Anyone else hoping next gen breaks the trend of AAA open world exhaustion?

[D3athsting]

Was thinking the same as op while trying dmc5 the other day, "finally some old school tunnel game that all you need to do is launch it and have fun without having to push M key every minute"

[Katchii]

If done correctly, like I feel AC: Odyssey, Horizon Zero Dawn, Spiderman, and Ghost of Tsushima were (haven't played the others on the list) I absolutely love them and wouldn't mind more coming out. The worlds feel huge, lived in and organic and with all of the little things to do everywhere and with fast travel options to places you've already visited I never feel bored or that I'm wasting time by exploring/ traveling.

- - - Updated - - -

Was thinking the same as op while trying dmc5 the other day, "finally some old school tunnel game that all you need to do is launch it and have fun without having to push M key every minute"

This is true too, though. But as I said I don't feel burnt out on the open world games.

[Cosmic Janitor]

Open world is a good thing if you can pull it off.

[kail]

It's a baseline so of a 1st/3rd person game is linear, it's often considered a con.

[PACOX]

I have no problem with open world games, and I really wouldn't say all of them are truly open world. What we use to call an overworld is now being called open world.

RDR2 is open world, there's very few things restricting you from going where ever when ever. God of War 3 has a large overworld but it's not open until you progress so far into the game

[jackofwind]

Since the introduction of open world games, I am less interested in linear experiences. There are exceptions of course (like Dishonored). And open world per se does not automatically means it will be good.

I find that open world games are generally the linear layout of a more traditional game, just with big expanses of fluff around them. Wither 3 is a great game, no question at all, but even it suffers from a huge amount of the world icons being completely non-memorable things like smuggler's caches and the like. AC: Black Flag suffered from much of the same - you just get inundated with a shitload of recycled content thrown onto a big map for the simple sake of there being more things. Nevermind that most of those things are repetitive, boring, and end up being so similar to one another that you can't even really tell them apart anymore.

As awesome as Wither 3 is, I finished Witcher 2 and immediately wanted to play through it again and again for the split storylines, and I enjoyed that a thousand times more than looking at a big fucking map full of locations to visit only to find out that abut 80% of them are the exact same thing in a different locaton.

Bloat is bloat, and open world games are super susceptible to it. It's not a net-zero for me, it really detracts from the game - much the same as bloat on an album detracts from the album experience. I don't want to want to skip in-game stuff, and I don't want to want to skip tracks on an album. Both should be tight and finely tuned, but these days the average open world game feels like a mid-90's prog album - 4 or 5 phenomenal songs mixed with another 4 or 5 that serve as nothing but filler to inflate the album length.

- - - Updated - - -

It's a baseline so of a 1st/3rd person game is linear, it's often considered a con.

Which is wild considering that the vast majority of iconic RPG games are linear, even if they have an overworld.

[Baine]

I find that open world games are generally the linear layout of a more traditional game, just with big expanses of fluff around them. Wither 3 is a great game, no question at all, but even it suffers from a huge amount of the world icons being completely non-memorable things like smuggler's caches and the like. AC: Black Flag suffered from much of the same - you just get inundated with a shitload of recycled content thrown onto a big map for the simple sake of there being more things. Nevermind that most of those things are repetitive, boring, and end up being so similar to one another that you can't even really tell them apart anymore.

As awesome as Wither 3 is, I finished Witcher 2 and immediately wanted to play through it again and again for the split storylines, and I enjoyed that a thousand times more than looking at a big fucking map full of locations to visit only to find out that abut 80% of them are the exact same thing in a different locaton.

Bloat is bloat, and open world games are super susceptible to it. It's not a net-zero for me, it really detracts from the game - much the same as bloat on an album detracts from the album experience. I don't want to want to skip in-game stuff, and I don't want to want to skip tracks on an album. Both should be tight and finely tuned, but these days the average open world game feels like a mid-90's prog album - 4 or 5 phenomenal songs mixed with another 4 or 5 that serve as nothing but filler to inflate the album length.

- - - Updated - - -



Which is wild considering that the vast majority of iconic RPG games are linear, even if they have an overworld.

Of course it depends if the world is bland or great. I had a fantastic experience in AC: Odyssey. It was so great to revisit ancient sites. The reconstitution of the Acropolis buildings was just awesome.

[Heladys]

Open world is fine as long as there's an actual game in there to play versus just wanking at the vastness of a sandbox.

