplay variety due to mixture of genres
-create situations that just can't be predicted
Overall they're a bang for your buck.
>>341964530
This.
>>341964530
They both can be good. It's a given that open-world gets you more bang for your buck in terms of replayability. But an open-world game can never achieve the same level of polish and detail in its open-experience that a linear game (of equal quality) could afford you in its 'closed' one. This is especially evident in the combat of open-world games. There is a reason why 99% of all popular competitive multiplayer games are linear.
I mean which has more depth to the combat, Battlefield or Grand Theft Auto? Okay, how about Splinter Cell Chaos Theory vs Skyrim?
They both have their merits. Linearity should not be a deciding factor in whether you get a game. Even games with extremely strong narratives like TLOU (another game with great MP) can be highly replayable, as says >>341961413
>>341964530
So open world games are basically pig slop of videogames. Tastes like shit, but there's ton of it, and it will make you feel full
>>341964530
>Overall they're a bang for your buck.
They give the appearance of that, but I've long since learned theres difference between a long time spent compulsively doing a task vs actually having fun doing it. MMOs are great at lulling you into a dull grind, sinking dozens if not hundreds of hours into them before stepping back and think "but was that really fun?"
My first run of Bayonetta may have lasted me no more than 10 hours, but those were 10 hours I actually felt awake and engaged in. 10 hours of excitement is a greater bang for my buck then 1000 hours of blandness.
>>341967535
>"but was that really fun?"
it was engaging. if you didn't think it was at least a little fun you wouldn't have played it, right?
>>341955551
Witcher 3 destroys all other open-world games.
>>341968716
>little fun you wouldn't have played it, right
Sometimes its kinda fun at the begging, but past a point its just addicting. Or you keep playing in hopes of recapturing an earlier moment of fun that doesn't come.
>you will never get to play your favorite linear game for the first time ever again
>>341952710
pmt
>>341966748
this
>>341946584
I've never finished an open world game but this >>341946897
To be fair I don't play a lot of RPGs
>>341950027
You missspelled
>xcom eu/ew
>xcom 2
>Mount and blade warband
>Total war FotS
>Borderlands 2
Your point is still valid tho.
