[ARTICLE] Do Open Worlds Do More Harm Than Good?

+
It seems to me, in order to tell an 'incredible' story in an open world, the premise of the plot must be built upon the business of adventuring, and not merely saving the world: Thus, the more the player explores, the more of the story he discovers. In this way, such a game would need imitate life, wherein every experience shapes the protagonist, and his story. The events of each adventure would need to build upon one another -- even if only slightly in some cases -- to create a complex web of interrelations. These interrelated experiences, from the various quests the player discovered, and the many regions through which he travelled, would accumulate to shape the story's finale. A grand revelation, and climax to the long adventures could come at the end, but only when the player had explored every corner of the world, completed every quest, and collected all the artefacts, skills, and made the acquaintances of the population; at that point, when all the slowly accumulating links had been joined, then the story's conclusion could be revealed. Such a story, spanning the vastness of the game's world, would be a 'life story', rather than a single main quest.

Realistically, however, the complex calculations, computations, and imposing number of variables, which would need be taken into account to implement such a game, would require a near perfect virtual simulation of real life, and its many, often conflicting, consequences, causes and effects. I'd wager the resources required would put such a game beyond the means of most companies.
 
Last edited:
It seems to me, in order to tell an 'incredible' story in an open world, the premise of the plot must be built upon the business of adventuring, and not merely saving the world: Thus, the more the player explores, the more of the story he discovers. In this way, such a game would need imitate life, wherein every experience shapes the protagonist, and his story. The events of each adventure would need to build upon one another -- even if only slightly in some cases -- to create a complex web of interrelations. These interrelated experiences, from the various quests the player discovered, and the many regions through which he travelled, would accumulate to shape the story's finale. A grand revelation, and climax to the long adventures could come at the end, but only when the player had explored every corner of the world, completed every quest, and collected all the artefacts, skills, and made the acquaintances of the population; at that point, when all the slowly accumulating links had been joined, then the story's conclusion could be revealed. Such a story, spanning the vastness of the game's world, would be a 'life story', rather than a single main quest.

Realistically, however, the complex calculations, computations, and imposing number of variables, which would need be taken into account to implement such a game, would require a near perfect virtual simulation of real life, and its many, often conflicting, consequences, causes and effects. I'd wager the resources required would put such a game beyond the means of most companies.

It's almost as if saving the world from the Wild Hunt was a distinctly bad idea. Yes, I'm saying it. Not particularly interested in a child of prophecy either, despite her being a bit more interesting than Link, or Commander Shepard. If the game had been a series of investigations and intrigues in the spirit of the past two, then there would have been a good chance of greater verisimilitude in an open world. First game was in the spirit of the short stories, second one I believe was influenced by Blood of Elves. The third game is where I think they should have parted ways with the source material.
 
Last edited:
I definitely think the "save the world" plot was a bad idea. I disagree with [mention]Rivenll[/mention] suggestion that it's (practically) impossible to have a good story in an open-world. You might be right that it's impossible to have a novel-like story. But I do think it's possible to have a good story. You just have to approach it right. And a "save the world plot" is definitely not the right way to do it. Sure, you can build up to saving the world. But starting out from that point is not the right way to go.

I think one thing you have to do is rely less on the protagonist's character development and more on side-characters and events in the world to develop the plot. I think it also helps if the main character is a blank slate. Or to use the literary term, an everyman. Someone the audience can read their own thoughts and emotions into. Link is a good example of this; he doesn't talk in any of the games.

A line in that wiki page sums up the everyman perfectly.
An everyman occupies the role of protagonist without being a "hero" and without necessarily being a round character or a dynamic character. In this scenario, the everyman is developed like a secondary character, but the character's near omnipresence within the narrative shifts the focus from character development to events and story lines surrounding the character. Some audiences or readers may project themselves into this character, if no dominant characteristic of the everyman prevents them from doing so.

Another good example of an everyman is Mad Max from the recent Fury Road.

I dunno whether anyone else noticed, but Max barely talks in the entire movie. And he only has one line where he makes a thematic contribution to the film (not counting the opening monologue).
Hope is a mistake. If you can't fix what's broken you'll go insane
 
Last edited:
?????????????????????

1st you are saying "Open world is the shit" & then "The open world was one of the reasons I got this game." so what exactly you want to say open world i good or shit ?

Shit = bad
The shit = good.