[PACOX]

I find that open world games are generally the linear layout of a more traditional game, just with big expanses of fluff around them. Wither 3 is a great game, no question at all, but even it suffers from a huge amount of the world icons being completely non-memorable things like smuggler's caches and the like. AC: Black Flag suffered from much of the same - you just get inundated with a shitload of recycled content thrown onto a big map for the simple sake of there being more things. Nevermind that most of those things are repetitive, boring, and end up being so similar to one another that you can't even really tell them apart anymore.

As awesome as Wither 3 is, I finished Witcher 2 and immediately wanted to play through it again and again for the split storylines, and I enjoyed that a thousand times more than looking at a big fucking map full of locations to visit only to find out that abut 80% of them are the exact same thing in a different locaton.

Bloat is bloat, and open world games are super susceptible to it. It's not a net-zero for me, it really detracts from the game - much the same as bloat on an album detracts from the album experience. I don't want to want to skip in-game stuff, and I don't want to want to skip tracks on an album. Both should be tight and finely tuned, but these days the average open world game feels like a mid-90's prog album - 4 or 5 phenomenal songs mixed with another 4 or 5 that serve as nothing but filler to inflate the album length.

- - - Updated - - -



Which is wild considering that the vast majority of iconic RPG games are linear, even if they have an overworld.

I have the same feeling about Witcher. Could never finish 3 because I felt like it tried too much. Great game and I see why people like it, I prefer something closer to Witcher 2.

[tangers58]

If this gen is going to be remembered for anything design wise its hard to argue anything has been more prevalent than "chasing the open world meme" in my opinion. We saw old names like Zelda and Metal Gear turn to it, we saw just about everything big budget first party thing on PS4 try it. I was looking back at the releases of the last few years and on my PS4 alone the notable things include stuff like:

-Ghost of Tsushima: open world
-Spiderman: open world
-Death Stranding: open world
-Days Gone: open world
-Horizon Zero Dawn: open world

To say nothing of third party stuff like all the assassins creed games, FFXV, 90% of Ubisoft releases, ports like fallout, gta, mgsv and even racing games like Forza all turned to "heres a massive open sandbox, because thats what everyone else is doing"

I don't know about you but i'm pretty tired of it. I saw ghost of tsushima and thought it looked great till i saw open world and just lost all interest. the game could be the best of its kind but "see that mountain? you can climb it and see theres nothing there" has well and truly gotten all the interest out of me it can.

I've found myself once again longing for tightly controlled, curated levels and cross sections/"corridors" that allow for far more detailed environmental storytelling and set pieces. Being handed a wide open map now just makes me sigh and wonder how much of it is tedious checkpoint unlocking, camp clearing and the same 6 things on repeat like the "Ubishit" archetype making a visit once again. Like puzzles and bosses have taken such a dramatic step back in favour of the same 'climbing up the yellow painted thing' naughty dog 'cinematic platforming' and 'kill a camp/horde' on repeat as a replacement and i feel like creativity and variety has really suffered as a result.

But they still make money so i can't be a common opinion right?

Whats your take on the idea, do you want another gen and another 5+ years of open world games being the focus of the majority of big budget releases? Are things like Another Horizon and another Spiderman having you excited for more years of map clearing checkpoint gameplay?

There are plenty of games that aren't open world, and plenty of games that are. And they are both fun.

[Pebrocks The Warlock]

Personally no not really, I enjoy when games are more opened world. Seeing Halo Infinite is taking on a more open approach has me excited.

[beanman12345]

I have the same feeling about Witcher. Could never finish 3 because I felt like it tried too much. Great game and I see why people like it, I prefer something closer to Witcher 2.

Yeah same. Witcher 3, great game, but finished witcher 1 and didn't lose interest, finished witcher 2 both sides, could not finish witcher 3, hell probably only did half of the base game. I'm having the same problem with the Dragon age series. Struggling on the third one, great game, just idk, like I feel compelled to complete the maps before moving on and just eventually lose interest.

[alturic]

i hate most open world games tbh. probably why ive lost most interest in games over the last several years.

its all the same thing over and over with no real goal. the same 5 types of mobs, the same 5 buildings, different hills! and hidden chests full of randomly generated garbage that is just disappointing to find.

idk, maybe im just getting old and cranky. ive not had interest in more than 5 games in quite a long while. black mesa finally finished, so that was at least exciting.

Pretty much this from me. Open world games have, by design, no structure. Not having that structure typically lends to nothing to do imo.

