True open worlds are "the opposite of fun" reckons The Unfinished Swan dev
The trick is to make them appear open instead
True open worlds are "the opposite of fun" reckons The Unfinished Swan dev
True open worlds are "the opposite of fun" reckons The Unfinished Swan dev
The trick is to make them appear open instead
Join the MyGaming Steam group || Find out how to enter MyGaming Steam Community Giveaways
So what about Skyrim? I think Skyrim was a fun open world RPG and the fun came mostly from exploring that open world. Giving me the illusion of an open world will just make me believe that you think I'm an idiot.
I agree, Open world like that of Skyrim, GTA, Red Dead Redemption just aren't focused enough. Sure it sounds cool to say the game has the massive open world but IMO most sandbox games get boring so quickly exactly because of the open world. I personally prefer what I call mini-sandbox structure. Like that of say the original Deus Ex or Crysis 2, Thief etc. A large level that is open ended but is connected to other similar levels via a corridor. This way the level designers can focus on building intricate levels without have to stoop on quality, these tighter levels also lend themselves better to story telling.
The DayZ mod begs to differ. However, that doesn't mean I disagree with these devs, it's only that it's not the same for every game.
DayZ, as an example, is a true sandbox game, and looking at all the pieces, it might sound boring. However, the stories you create for yourself within the game is what sets it apart. Without other players, the mod would have tanked.
On another note, Just Cause 2 was also a sandbox, but it failed a bit in that department, seeing as it was just a giant landmass upon which you could do the same things over, and over, and over.
But see that's a personal preference. I personally love open worlds that let me explore the way I want to. If Skyrim didn't have the open world it currently does I wouldn't have found it half as appealing.Originally Posted by OmegaFenix
I love running around and then stumbeling on to a cool place so would like more of those.
Evil meet my Sword. Sword, meet Evil!
Im not saying full open world shouldn't not exist. I my self wasted 100+ hours of my life in Skyrim & Oblivion. Having said that if the world was smaller with more details rather than the same 5 or 6 copy pasted dungeons I would have spent more. Also, and this is definitely personal preference, I would rather spend 40 hours in a more confined game like the Witcher 2 with its great story, than I would spend 400 hours in a massive game like Skyrim where the plot was a joke and its open nature pretty much ruined having a unique single play through. That is however more of a design issue with the mechanics than the game world.
My Personal Favourite Open World game has to be the original S.T.A.L.K.E.R SoC
Yeah it's purely preference, some games NEED more structure and sometimes fall back on 'open world' as an excuse rather than a feature. Other times open world is awesome since it lets you break out of the highly structured environment and just lets you do your own thing.
Crackdown was a good example, I loved just climbing buildings and causing random chaos, throwing cars, engaging in fire fights, it was fun. Read Dead is the same story, I like just going around and doing stuff that I want to do without always being told to "be here" and "do this".
Minecraft is probably the prime example of a completely open world sandbox and it's popular as hell. Doesn't mean every game should be open, but every now and then it's a fresh experience.
Red Dead is another good example (personal preference again). If it had been more linear then the sense of being in the wild west would have been greatly lessened. The open world structure while at times baron was for me at least always interesting and gave me the sense that I was in a living world rather than a prescribed idea of what the world should feel like.
I also feel that open world games can lend themselves to interesting gameplay scenarios and Rockstar seem best at utilizing it.
There's too much generalisation. I have seen so many developers saying that x genre is bad or y gameplay isn't fun when they really aren't in a position to speak in such general terms.
Sure, a developer can argue that the gameplay of one game is bad for a number of reasons or that it doesn't work well with this particular developer's game, but to say that an entire genre or type of gameplay is "the opposite of fun" is just plain stupid.
Has there been an open world game that was widely enjoyed by its audience? Yes, there has been. Many, in fact.
Just because one developer doesn't thank that it's fun doesn't mean that the rest of the world can't think so.
Posting Permissions