Yup, and in UK it's like this:

bollocks = bad
dog's bollocks = good.

Getting back to the topic at hand.

I hate the "collect 'em all" points of interest scattered all around the world that artificially extend gameplay time and are a chore to complete, especially the smuggler caches on Skellige. For me, this is the only sore point of TW3's open world.

I agree. I've finished the game with about 60 of them unfinished in Skellige. What's the point? You don't get rewarded in any meaningful way.

In that last eurogamer article on how troublesome was the development of TW3 they say that after the first playthrough in 2014 they felt the game felt empty and they designed those ? marks and that is why the game was pushed the 2nd time (I seriously doubt that this was the reason for the 2nd push of the release date but that's the topic for another thread).. Guess what these copy-pasted ? marks didn't help at all.
 
Last edited:
Well, before the game came out, everyone was wondering if CDPR would be able to pull off combining a strong story, which is by its nature fairly linear (with branches, sure, but still linear) and open world. As far as that's concerned, I think they succeeded.

I think the problems are something else - they've been heavily discussed already, so no need to go into detail, but the problems of running out of sidequests too early, of managing levelling up without being over- or under-levelled for the main quest, of loot that's not worth picking up, monsters not worth the effort of killing them, quest rewards that are fit only to be sold.

These are all things that could occur in ANY open-world game. Some manage it just fine, others not so well. I don't think that the fact that a game is open world means that these problems HAVE to exist, so I think that Erik Kain, who I tend to respect, got it wrong this time. Open World brings in certain challenges to developers, but they're challenges that CAN be addressed.

As far as personal preferences are concerned then I'd prefer a well-balanced linear or hub-based game. But that is just my preference, I don't think that developers should give up on open world.
 
(5) I can't believe I am going to say this, but the more I think about it, the thing that I think was the biggest drawback to the open world setting is the RPG leveling system. I am a huge RPG fan - RPGish type games are pretty much all I play anymore (with the notable exception being pretty much anything by Naughty Dog). The problem with open world RPGs with leveling systems IMO is that game designers largely fall into one of two choices: either (A) enemies scale with the PC which means Dragons and Bandits are equally as challenging or (B) you feel discouraged from completing some quests until way later in the game. I'm not sure what the answer to this is - and maybe it's beyond the scope of this thread - but I feel like de-emphasizing leveling where you become more powerful, and emphasizing the equipment, potions, crafting parts of the game would make sense for any potential witcher games. You're a witcher (or witcheress in future versions maybe), so your already a complete badass. You pretty much shouldn't get better at fast attacks or signs or potion making - you're already there. Some enemies will be harder to fight, some will be easier to fight but that's they way it is. You make the fights more intense and skill based by leaving less room for error on PC health. The RPG customization comes into play with equipment and the like.

This actually is what I thought they would do. I remember watching the same review of 2013 E3 presentation by one youtuber "gamermd83" and she said something like:

you're the witcher, this experienced monster hunter, you have the full bestiary right from the get-go and each time you fight you'll have to prepare and learn about how to fight this or that monster by reading the info in your bestiary.

So for some reason I thought that there will be less emphasis on leveling up and more of it on using different techniques to your benefit when fighting each particular monster.

---------- Updated at 02:30 PM ----------

It's almost as if saving the world from the Wild Hunt was a distinctly bad idea. Yes, I'm saying it. Not particularly interested in a child of prophecy either, despite her being a bit more interesting than Link, or Commander Shepard. If the game had been a series of investigations and intrigues in the spirit of the past two, then there would have been a good chance of greater verisimilitude in an open world. First game was in the spirit of the short stories, second one I believe was influenced by Blood of Elves. The third game is where I think they should have parted ways with the source material.

You're reading my mind. Of all the Witcher books the best ones (IMHO) were the first two collections of the short stories. When Ciri is introduced and Sapkowski decided to create his own Saga then personally for me it all went downhill. Ciri being the child of the prophecy is as cliche as it could be, enough with the prophecies and chose ones already!!!
 
My idea's about W3 game & how it should be like... As I said earlier open world is not a problem but then you have to decide what areas should lock till some point to maintain balance as well as curiosity about the further things.

Before going further let me tell you that I am not comparing W1, W2 with W3. I am just giving examples of previous game due to the fact that they really feels as a RPG genre where W3 is just looks like a adventure game with plain boring gameplay without any excitement.

