I absolutely agree, but companies often advertise how big their world is cause it's easier to how how your numbers are bigger than those of your competitors, completely ignoring that the world is...
I absolutely agree, but companies often advertise how big their world is cause it's easier to how how your numbers are bigger than those of your competitors, completely ignoring that the world is just empty. Ubisoft games especially had that problem, even though after Ghost Recon Breakpoint, they've hopefully rethought their approach to designing games. At least that's what the CEO said at the stockholder meeting after that game launched.
Games like Yakuza 0 show that an open world doesn't have to big. Open just means that you can go wherever you want to go at any given time. Making it bigger sacrifices depth and content of a game only to result in a little more eye-candy, that often looks exactly the same to all the other areas of a game.
Absolutely. A small world with incredible detail and a person in every building feels so much better than a big world with nothing in it but boarded up doorways and empty streets. Barring the...
Absolutely. A small world with incredible detail and a person in every building feels so much better than a big world with nothing in it but boarded up doorways and empty streets. Barring the post-apocalypse, but Fallout games from 3 onward have a lot of elided population.
Time of developers could be used to deepen content in currently existing places in an open world, rather than expanding it. While some games have legitimate reasons for a big, empty world, for...
Time of developers could be used to deepen content in currently existing places in an open world, rather than expanding it. While some games have legitimate reasons for a big, empty world, for most games it's just an excuse to tout a bigger number without actually backing that number up with meaningful content.
None of these are really about the games the article is about, which is open world games. In flight sims and strategy games we're not really dealing with "worlds" so much as "maps." You don't...
There are some things that require size whether it's a flight simulator that needs it to replicate the feeling of awe and variety that it gives, a strategy game that is meant to make you feel like a small and insigificant part of the world, or an action game that provides slower, calmer moments in between the action, and so on.
None of these are really about the games the article is about, which is open world games. In flight sims and strategy games we're not really dealing with "worlds" so much as "maps." You don't generally interact with anything in it. In action games there's lots of better ways to create calm moments between action. In Red Dead Redemption 2, for instance, there are plenty of calm moments but the game forces you to be calm during them (as when riding from place to place during a mission) because the "normal" state of the world has so much procedural shit going on in the back ground that it distracts from what you're doing. Mario Odyssey has plenty of calm moments between action within very small spaces because they specifically designed spaces to chill out in.
I absolutely agree, but companies often advertise how big their world is cause it's easier to how how your numbers are bigger than those of your competitors, completely ignoring that the world is just empty. Ubisoft games especially had that problem, even though after Ghost Recon Breakpoint, they've hopefully rethought their approach to designing games. At least that's what the CEO said at the stockholder meeting after that game launched.
Games like Yakuza 0 show that an open world doesn't have to big. Open just means that you can go wherever you want to go at any given time. Making it bigger sacrifices depth and content of a game only to result in a little more eye-candy, that often looks exactly the same to all the other areas of a game.
Absolutely. A small world with incredible detail and a person in every building feels so much better than a big world with nothing in it but boarded up doorways and empty streets. Barring the post-apocalypse, but Fallout games from 3 onward have a lot of elided population.
Time of developers could be used to deepen content in currently existing places in an open world, rather than expanding it. While some games have legitimate reasons for a big, empty world, for most games it's just an excuse to tout a bigger number without actually backing that number up with meaningful content.
None of these are really about the games the article is about, which is open world games. In flight sims and strategy games we're not really dealing with "worlds" so much as "maps." You don't generally interact with anything in it. In action games there's lots of better ways to create calm moments between action. In Red Dead Redemption 2, for instance, there are plenty of calm moments but the game forces you to be calm during them (as when riding from place to place during a mission) because the "normal" state of the world has so much procedural shit going on in the back ground that it distracts from what you're doing. Mario Odyssey has plenty of calm moments between action within very small spaces because they specifically designed spaces to chill out in.