The Skyrim 1.4 patch that was released on Steam last week is now arriving on...
20 hours 31 mins ago
An editorial that examines the current trend of open-ended games and explains why they're often lacking. Specifically, developers place too much emphasis on providing choices for the player while neglecting to make those choices meaningful.
At some point during the past few years, the word "linear" became a bad word in gaming. The completely ludicrous sales of the Grand Theft Auto III, GTA IV, and everything in between probably contributed to this but whatever the cause, developers are now obsessed with giving players freedom. Open-ended gameplay is a good thing in theory because allows the player more control over his gameplay experience but the concept is so badly executed in many of these so-called "open-world" or "sand-box" games that it makes me long for the days of choice-less side-scrollers.
Latest comment:
Most recently commented on by on Nov 28, 2008
Most recently commented on by on Nov 28, 2008
Comments
When you're confronted with a big choice in a game, what's the first thing you'd do? Most people would look up a guide on the internet and check what both paths do/don't do. If this choice was for every little encounter in the game, you'd be spending more time thinking about what choice to make than actually playing the game.
And Mass Effect was crap anyway.
Also I need to know what the consequences are before making my decision. Cause I may or may not want to proceed with an option I don't want. Like killing Dwayne lands me 25 grand and using Playboy's house as a saving apartment. Where as killing Playboy gives me more contact with Dwayne and the ability to get armed gangs for back up. See right there, both options sounds intriguing but makes you think what you want.
Oh and I agree with Woudo. I would be spending more time wondering what would happen, thus making the game tedious and boring. I don't want to keep doing that type of stuff. I want to play and if it happens once or twice, then cool. Not every flipping moment.
I thought last night, "All I want is to go from mission to mission and get it finished". You have to worry about the open-world games when I start having thoughts like that.
If that is the case then don't play the damn game in the first place. You want a direct approach game from A to B, play Halo...not Fallout 3
As to the article at hand, I'm 50/50 with this but like Kspiess says, just because some open world games are failures doesn't mean you can write off the concept just as easily.
Then again I look at open-world games very differently to others. I prefer the freedom and choice, whether the two routes take me to the same place or not. I just prefer to have that choice given rather than made. GTA is a prime example...I am still 25% through the story...why? Because I spent £45 to run over people, to kill people, to annoy cops and above all, to just mess around within a virtual environment.
In fact I have spent more time gaining 6 stars on my wanted level than actually progessing through the game but again that is just me
I love Open-world games, the Freedom, the choices, you're free to do anything you want in them.
This news story is archived and is closed to comments now.