What goes wrong in W3 IMHO

1] Graphics & Music
Graphics - Yes very nice game looks awesome but what about location feel? Do you enjoy those swamps or caves or other creepy places? For me answer is BIG NO. As even if graphics are beautiful this creepy places are really not looks like creepy. Just go & watch W1 swamps or caves & look how creepy it looks like. That swamp in W1 is dark, smoky & gives that feel that you are really in deep shit but in W3 swamps hahaha its just looks like normal area with water & many trees in it.
Location wise W3 cities, towns really gives nice feel.

Music - Again awesome but W3 music is giving more like adventures feel no matter at what place you are or to whom you are fighting. Yes of course its energetic but is music gives you that RPG feel ? or creepy horror feel in creepy areas ? Or are you feel that fear before entering some areas due to horrifying music ?? again the answer is BIG NO.

Conclusion - Actually graphics & music helps to add that proper feel & variety in gameplay as every location needs to justify its bg music & same goes to enemy we are fighting. As this is a RPG game so you really need to give that feel with music that you are really in swamp or cave like W1 music. Where if you are in swamps there is horror, mysterious music in bg with small creatures creepy sound which really makes you thing before going further.

2] Gameplay
W3 game play is super boring due to the fact of very low variety in quest designs & monster attack types.
About quests except main story it requires same thing to do again & again to complete those quests like find something, kill bandits/ kill monsters, find witcher gear etc. which is ok but due to open world we are already knowing about ever type of monster or human enemies as well there locations too so there is no surprise attacks or any excitement about your enemies left in game from start.
As if you ask me 1st area white orchard looks good but the fact is you are really learning about almost everything in white orchard only that you are going to get some random quests where you have to kill some monster or bandits or monster contacts or some side quests where you have to follow the tracks with witcher sense & need to complete that quest. Even it goes same with loot every time you are going to get some crafting/ alchemy material, sword, armor, diagram etc.. At level 25 I have more then 30 relic swords.


Overall Conclusion -
W3 fails to give me that RPG feel & actually it feels like adventure game rather than RPG. Even with beautiful graphics & awesome energetic music W3 failed to justify proper feel for locations like funny, horror, mysterious, excited, creepy, danger, safe etc... neither with graphics nor with music.

My suggestion

1] Try to use proper graphics & sound to justify that location feel. like..
If its a swamp then it should be dark, smoky with creepy creature sounds & with horror, mysterious bg music like W1. Many of us know the horror films right so take ideas from it like something is going in front of us very fast which is not enemy or its not possible for us to attack him/her but just to create that atmosphere same goes to cave, mine, cemetery, pit & other creepy places.
You can add many small things like spider nets, monster eggs, water dripping sound, cry sound, something suddenly drops down, small creatures going to run on cave walls, blood, skulls, chanting etc.

2] Add different kind of ideas to complete the quest rather then just following tracks with withcer sense & killing at the end. Ideas like..
*Add puzzles like activate something in proper way
* you have to 1st find some statues//ambulates/rings or anything & may be you have to places those thing properly in some temple to open doors etc.
* Add difficult brain kicking quests for Epic items
*Add more variety in enemy as well as their attacks like W1 floating enemies or different creatures in swamps.


In the end I just want to suggest that even if you are going for open world don't change the real mood & feel of RPG genre into Adventure game & for that keep secrecy, suspense about further things like all items, enemy types, advance gear & almost about everything. Unlocked the area's & items at proper level only as well please please try to keep the proper feel for location with proper graphics & music again same as W1.


Those who have played W1 & W2 going to understand what kind of variety or fun I am talking about & please if you don't then don't ask me as I am really tired now by explaining my point many times & actually my English is not that great so its really going hard for me to explain what exactly I am talking about.

Thanks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Last edited:
There is only one game with perfect balance between open world experience and great nonlinear storytelling.

That is a Gothic 2 with Night of the Raven expansion. Underrated gem of gaming industry. @vivaxardas2015 can confirm that.
 
Well, before the game came out, everyone was wondering if CDPR would be able to pull off combining a strong story, which is by its nature fairly linear (with branches, sure, but still linear) and open world. As far as that's concerned, I think they succeeded.

I think the problems are something else - they've been heavily discussed already, so no need to go into detail, but the problems of running out of sidequests too early, of managing levelling up without being over- or under-levelled for the main quest, of loot that's not worth picking up, monsters not worth the effort of killing them, quest rewards that are fit only to be sold.

