-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
For how much longer will "X will have the biggest open world ever" be a selling point to you?
- Thread starter oni-link
- Start date
It was never important for me. That's what I voted, but size not mattering as much as what you do with it also rings true. And the larger the world, the less effectively that space is usually used, which in and of itself is a turn-off, so the last option also applies. I'd vote all three if I could.
It hasn't been for a while. I only have so much time to play a game. I'd rather a world be compact and interesting than anything else.
It was a cool thing a few years ago, I think the last time that hit me was Zelda, but that was more about the feel/design of the world than the sheer size of it
You're right, instead i'll offer a video that argues in the favor of larger open worlds and how that can affect design in a positive way:
Introspection in the middle of a well realized digital space is an amazing feeling.
The size doesn't matter anymore. Games are big enough to fill them with loads of meaningful content. Games like Assassin's Creed Origins are already too big for their own good.
Cool video, and introspection in the middle of a well realised digital space is an amazing feeling, I agree
The video does literally say in the first 40 seconds that map size is used as a bullet point on a press releases, then gives 4 examples of the kind of thing publishers say regarding map size, which is what I'm talking about in the OP
I would also say the video is arguing for better UI more so than bigger worlds, as the games he uses both have amazing worlds that are in some ways undermined by quest icons and markers that take the player out of the world, and you can do this in theory with smaller open worlds too
I know Ubisoft have made great leaps with this in Assassin's Creed with exploration mode in Odyssey (and as someone currently 25 hours into Syndicate, after playing Unity earlier in the year, they made improvements from Unity to Syndicate too)
Unity doesn't have a map anywhere near the size of the newer games, but with tweaks to the UI you could make quiet spaces in that game work as well as in the newer ones. You could argue Syndicate achieved that from Unity with the fewer map icons
You can also look back to open world games on the PS2 and see that some used quiet spaces well too. Driving across to the 2nd major city at night in San Andreas for the first time had this effect, and that game has a much smaller map compared to 2018 open world games
Just Cause 2 was probably the last time I was really hyped because of the world size, it's not really a factor either way for me nowadays. Fine either way, though if you are going to have a big ass world, you better have good movement or be extremely immersive or I'd probably get burnt out and just speed through the story eventually.
There are several games this year I have avoided simply because they're likely too big, and I don't want to be forced to spend forever on them. I really wantee to play AC Odyssey, but it's just too big.
I really wish devs would shift their focus to something else.
I really wish devs would shift their focus to something else.
This poll is dumb because the answers aren't mutually exclusive.
Yes, I want to go to all the mountains in the distance, and no, the size of the map isn't the end all, be all.
I love large maps, and I love maps with a ton of things to do. So you bet your ass I'd love the biggest map ever with a ton of shit to do.
Yes, I want to go to all the mountains in the distance, and no, the size of the map isn't the end all, be all.
I love large maps, and I love maps with a ton of things to do. So you bet your ass I'd love the biggest map ever with a ton of shit to do.
I think quality curation and system design is more valued that sheer size. My first thought when I hear "X game is so big...." is what's in it?
Elite: Dangerous is a great example, because it's literally the size of the Milky Way galaxy, but critical reception wasn't the same as BOTW.
This hasn't been a selling point to me since the original Assassin's Creed came out. Huge world, not much to do in it.
Was never a selling point.
Nonetheless I think Xenoblade X has still the biggest open world and the most beautiful.
Nonetheless I think Xenoblade X has still the biggest open world and the most beautiful.
I'm kind of burning out on Open World designs to be honest. I loved it in the Witcher 3 or BOTW, but playing through Origins now is becoming exhausting. I'm looking forward to wrapping it up and playing some tighter designed level-based games to cleanse the palate.
Couldn't give a shit these days, most recent offended was breath of the wild, such a vast openness of fuck all
Active turn-off for me.
I don't have the time, interest nor energy for this style of game personally. I don't get anything out of staring at beautiful vistas while barely engaging. It's gorgeous and I admire the artistry but I'll stick to screenshots. RDR2 was the final nail in the coffin for me honestly.
I don't have the time, interest nor energy for this style of game personally. I don't get anything out of staring at beautiful vistas while barely engaging. It's gorgeous and I admire the artistry but I'll stick to screenshots. RDR2 was the final nail in the coffin for me honestly.
All depends on what content fills it, otherwise it may as well be Daggerfall
I think GTA San Andreas, Red Dead 2, Fallout NV have great worlds that successfully meshed interesting density/stuff to do with open spaces to space those things out. If a team can somehow create a huge and compelling map, I'm all for it. Exploring is my favorite thing to do in these open world games and I love being rewarded for it.
I think GTA San Andreas, Red Dead 2, Fallout NV have great worlds that successfully meshed interesting density/stuff to do with open spaces to space those things out. If a team can somehow create a huge and compelling map, I'm all for it. Exploring is my favorite thing to do in these open world games and I love being rewarded for it.
Last edited:
Daggerfall is awesome though. I really want a modern Daggerfall. With less bugs, obviously
It never was a selling point for me. You can have a huge, open world with absolutely nothing to do in it. If there's no content, it's pointless really.
If the open world is like Xenogears X in the scope of size, I'm all for it. Ultimately I'm looking for details more than anything.
I'm hoping for a Bully 2 with a small town fully detailed and realized. So I guess it depends on the scope.
I'm hoping for a Bully 2 with a small town fully detailed and realized. So I guess it depends on the scope.
Not any more. Just means I have to waste more time trying to get to what I'm trying to do instead of just doing it. One of the gripes I had with AC: Odyssey.
