16 votes

The time is right to re-evaluate open worlds. We can do better

9 comments

  1. [5]
    Comment deleted by author
    Link
    1. [3]
      hamstergeddon
      Link Parent
      EA seriously burned me on the concept with Sim City 5. They swore up and down that they couldn't give us local play because the number-crunching behind the scenes was too resource-taxing for home...

      EA seriously burned me on the concept with Sim City 5. They swore up and down that they couldn't give us local play because the number-crunching behind the scenes was too resource-taxing for home computers. And then like a year they walked that back and gave us an offline mode exactly like online play (sans other players, of course).

      So while I'm actually curious to see what kind of open world games we could get by leveraging "the cloud", I don't trust devs/publishers enough to actually give us that. They're more likely to use it as an excuse to lock us into an always-online state like EA did.

      14 votes
      1. [2]
        gpl
        Link Parent
        I would be interested in some "multiverse" type thing where there is a large and in-depth local world, but one which can be expanded by connecting for online play.

        I would be interested in some "multiverse" type thing where there is a large and in-depth local world, but one which can be expanded by connecting for online play.

        7 votes
        1. helloworld
          Link Parent
          Like No Man's Sky, but more vast? Over so many wasted years of 'open world' games, I've come to realise that these worlds are mostly empty, same-ish after you've been few hours into them and only...

          Like No Man's Sky, but more vast? Over so many wasted years of 'open world' games, I've come to realise that these worlds are mostly empty, same-ish after you've been few hours into them and only feel bustling due to busywork fetch-quests. Assassins Creed is especially bad at this.

          Arkham Knight was the only exception for me, and that was only because of the nerd in me enjoys finding easter eggs all over the place.

          3 votes
    2. streblo
      Link Parent
      I agree but I would argue there is room for both. If we just say 'never' to always-online games we are drawing an unnecessary boundary on what is technically feasible. Something like MS Flight...

      I agree but I would argue there is room for both.

      If we just say 'never' to always-online games we are drawing an unnecessary boundary on what is technically feasible. Something like MS Flight Simulator is not possible without the cloud component and I will gladly cede points 1-3 to make it possible to experience.

      That said, would I want that in every game? Absolutely not. If always-online becomes a trend do I expect the games industry to use nuance and discretion in what future games actually require an always-online component? Probably not.

      8 votes
  2. [2]
    NaraVara
    (edited )
    Link
    Jenner seems to misunderstand what actually ails open world games. The issue isn't that people feel disinterested in the world because the simulation doesn't feel personal or persistent enough....

    Jenner seems to misunderstand what actually ails open world games. The issue isn't that people feel disinterested in the world because the simulation doesn't feel personal or persistent enough. The issue is that, for most of them, there is no compelling narrative or gameplay logic to structure them as open worlds in the first place.

    An Assassin's Creed game that was 80% just roaming around a historically faithful reproduction of a historical setting, like AC1 and 2 were, had some logic to it being open world. The story was secondary to the act of exploration and improvisational approaches to completing your missions. It also became somewhat boring because there wasn't a whole lot to do once you learned the crowd patterns and enemy patterns.

    AC games like what the series turned into, which are more semi-scripted set-pieces have no reason for it. You might as well just go from one small setting to another with more traditional level design. Super Mario Odyssey did a fantastic job of this, giving you a series of discrete levels that you can explore that are densely packed with stuff to do. But they felt no need to give you giant chasms of nothing to connect the set pieces.

    While the open worlds in these new games are big, they tried to tackle the "not much to do" problem by filling the map with pointless gopher quests. The problem with these quests is not just that they're disconnected from the central narrative, as Jenner seems to think. The problem is they're literally just grindy and boring. It's not fun to find them. There is no challenge in doing them. It's not satisfying to reflect on having done them. That's what makes them pointless.

    The Spider-Man PS4 game is full of random side-quests that are disconnected from the central narrative, but people complain about this much less than they complain about UbiSoft games because the actual fun part of that game is swinging around NYC as Spider-Man. The random map markers and pointless gopher quests are just an excuse to be web slinging. Mashing A to ride your horse across a field and avoiding traffic jams to get to your map markers is not fun. Compare this to GTA games where you just drive like a maniac. Now that's fun! Stumbling across environments to go from marker to marker without any kind of fun parkour path is not.