These are all things that could occur in ANY open-world game. Some manage it just fine, others not so well. I don't think that the fact that a game is open world means that these problems HAVE to exist, so I think that Erik Kain, who I tend to respect, got it wrong this time. Open World brings in certain challenges to developers, but they're challenges that CAN be addressed.

As far as personal preferences are concerned then I'd prefer a well-balanced linear or hub-based game. But that is just my preference, I don't think that developers should give up on open world.

If you run out of side-quests its your own fault lol. Come on, there's like 200 of them. If this game was not OW I would not have gotten it. There's a few glitches here and there, but it works really good.

I think people forget how fucking awesome it is to go and take a contract when you feel like it. Or explore caves looking for witcher-gear. CCPR whatever you do, do not stop making OWs
 
On the leveling:
I had no problems with that simply because I have taken it as a part of (RPG) game building. I dont like leveling as a whole (and one of my biggest gripes with RPGs) and I completely block it out from my min when playing a game. A separate thing.. part of the gameplay, and not really much of a part of the world or even the story.

I do like finding equipment, modifying or upgrading gear. But leveling ... nah.

I have a different gripe to what most of you people are getting at. And it is both a world building one and a lore-one (I guess) but mostly a gameplay one.

The world is fairly static. The AI... it does not ever do anything. There is no surprise if you will. I was left with the ( wrong ) impression that CDPR would do some of what STALKER did with its A-Life system.
I wont ever get to see a monster from a contract be killed dynamically by soldiers, other witchers or militia. Camps dont ever really change possession without me. Such things.
Admittedly, a hard as all hell to code, buggy, and at times unfair system. Also... a very real and immersive one.

You're reading my mind. Of all the Witcher books the best ones (IMHO) were the first two collections of the short stories. When Ciri is introduced and Sapkowski decided to create his own Saga then personally for me it all went downhill. Ciri being the child of the prophecy is as cliche as it could be, enough with the prophecies and chose ones already!!!

Sapkowski actually played with the entire idea for a long time.. all 5 books. The point is... he hates the trope too and he subverted it.
 
How many of you here know the wild hund story even before the game release ? I mean via book or from any other sources ?

& now I think that's the reason you guys enjoy the W3 as you just wanted to play the thing which you are already knowing so there is actually no secrets or excitement for you its just you want to play the Geralt role for the story you have already know.

But for me its not the case as I am never into books & every witcher game in series is totally new for me so I really enjoying that mystery & suspense which in case of W3 got killed due to the fact of OW :(

---------- Updated at 12:42 PM ----------

@Charcharo - stalker is one of my favorite game series & specially 2nd game & as you know even if its a OW its not exploiting your fun by telling you what going to happen next. The weather & creepy places really dose there job handsomely. Music is also justifies the location you are in & the enemy you are fighting & that's what I am expected from W3 but even with beautiful graphics & music W3 failed to create that atmosphere.

Are you played W1 & W3 ? If yes which is your favorite game in series ?
 
Last edited:
But why would finding Ciri be less important with smaller gated zones. You wouldnt have the time to do sidequest and explore in that case either. The wild hunt dont take coffe brakes, why should you`?

What I was trying to get it (albeit, badly) was that a smaller area would have only a few sidequests, it could be more condensed for that specific location. These could be designed in such a way that the side quest areas are in the same area, as the main quest, for that particular region. So while you are off jumping through hoops for someone, so you can move on the story, you can kill two birds with one stone, so to speak. But then, if you choose to skip them, the whole world would be open by the time you finish the main story so are able to go back and do them at your leisure. But I feel the world would need to reflect the changes created by your choices throughout the game, so that it still feels alive.

---------- Updated at 06:02 PM ----------

Just sticking in my two bob re story v open world. The Uncharted series of games are one of my best game series of all time because I really enjoyed the story. It felt like playing through an Indiana Jones movie more than playing through a game and I loved it, mostly because of the story.

You couldn't get any more linear but IMO they are amazing games with amazing story.
 
Do you even know that not all the interesting stuff and quest are marked on the map with ? or !? Have you even explored the world or are you running from ? to ? by marking your map?

I really want to know what kind of interesting stuff you found which I don't so please share with spoiler tag. I really want to know it.
 
