OPEN WORLD
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /v/ - Video Games
You are currently reading a thread in /v/ - Video Games
>OPEN WORLD
Have any of your favorite games been ruined due to this meme?
>Witcher 3
>MGS V
>Dragon Age Inquisition
>soon to be Final Fantasy XV
>>341940573
Final Fantasy 1-3 were pretty open for its time. Then they started focusing on narrative with 4.
Open world is fine, unless it's a shitty Ubisoft style open world game which has you looking for hidden gems or crafting materials or doing fetch quests (e.g. Far Cry, Assassins Creed, Dying Light, etc)
Dragon's Dogma.
Not ruined, really. But I would have preferred if they made the whole game just dungeons. Everfall and BBI were the best parts of the game, but you spend most of the time running around in a huge, empty open world.
>>341940573
Witcher 3 was the greatest open world of all time, actually. Who thinks it was bad?
Agree with MGSV and DA:I though, those games had terrible open worlds.
XV is ruined already and it's not because open world.
>>341940573
Fallout primarily.
Final Fantasy was already ruined once they got rid of Turn-based combat.
>>341940573
How old is that female?
Open world is not inherently bad. only ubisoft and bethesda open worlds suck. I would just like more linear games. Variety
>>341941451
IMO the ONLY aspect of Bethesda games that doesn't outright suck are their worlds.
My favorite kind of game so no.
Open world makes everything better.
I love open world!
>>341941451
>Morrowinds open world sucked
this is an objectively wrong statement
>>341941037
open world is never fine. the game will suffer from being stagnant over time.
Overall, the quality of the game will suffer just to accommodate open world.
Graphics will suffer because the game has to be big. Animations and NPCs can't be unique because doing that would take too much time and not reach deadlines. Writing and quest progression will sometimes not work as intended because once a project because so large, they will have a bunch of people working on it and the overall message gets lost in translation. Explanations tend to not make sense, the world starts to lose its composure and you have a wacky zany anything goes world. And you have bugs because there are so many things going on and the workers are too busy trying to make deadlines that they may not have enough time to find and fix bugs.
tl;dr - open world is bad.
Soon to be Zelda
>>341941810
idiot.
>>341941927
every single zelda game is open world.
>>341940573
FF was ruined way before the open world meme was a thing.
>>341942119
SS is not
>>341940573
Burnout Paradise.
Honestly, could have worked if they would have added boundaries around the racing line. I hate using a fucking map while playing Burnout.
>>341942021
>mods
also who cares? GTAV wasn't even that good.
>>341942284
>mods
That's an official screen shot of the base game on PC.
I actually like open world stuff because it's fun to just run around and see stuff happening/do whatever you want in a huge open space. However after the main campaign there's usually almost no incentive to keep playing other than uninteresting side missions or challenges so I just get bored and stop. See JC2, MGSV, DAI, etc.
>>341941810
You're completely wrong. Open world shouldn't be shoehorned in where it doesn't belong, I agree-and when developers are unprepared can undercut the story. But it's absolutely necessary in certain genres-survival for instance- in which linear is just a clusterfuck.
>>341942383
>>341942682
open world is bad for RPGs. GTA and other survival shit are not RPGs.
>>341942682
survival games are shit anyways. what is the point of doing all that when you don't have a good reason for it?
you play an RPG to immerse yourself and finish the sotry.
you play a racing game to beat everyone and to be the fastest.
you beat people in a fighting game.
but what of survival games? you do it because it tells you to and there really is no reason to continue playing it.
It depends on the execution. If in the world the places you go, and the things you find are given purpose and utility based on the area you're in then it's ok. Or it could be something you're hunting or trying to find like a rare enemy encounter. If it's executed that way then it's a wonderful thing to have. How this is done, the purpose of your travel, the rarity or use of the things you find all add to the experience.
Zelda 1 and 2 coincidentally executed (for the time) having a large world very well. There were places to go, rare things to find on the overworld, and places to visit and find that made the experience and search worth it. Even the NPC's told you where to find hearts/magic containers in the world, or even where secret tiles were (this is where special needs handholding-era Zelda fans come in, calling it cryptic because they dont have the attentionspan to read).
If it's pointless, annoying, point A to point B fetching/long winded travelling then you have a rather large problem. Or, another example. If it's just a big open world for the sake of having a huge world then it's a waste.
I feel however these threads are going to pop up often now to spite the upcoming Zelda game and slide the thought of a open world into negative view (which is why I mentioned the first 2 games) so you can fuck right off. The timings too coincidental.
le contrarian face
>>341942798
All the best RPGs are open world. Opinion discarded.
>>341943014
>My opinion is objective and representative of all views
I hate racing games, and as such wouldn't give 1 shit if they were all destroyed and ceased production, and yet I don't bitch about them and claim no one enjoys them, you dumb fucking retard.
Some games kind of require open world, even if it's not the best. You can't really have GTA or TES that's not open world. The problem recently though is that every fucking game is open world regardless of if it really needs it or not. This is because we're progressing technologically to the point where devs can do it for most kinds of games without as much sacrificing in other areas. I'm hoping it's just a "cool look what we can finally do" thing and it stops eventually and goes back to depending on what kind of game you're making.
>>341941561
Exactly.
There's nothing wrong with linear design, but if you're building a mapped out world, nothing's more disappointing than being led down a corridor to another corridor like a rat in a maze.
>>341941810
You're not an idiot, and you clearly don't like open world/sandbox, but everything you're saying is a lack of confidence in imagination of designers.
if they can't hack an open world game, they're probably not good at linear game design either.
and there are plenty of lousy games in either type of map design. but it can be done, has been done, and will be done, better and better, over time, for both design styles.
>>341943065
People have been bitching about open world since MGSV, I doubt it'll increase substantially because of console warring retards
>>341943065
>It depends on the execution
well it seems the japanese devs are recently getting into it and they are worse than the western devs at it. MGS V open world was completely unnecessary and added nothing to the game.
but i guess we'll see how FFXV and zelda turns out.
>>341943265
>>341943873
hub design is more proper and easier to do
>>341944916
The problem is, MGSV did open world as described by the second problem. It was just "there" for the sake of being there, but it fell into the same problem all consolized titles do which is "WOW ITS A OPEN WORLD BUT WE HAVE MOUNTAIN BORDERS SORRY :(".
>>341947875
I don't think it's a console issue. What are some PC games you're thinking of that don't do "lol we're on an island" or mountain borders like you're complaining about? There have to be limitations and besides those two I can't think of much better ideas to limit player movement.
>>341940573
Witcher 3 was done well you nerd, as far as open world can go. DA:I was doomed no matter what and I will agree that open world killed MGSV before it could live.