    Breath of the Wild came out, like, 3 years ago this point. I thought that game was going to be a wake-up call for the industry about what open world games can be and what actually makes them fun. It's disappointing to see that the AAA, core-gaming segment of the industry doesn't seem to have learned any lessons from it. A more detailed and well simulated world can have potential, but I'm not seeing how it would help in a narratively focused game in any way. They leverage it in really cool ways for the latest Microsoft Flight Simulator. And it could probably be cool for games where the intent is to actually do cool simulations. A 4x game with role play elements (like Crusader Kings), a "slice of life" type game (like The Sims), or something like a city builder or RTS (like FrostPunk) could maybe all benefit from something like this because those games are all about emergent storytelling rather than following a narrative. But I have no idea what the point would be for a series like Watch Dogs or Mass Effect. This just seems like yet more emphasis on quantity over quality or ever narrative coherence.

    23 votes
    1. babypuncher
      Link Parent
      Give it a little more time. Games coming out today were probably already ramping up production when Breath of the Wild released.

      Breath of the Wild came out, like, 3 years ago this point. I thought that game was going to be a wake-up call for the industry about what open world games can be and what actually makes them fun.

      Give it a little more time. Games coming out today were probably already ramping up production when Breath of the Wild released.

      17 votes
  3. [3]
    wirelyre
    (edited )
    Link
    I never got much into Dwarf Fortress, but I think it satisfies all the points Jenner brings up. Characters and world terrain (both natural and constructed) are persistent. Side quests are the main...

    I never got much into Dwarf Fortress, but I think it satisfies all the points Jenner brings up.

    The new locations are pristine and returning somewhere normally means the effects of previous actions have been removed, as if they had never happened.

    Characters and world terrain (both natural and constructed) are persistent.

    [Side quests] are often unconnected from the main story and can therefore feel unnecessary.

    Side quests are the main story. Alternatively, since there is no prescribed plot, there is no main story.

    NPCs in Far Cry … react to not only the player's actions, but also NPCs from other factions, wild animals and even fire.

    Dwarves and animals do this, in very sophisticated and intricate ways.

    In [Civilization], the entire world changes over time based on both player and AI actions, which need to be planned, and their effects.

    Large systems interact with small ones. You gain and lose favor with traveling merchants; if you raid another civilization you can't trade with them; other civilizations can raid yours. Fortress layout affects productivity which affects dwarf morale.

    … this creates more challenges for other areas such as narrative, level design and art production.

    Worlds are completely procedurally generated, including for example terrain, legends, historical figures and civilizations, deities, inhabited sites, and dwarf preferences.

    7 votes
    1. [2]
      mat
      Link Parent
      I'm just trying to imagine a future in which Dwarf Fortress occupies the same kind of cultural position in our society as games like Skyrim, GTA and so on. It's pretty hilarious. The cosplays...

      I'm just trying to imagine a future in which Dwarf Fortress occupies the same kind of cultural position in our society as games like Skyrim, GTA and so on. It's pretty hilarious. The cosplays alone...

      Nothing against DF or it's players, of course, it's an amazing thing.

      5 votes
      1. whbboyd
        Link Parent
        I don't know if this has been fixed, but it used to be the case that your starting seven dwarves would all spawn ex nihilo with no history or background in the world, all at the same age. This...

        The cosplays alone...

        I don't know if this has been fixed, but it used to be the case that your starting seven dwarves would all spawn ex nihilo with no history or background in the world, all at the same age. This wouldn't really matter, except that all their clothing would spawn in the same way (pristine as of the instant they popped)—and then degrade over time at the same rate, and all disintegrate off them at the same time. Now, having one article of clothing literally unravel itself off your body is a small hit on mood, but stack that for a dwarf's entire wardrobe, and the negative feelings could literally drive them insane. (Couple this with the fact that your starting seven tend to get beastly strong and remain pretty essential throughout a typical fort's run, and the moment all their clothing died could literally end a fort.)

        …So anyway, a realistic cosplay of a DF dwarf would be them running around wearing only one XXPig Tail SockXX, babbling like a lunatic and destroying buildings.

        8 votes