Yes.So Breath of the Wild would have been better as a different game entirely.
Mafia 2
Made a large open city with literally nothing to do in it except drive from one main mission to the next.
I rented the game and kept thinking "once I get through this linear introductory section the game will open up."
I thought that for about 7 hours before I realized it wasn't an introductory section.
Agreed. Traversal or the means of traversal in 95% of open world games just sucks, so you end up doing the fastest thing possible to get from point A to point B. "You're missing the stuff inbetween!" except there is nothing inbetween the vast majority of the time. You could've trimmed a ton of openness from the games and making it tighter would've been much better.Hot take: Most Open Worlds are pointless and 9 out of 10 open world games would be better off with a linear more focused experience. The number of games that actually pull off open world design is incredibly small.
This is true as well. One of the biggest things I feel people miss when it comes to open worlds is that they often are meant to invoke a sense of scale so that these spaces feel real and less like game levels. Worlds need breathing space to feel real and to set the pace but many people will just call it empty space.
Best example I can think of is taking Breath of the Wild's world and cutting it down to a third of its original size but keeping all the content. Just condense it all so they fit in the smaller space. Now you have no waste, no empty space, no "pointless" open world. Just pure gameplay utility. But that version of Breath of the Wild would not even come close to what we have.
I enjoyed all previous games but I've been avoiding 5 so far when I read it was open world.
Horizon.
It was a combat focused game that was spread way too thin. No engagment in the map, it was quite the looker but had Spider-Man PS4 levels of open world when it came to thinks to do.
Love the driveby BoTW answers with pretty much no explanation or detail.
I could keep going with things that are not well done in the game but I rather wait for part 2 and hope that is going to a be a game 90% different from BOTW.
Ooh yeah, that really does make a lot of sense. I too often find myself needing constant engagement but I recognize it and can switch it off for things like BotW.This discussion puts me in mind of an article I read about the original Western release of Studio Ghibli's movies published by Disney. Taking Laputa/Castle in the Sky as an example, Miyazaki's original had a soundscape full of quiet moments. Sounds of the wind and nature, people talking and conflict in the distance. Those moments filled in the story of the world, the events that were happening. When Disney brought them over they requested that the music composer extend his sound tracks to fill in those quiet moments because "Americans become uneasy if there are long moments without music", and so those movies were altered (a practice Miyazaki put a stop to later on). But maybe Disney was right. Americans have to have constant noise and lack appreciation for quiet or rest. That would also explain the discussion around "Breath of the Wild has no music (despite having the largest sound track of any Zelda)". It's rather frustrating.
DA: Inquisition had the most unpleasant, excessive, bland, distracting, un-immersive open-world I've ever tried
Is quite simple.
Repetitive Open World with only exploration as a strong point.
Combat is really repetitive and basic.. open world could have been more enjoyable if this was not a problem.
Shrines are part of the open world and they are also repetitive.. the first 3 or 4 times is fun.. after that is just a chore.
Since the game has a really lackluster story the open world feels empty and also the music is absent most of the time.
I could keep going with things that are not well done in the game but I rather wait for part 2 and hope that is going to a be a game 90% different from BOTW.