It's not about the size for me. It's your travel options, and how fun it is to explore.
I loved Spiderman and did pretty much everything in it not because the world was big or full of stuff to do, but because it was incredibly fun going from point A to point B.
I loved Spiderman and did pretty much everything in it not because the world was big or full of stuff to do, but because it was incredibly fun going from point A to point B.
Never was; never will be.
My gaming time is limited, so I actively look for experiences that will utilize my time well.
My gaming time is limited, so I actively look for experiences that will utilize my time well.
After playing Zelda BotW, I think I've hit max capacity on the whole open world thing. Announcements of open worlds potentially bigger than that now get a big "ehhhhhhhh...." from me. I'd be all for downsizing and more curated experiences.
usually bigger the world, the emptier it is. the only exceptions to that are the games that were polished to to the t. (red dead 2, witcher 3 etc)
I think the poll options are a bit loaded.
Obviously I don't want big maps for the sake of them being big, but I do enjoy it when a game provides you with a real sense of "scale". AC origins really impressed me in that regard. Not only was the map big, but it was filled out in a belivable way. AND, there was plenty to do and find.
Then there's racing games. No fucking doubt in my mind that Forza Horizon would be even more amazing if it had bigger maps.
Obviously I don't want big maps for the sake of them being big, but I do enjoy it when a game provides you with a real sense of "scale". AC origins really impressed me in that regard. Not only was the map big, but it was filled out in a belivable way. AND, there was plenty to do and find.
Then there's racing games. No fucking doubt in my mind that Forza Horizon would be even more amazing if it had bigger maps.
Never, saying you have a giant world map if anything just makes me brace for the inevitability of how much filler the game is going to have.
Chasing the idea of 'infinite content" is certainly an ambitious goal, but the problem with most open world games is how they engage with the player and how the actual interesting bits of gameplay are spread so far apart.
To give an example; I've played MGS3 probably 10+ times through in my life and have 100% it each time. I hold it in high regards. On the other end of the spectrum I've 100% MGSV once and plan to never play it again, even though it plays like a dream and the gameplay is way better. With a title smaller in scope that offers a linear experience, I finish the game loving it and wanting more. Open world design on the other hand is there until you get tired of it, its a front loaded experience that's meant to hook you in until you hate playing it.
Chasing the idea of 'infinite content" is certainly an ambitious goal, but the problem with most open world games is how they engage with the player and how the actual interesting bits of gameplay are spread so far apart.
To give an example; I've played MGS3 probably 10+ times through in my life and have 100% it each time. I hold it in high regards. On the other end of the spectrum I've 100% MGSV once and plan to never play it again, even though it plays like a dream and the gameplay is way better. With a title smaller in scope that offers a linear experience, I finish the game loving it and wanting more. Open world design on the other hand is there until you get tired of it, its a front loaded experience that's meant to hook you in until you hate playing it.
Size ain't shit, I enjoyed Skyrim and Witcher 3 way more than Assassin's Creed Origins and Odyssey, even though they both have much bigger maps.
The problem has always been that people associate world size with number of options. I know tons of linear or semi linear games that have a lot more complex gameplay and interactions than many popular open world games.
It hasn't been for awhile. Ever since the first assassins creed where it had this huge, boring, empty world I haven't cared about this. It's why I greatly prefer GoW over red dead 2. Red dead has an absolutely massive open world but GoW's packed every inch with something unique and creative. I never had these huge stretches where nothing was happening. I also don't like just cause because it's just the same recycled thing over and over and after I destroyed a few bases I got bored as hell
Size for size's sake isn't exciting. And honestly, after Red Dead, give me a smaller world/game, please.
I'd be more interested in a openworld that is fully fleshed out.
Every NPC has a routine. a path. sometimes they are randomly not doing their routine.
I'd like to see towns/settlements get better and improved as a result of your actions. or the opposite endof the spectrum. a ghost town to dilpidation and the issues that arrise from it.
I would like to see reactions to you. I would like thoughtful quests that are not, follow the magic glowing circle to the next part. I would like to see, stake out quests. I would like to see weird treasure maps, and directions. Follow the road until you see the hanged man rock, turn left at the fork in front of it, and walk until the Dreary eyed tree wanes and the creatures of the night sing. then, go to where nothing sings. there is your destination.
Every NPC has a routine. a path. sometimes they are randomly not doing their routine.
I'd like to see towns/settlements get better and improved as a result of your actions. or the opposite endof the spectrum. a ghost town to dilpidation and the issues that arrise from it.
I would like to see reactions to you. I would like thoughtful quests that are not, follow the magic glowing circle to the next part. I would like to see, stake out quests. I would like to see weird treasure maps, and directions. Follow the road until you see the hanged man rock, turn left at the fork in front of it, and walk until the Dreary eyed tree wanes and the creatures of the night sing. then, go to where nothing sings. there is your destination.
Never was a selling point to me, as many of my favorite sand-boxes fit into the Hitman or Prey-sized experiences. Denser with more varied things to do and interact with is always the better approach to me. If you can create that density at a larger scale like I think the Witcher 3 pulled off by having side-content worth doing...great. A few other games have also proven their scale was justified, but more open-world games just don't, and I end up picking content not to do.
Claiming your game is going to be even bigger than last time, much less bigger than any other game, only makes me worry that there will be a decent amount of filler I have to watch out for.
Claiming your game is going to be even bigger than last time, much less bigger than any other game, only makes me worry that there will be a decent amount of filler I have to watch out for.