name everything bad about open world design
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
name everything bad about open world design
name everything bad about open world design
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
Unused space
Unfocused
halo infinite had good open world design
i agree. i don't really play open world games because they get boring quick but infinite felt pretty good.
i thought the linear = bad sentiment back in the day was aimed at cod and uncharted for railroading the player. i recently played half life for the first time and it's all gameplay but linear as frick
Define "open world"
large expanse of space without any limitation as to how you can traverse it, encountering different entities and goals along the way according to your own preferences.
>large expanse of space without any limitation as to how you can traverse it
So not Starfield? You took away a lot of good arguments against them just now
starfield to me was good in that the open space wouldn't really make sense to traverse due to the sheer scale. what is more unfortunate is that planets have a tile system to them that can't be dynamically extended as you explore. in retrospect, the way starfield store and generate the worlds and their tiles is brilliant, but there needed to be more done for dynamically extending and connecting them.
I just don’t like it.
It's bad because I need to be funneled down a corridor or I have panic attacks
wouldn't corridors be more terrifying?
>lacks a handcrafted feel most of the time (soulless)
>most of the time devolves into a checklist chore simulator
>narrative often suffers at the expense of the open endedness
>extremely played out at this point in time
>usually a replacement for level design, in the sense that it has none
>does nothing to improve gameplay, usually just results in boring wandering around collecting gumdrops
there's more I'm sure
It's not fun.
even the best games go theme park after some time
many, many open world games would benefit from a hub-based structure with more verticality
one reason why F4 and Skyrim are remembered so well by normies is these games have a density spike areas that offer somewhat catered experiences, for some reason ubisoft never implemented it right, but they also do fun sandboxes
metro exodus' Volga map is my go to example of a good hub-based map design. its compact, has enough freedom and adds to the overall experience
metro exodus was a special game in general
Nothing.
Trying to get archived?
Oh sweet bro, i also used the scorpion gun
i am incapable of any problem solving on my part and need the game to do it for me
Ganker is filled with npcs who can't think for themselves so they treat any term or buzzword as a negative and act like that is an argument by itself. But it's not.
There are "open world AAAslop" games out there which have better gameplay than the obscure weebshit games they love so much.
Could you give some examples?
it's like JRPG padding but even less interesting
Low effort padding when you don't know what to do otherwise.
Open world games are for true gamers.
Linear games are for posers that want to play glorified movies
I've had more fun playing einhander than open world games.
The lack of actual content (especially that pic related)
Most open worlds following the same formula (go to a marker and kill some dudes)
What is actual content?
A structured quest following a small plot that improves the worldbuilding?
Open world games usually have structured quests that follow a small plot that improves the world building though. Very few open world games are actually just complete sandboxes.
I like that games like botw have huge mostly empty plains. I like my open world to feel real, I don't want chests or monsters or camps littered everywhere. I play this kind of game for escapism and sometimes you have to have calm moments of wandering.
You don't go in an irl forest and find hogs and deers and stuff everywhere. You just walk and appreciate the place.
I understand that from a pure gameplay "I need to press buttons and react to external stimuli" it's not what you want and I get that, but I myself greatly enjoy it.
>See that mountain over there? You can climb it.
If I wanted to climb a mountain, I'd mating press your mother.
>mostly empty space, mostly walking
>repetitive procedural content
>lack of meaningful variety
>lack of unique content
>ideas become stale long before content quotas are reached
>fast travel deletes all the empty space, so what's the point of having it to begin with
>"see that castle, you can go in there" design doesn't need miles of empty space
>creative bankruptcy means lots of filler and padding, which is always overkill.
>zero replay value; open world characters can do everything in a single playthrough
>shit awful writing intended to be as inconsequential and nihilistic as possible
>primary pastime is "gathering potion materials" or "inventory management" or filling out an OCD chart
>music is usually droning ambience because "muh immersion" with zero melodic content
>rewarded with actual literal garbage for playing the game; this is 90% of your rewards
>"seamless loading" gets stale when you have to wait for elevators and go through six slow opening doors
>character customization means nothing because any unqiue build is a nightmare for game balance
>every build has to work so they're all inconsequential and purely cosmetic
>NPCs are mass-produced and have zero personality aside from 2-12 people in the entire continent.