I don't think the open world is the problem. Most complaints about the game are related to the 3rd act, which is pretty linear for most people. At the same time people are prasing the Velen questline which is probably the most "open world" part of the game.
CDP did a good job with the open world and i believe it makes sense for the game. I'ts rather a problem if priorities. The story feels rushed and some of the ressources which have been uses on the open world should have been used to enhance the story part instead. For example, they couldn't fill all of it. The whole south and south-west of Velen is almost empty. There is only one quest related to it, the rest is filled with bandit camps, places of power and monster nests.
 
Open world is sometimes not very good for the consistency of the story. Especially in Witcher 3. You have to find Ciri before Wild Hunt do, so you need to rush, seriously rush, there is no time for contracts, side quests, looking for gear of witcher schools and exploring question marks on map... There are also a lot of great advantages of open world, but story need to be really "light" to avoid it colliding with other features like huge world to explore, a lot of side quests and etc. "Strait" and focused on main story game worlds, like the one from TW2, are in fact much more storyline friendly. This is not only about game worlds, this is huge advantage of any linear solutions used in storylines, game worlds and etc. Open world is probably better solution at the end, because it simulates real life, you have choices to make, you can choose whether you help people on your way or you go strait for main story goal. But to make this really believable not only game world need to be open, but also other things. Creating open world with level restrictions, especially as ridiculous ones like in TW3, where you are welcomed to Velen with 33 level contract while you are on level 4, not to mention that this kind of monster is immune to everything until you are close to his level, is just breaking any reason for open world. This is complete nonsense. Thankfully Better Combat Enchanced fixes it and you can fight with monster on much higher level if you have skill, you are prepared and you have proper gear, but this is also another nonsense feature, world renowned witcher doesn't have to find unique sword in some cave to be able to fight powerful monsters.

So those are only few examples of how open world can hurt seriously hurt immersion, storyline and lore. This really needs to be made with sense, otherwise you will get huge world with huge story holes and a lot of nonsense solutions that makes 64 km2 open map with huge content worse than 1 km2 closed one.
 
How many of you here know the wild hund story even before the game release ? I mean via book or from any other sources ?

& now I think that's the reason you guys enjoy the W3 as you just wanted to play the thing which you are already knowing so there is actually no secrets or excitement for you its just you want to play the Geralt role for the story you have already know.

But for me its not the case as I am never into books & every witcher game in series is totally new for me so I really enjoying that mystery & suspense which in case of W3 got killed due to the fact of OW :(

---------- Updated at 12:42 PM ----------

@Charcharo - stalker is one of my favorite game series & specially 2nd game & as you know even if its a OW its not exploiting your fun by telling you what going to happen next. The weather & creepy places really dose there job handsomely. Music is also justifies the location you are in & the enemy you are fighting & that's what I am expected from W3 but even with beautiful graphics & music W3 failed to create that atmosphere.

Are you played W1 & W3 ? If yes which is your favorite game in series ?

I read the books before the games were even a thing. So I do know a lot :p
Problem is it also makes the faults in the games more visible.

Yes, I played all Witcher games. Witcher 3 is my favourite.

STALKER's A-Life system is something others should copy more often.
 
Imo not only open world games suffer from repetitiveness, most if not every game out there feels like that once you put more time into it, we'll recognize the pattern and what the game allows us to do in the game world and that's it, it'll feel repetitive the more we play, that's where story helps, it's usually more fun to do main quest in a game, but I think CDPR has done a great job with TW3, even the side quests have story, but other things break it, like using same models for a lot of important npcs, it's understandable from technical view points but it totally breaks immersion somehow. Aside from that, it lacks variety of monster and animals in a world that huge, double or triple the variety of those creatures and it'd be a LOT different.
 
How many of you here know the wild hund story even before the game release ? I mean via book or from any other sources ?

& now I think that's the reason you guys enjoy the W3 as you just wanted to play the thing which you are already knowing so there is actually no secrets or excitement for you its just you want to play the Geralt role for the story you have already know.


I didnt know anything about the game. My buddy on the other side of the globe got it the day it was released. We did share-play so I watched him play it for the first time. A few hours later I went out and got it.
 
I didnt know anything about the game. My buddy on the other side of the globe got it the day it was released. We did share-play so I watched him play it for the first time. A few hours later I went out and got it.

Then I am sure you have not played W1 & W2 right ?
 
Top Bottom