This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

How do you feel about the growing open world trend in gaming

#11pakathecatPosted 10/9/2013 9:40:43 AM
Love it, so long as the world is at least somewhat interesting. Exploration is on the top of my list of favorite things in games, and I just love wandering around aimlessly and finding all the little details devs put in. But, there are plenty of linear games I also love; it isn't a dealbreaker by any means not to be able to wander.
#12str8KnowledgePosted 10/10/2013 10:05:23 AM
I wish they would stop making big boring worlds and instead find other ways of nonlinearity or open gameplay. not just open world.
#13ohollywoodoPosted 10/10/2013 7:19:58 PM
Hate it. I find the peppering of side quests and collectibles detracts from the main story to the point that it's almost pointless. Batman City was a good example of this. Of course I could ignore all the side quests, but if they were easy to ignore then the developer wouldn't have done their job well! They want you to get caught up in everything and do it all...

I just don't enjoy it, and I think some games suffer from it.

I believe that the one game of late that did a good job of it was Tomb Raider. It wasn't really so much of an open world game, but it wasn't completely linear either. However I found myself very engaged in the story and moved along without pointless distraction..

Batman Asylum had a good mix too, for as open as it was..

Then again, perhaps it's not the open world I dislike as much as it's the poor writing of some of these games...
---
ooH0LLYW00Doo <-- feel free to add me
#14SkilzMC(Topic Creator)Posted 10/10/2013 7:27:33 PM
I agree with all the posters that want a happy medium. For instance in AC games I love the fact you can use your climbing abilities and all the space in the open world to find your own way about an assassination, but I don't want to chase down feathers or end up sprinting for 3 minutes just to start the next mission, that's just NOT fun.
---
"I wanted to buy a candle holder but the store didn't have one, so I bought a cake." -Mitch Hedberg
- GT Skillz MC
#15vigorm0rtisPosted 10/10/2013 9:27:32 PM
I think you have to make the distinction between an open world and a sandbox.
---
"'Grab the guns!' 'What about the troll?' 'Leave the troll.'"--ATHF http://i.imgur.com/D9R0iaQ.gif
#16necro00Posted 10/10/2013 11:17:34 PM
I find most of them to be a chore,
#17656stoogePosted 10/11/2013 1:00:37 AM
The problem is that most of them seem to have a ton of minor mini-quests and games that just aren't that fun, and the story is normally disjointed because of the open-ended nature of the game.

Take Arkham City for example. The story felt far too short IMO, and all of the side-quests felt like an after thought. Sure there was more content, but that content was of lesser quality than in Asylum (IMO).

I don't mind it when the games are full of interesting content (Morrowind) or the core gameplay is just really fun and the large world is there purely to screw around in (Just Cause 2), but in too many games it seems that the world is only bigger so they can say it is.

And to the guy that said just ignore them, it kind of sucks when a series you like goes open-world. That's like telling someone to get over the fact that their favourite band is now playing a different genre of music.
---
For want of the price of tea and a slice, the old man died.
#18murderinthedarkPosted 10/16/2013 11:59:20 AM
I liked it more 10 years ago. When I felt like I was exploring and there was treasure around every corner. Now everything is so carebear, hand holding, wishy-washy, which makes it a chore. And I probably have a hard time enjoying the genre when every game feels like the last.
#19hunter_gohanPosted 10/16/2013 12:37:13 PM
foodeater4 posted...
I don't think its a trend, its just something game designers have always wanted to do, but couldn't in earlier game generations due to the hardware limitations.


Beth's been doing it since Arena on DOS.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Qiz8e3si90

I wonder why nothing is moving in that video...

Lord British did it in 1981 on Apple II:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultima_(series)
---
The food that stands on his [Odin's] table he gives to two wolves of his called Geri and Freki. He himself needs no food; wine is for him both drink and meat.
#20simonbelmont2Posted 10/16/2013 1:23:43 PM
656stooge posted...
The problem is that most of them seem to have a ton of minor mini-quests and games that just aren't that fun, and the story is normally disjointed because of the open-ended nature of the game.

Take Arkham City for example. The story felt far too short IMO, and all of the side-quests felt like an after thought. Sure there was more content, but that content was of lesser quality than in Asylum (IMO).

I don't mind it when the games are full of interesting content (Morrowind) or the core gameplay is just really fun and the large world is there purely to screw around in (Just Cause 2), but in too many games it seems that the world is only bigger so they can say it is.

And to the guy that said just ignore them, it kind of sucks when a series you like goes open-world. That's like telling someone to get over the fact that their favourite band is now playing a different genre of music.


I didn't like Arkham City that much partially for the reasons you mentioned, I loved AA though!
---
and when he crossed the bridge the phantoms came to meet him