[Itori]

Open world is nice, but only if done right, Death Stranding while a good game imo does open world wrong, I think i spent more time trying to find a quicker way to where i was going rather than just trying to explore this world that just seemed dead and empty, I didn't really care to look around and admire the world that was created by the devs working hours on end to make. GTA 5, Red Dead Redemption 2 are examples of an open world that has been done right, you can play those games dozens of times and still find something new.

[Agent Smith]

OP you're saying this as if open world is a bad thing.

[Poppincaps]

OP you're saying this as if open world is a bad thing.

Some open world games have a bunch of pointless/bad side content that just wastes your time. And sometimes that side content is mandatory to progress. In this instance, Open World is indeed bad.

Of course there are games like Bethesda's titles and The Witcher 3 that use the Open World format really well and enhance their games greatly as a result.

[Vakna]

Honestly I hope not, I love open world, my favourite kind of game. There is something to be said for games like Mass Effect OT though, that has semi open world zones but is mostly on rails with choices in between. I wouldn't mind more games like that, as long as the length and depth isn't affected by lacking a true open world.

The worst thing that can happen is no more epic 200 hour games like Witcher because they are afraid of doing open world, and everything becomes 10-20 hour stories that are barely worth the money you pay.

[melzas]

Some open world games have a bunch of pointless/bad side content that just wastes your time. And sometimes that side content is mandatory to progress. In this instance, Open World is indeed bad.

Of course there are games like Bethesda's titles and The Witcher 3 that use the Open World format really well and enhance their games greatly as a result.

Dunno about Witcher 3. Even in this thread alone there are already posts on how W3 open world content was handed badly. It's just overloaded with pointles, boring crap.

I agree on Bethesda games though.

[Shakzor]

Some open world games have a bunch of pointless/bad side content that just wastes your time. And sometimes that side content is mandatory to progress. In this instance, Open World is indeed bad.

Of course there are games like Bethesda's titles and The Witcher 3 that use the Open World format really well and enhance their games greatly as a result.

But these games would've likely be just as bad and boring if they were linear with questhubs and stuff like that. If they can't pull off interesting side content in an open world, they wouldn't magically have done it in another format. "Kill 5 boars" is just as uninteresting in a corridor as in an open world.

Neither open world nor linear corridors are inherently better than the other, it's the execution. But many think they can do good marketing with "an open world as big as 5x Russia!" and poor fools fall for that.

[vitor210]

If this gen is going to be remembered for anything design wise its hard to argue anything has been more prevalent than "chasing the open world meme" in my opinion. We saw old names like Zelda and Metal Gear turn to it, we saw just about everything big budget first party thing on PS4 try it. I was looking back at the releases of the last few years and on my PS4 alone the notable things include stuff like:

-Ghost of Tsushima: open world
-Spiderman: open world
-Death Stranding: open world
-Days Gone: open world
-Horizon Zero Dawn: open world

To say nothing of third party stuff like all the assassins creed games, FFXV, 90% of Ubisoft releases, ports like fallout, gta, mgsv and even racing games like Forza all turned to "heres a massive open sandbox, because thats what everyone else is doing"

I don't know about you but i'm pretty tired of it. I saw ghost of tsushima and thought it looked great till i saw open world and just lost all interest. the game could be the best of its kind but "see that mountain? you can climb it and see theres nothing there" has well and truly gotten all the interest out of me it can.

I've found myself once again longing for tightly controlled, curated levels and cross sections/"corridors" that allow for far more detailed environmental storytelling and set pieces. Being handed a wide open map now just makes me sigh and wonder how much of it is tedious checkpoint unlocking, camp clearing and the same 6 things on repeat like the "Ubishit" archetype making a visit once again. Like puzzles and bosses have taken such a dramatic step back in favour of the same 'climbing up the yellow painted thing' naughty dog 'cinematic platforming' and 'kill a camp/horde' on repeat as a replacement and i feel like creativity and variety has really suffered as a result.

But they still make money so i can't be a common opinion right?

Whats your take on the idea, do you want another gen and another 5+ years of open world games being the focus of the majority of big budget releases? Are things like Another Horizon and another Spiderman having you excited for more years of map clearing checkpoint gameplay?

Open world games are inherently better than games that you can't explore and you're just playing like on a rollercoster, watching the game unfold around you. Plus, a good open world game will suck you for countless hours. Look at Skyrim!