>most environments are padding so the world "feels real"; zero point to being there, unlike linear where every level matters.
>most of the design revolves around masking empty space, rather than gameplay or content
>DD2 isn't out yet
that's the most glaring issue with the genre and it should be fixed soon, then open worlds will finally be good.
Was actually a pretty good open world. The set pieces and actual levels were still fun, and Halo's emphasis on vehicle gameplay means that the open space of the world actually has purpose. And if you were on foot, the grappling hook makes world traversal fun. Makes sense that it worked so well, since the level is essentially a giant Halo (the Halo 1 level).
Inherently? Nothing. Zoomers who grew up on shitty linear console games are just pretending that open world is a new fad and pretending that they're the oldgays for hating it.
Open world design is basically like you took a massive canvas like 100x100 feet or something and spread out 10 normal sized paintings on it
So you ask what's the point of all the extra space and the artist says the empty space is a painting too
>anon learns what a gallery is
>insists collages are superior
a gallery would be level based. a collage would be open world
No the difference is the gallery doesn't try to convince you their walls are art
all the downsides of an overworld with none of the upsides
people(read: shitty devs) seem to forget open world was a way of removing loading screens just as much as it was creating a sandbox
a lot of tards like to hate on "theme parks" without a single clue as to why they work, both irl and in games
a lot of tards get lost in the carnival games
>was a way of removing loading screens
you have that backwards. in order to have real open worlds, you HAD to remove loading screens.
>explore and find a cool place
>clear it
>nice
>later get a quest
>go there and find this item
>it's the same place you were just at
Fricking DESPISE that shit.
ubi towers, largely empty, devoid of interactivity, markers, terrible "rewards" for "exploration", copy pasted stuff, level scaling, trash collecting, bandit camps, half assed crafting and rpg mechanics, shit traversal options despite traversal being 90% of the "gameplay", no real level design
lack of stakes. this was the real nail in elden ring's coffin, 90 percent of all the main map enemy encounters were less interesting than the most basic mob placements in Demons' or Dark Souls 1.
Cluttered.
Developers have this notion that open world games need to be filled with the brim with interactables, that there needs to be something every few meters. Because of the sheer volume of required stuff, the overall quality becomes extremely low.
The open world should only exist to add realism to a game, to connect interesting and high-quality gameplay sections in a realistic manner. It should not be the game itself. It should really just be the evolution of a backdrop or a skybox, one that you travel through.
Never forget: Limitations breed creativity.
-There is generally no real incentive to explore, all the good shit you can get in terms of equipment is generally acquired by normal story progress or shops, maybe some sidequests that aren't out of the way. Example: elden ring, you just pick up spirits you're not gonna use from some dungeons and a bunch of flowers and herbs and materials and nothing else. Most good weapons are obtained via boss souls or normal enemy drops.
-Big empty map with nothing to do, riding your vehicle/mount is just excessive downtime. It adds nothing to the game other than inflate the hours you have the game on so devs can say people play it a lot. On a first playthrough of an open world game, your first 40 hours are divided by downtime. Exploring the empty world, going out of your way to search hidden corners (only to find nothing) and backtracking. Out of 40 hours you actually played 20 once you continued the story.
-A big map does nothing to make the game better
-The game might start off strong but eventually feel like a slog, ruining the experience
I can go on but I'm too tired. Frick open world meme.
they waste your time when they just make a game and then go "okay now you're free to run around" but the world just exists to hold missions or shitty activities without being interesting
It wouldn't be so bad if a lot of shit was handcrafted to still accompany the vast openness of the world, but it never is and never will be. Because open world is simply an excuse going forward to just have AI produced garbage and half assed copy/paste jobs to speed up dev time. And that is my problem with this genre.
>but it never is and never will be
It almost always is. Like most idiots who complain about open worlds, you don't know what you're talking about. Very few games are procgen.
>Unused space
>copy and paste
>enemies are segmented by area
>certian biomes go unused
>b***h to traverse or rely too much on fast travel