Game content - How keep an Open World interesting

+
Suhiira;n9538961 said:
Ever play "Secret World"?

I am very torn on their new combat system and that they decided they needed to restart the entire game for it. And I head nasty rumors that the investigation quests all got casualised hard.
 
walkingdarkly;n9542291 said:
I am very torn on their new combat system and that they decided they needed to restart the entire game for it. And I head nasty rumors that the investigation quests all got casualised hard.
EVERYTHING got casualized.
My big issue is that it feels even more like an Asian MMO then it did before.
Grind forever for little gain (the Talismans-Glyphs-Sigil upgrading system).
 
Suhiira;n9544191 said:
EVERYTHING got casualized.
My big issue is that it feels even more like an Asian MMO then it did before.
Grind forever for little gain (the Talismans-Glyphs-Sigil upgrading system).


If only the character models were more like an Asian MMO. Asian games have some of the best character models and character customization.

Not gonna lie, half the reason I couldn't get into The Secret World was that the characters looked like apes with kinda bad models and really bad character customization comparable to random free to play cash grab type games where you just swap faces and a few styles. That is, at least, the memory of my impression.

Pointless explanation of the other half the reason people probably don't need to waste time reading:
The other half was that I kept having to replay the game getting back into it after being away for so long. So every time I returned, I couldn't get as far as the last time before I burned out. Now it's to the point that I'm burned out before I even see the first area.

Really loved the experience I got years ago during open beta where I got to the third or so area/realm/map before the 5-6 day trial ran out and then I didn't get to play for a year. Once I did, I had to replay the stuff I already did and it dragged me down a little but I still got pretty far before burning out for other reasons... But then the second (third) time I approached the replaying was fatiguing... starting the viscous cycle.
 
It's a complex matter...if you're going into open world with we'll create mechanics/story/world first and then fill it with content later, then honestly, you're wasting time/resources on creating these type of games.

Gameplay and rpg mechanics have to be designed, from the start, to offer as much meaningful, intuitive interaction with the environment.

Two games excel at this: Larian's Divinity Original Sin and last Zelda.

From level design that has multiple entries, movement ( parkour and verticality), destructible environments, interaction with objects...player should always be rediscovering different ways to solve problems ( Essentially opposite of Witcher, that disabled interaction with objects during encounters...madness)

Then there are dynamic encounters that allow player to roleplay using his role/skills...persuasion, disguise, combat, hacking, intimidate as cop, etc.

When it comes to worldbuilding through environmental storytelling, Mankind Divided is a great example...it's levels are littered with stories and items that connect npcs, quests and locations.

Npcs should also be more pro active, feel less scripted and take action in different scenarios, instead of being mobile scenery.

And one thing usually overlooked is Fast travel design: instead of instant teleportation should be logically implemented at used sparingly, to actual give a sense of travelling...see: Morrowind.
 
This is likely a rather complex matter and to keep it simple, I would summarize it as:

The less static and thus more dynamic you create the world and allow interaction, the better. Some good examples are already present in here. Best I can imagine is a living persistent breathing world with lots of interaction with the environment where seemingly normal items can have different uses depending on the situation. See a filled coffee mug? You could use it as consumable item. But maybe you can also use it as impromptu weapon to throw at an enemy to distract them a bit with really minor damage, but more so to confuse them - unless they were not armored and you were augmented. So you could perhaps actually hurt them with that item given enough force and lack of protection on their end.

Or maybe you can simply throw it somewhere, anywhere, to distract someone through the sounds.
 
Interactivity....

Is useless to make a open world RPG if you ware not even able to sit on a bench....

Less movie set and more actually interactive world please.
 
Speaking of that - it would be amazing to be able to walk into most houses - or, in other words, it would be amazing if you had the ability, if each (or most) interiors were actually there - opposed to GTA where it is just scenery in a nutshell. Sure, horrible work to flesh out every house if you have a large urban area - but still cool.
 
Metropolice;n9583031 said:
it would be amazing to be able to walk into most houses[/QUOTE

That's a feature I've been wanting to see in GTA from the days of GTA: Vice City. I wonder if it's possible to actually do that or is it just to time consuming for most devs to do such a feat.]
 
What would you do with all those interiors if you had them all rendered?

I mean, isn't the point ultimately interactivity? You'd need content there too, stuff to do, or it'd be but of little difference between entering a building and watching it from outside.
 
Last edited:
kofeiiniturpa;n9583331 said:
What would you do with all those interiors if you had them all rendered?

One idea I can think of, is if I'm on the run from someone it would be someplace I can duck into to hide or try to lose the people on my tail by going through the front door, up the second floor and out a backside window.

It would also mean the city would feel more alive and lived in than what's in the likes of GTA.
 
Look at open world games or RPGs like the Fallout or TES series: People (NPCs) live somewhere, usually houses. In there, you can usually find clutter and personal belongings, not counting their place to sleep and live of course. And that is not including possible unique items such as personal notes or quest items / areas, of course.

In other words, even if there is nothing "special", you can steal from them if you're less than lawful. And if they are criminals, you'd even do something subjectively good.

Plus what walkingdarkly wrote.

You can even go nuts and if the game will have some more than simplified or basic "housing mechanic" you could in theory even pick the place you like and make it your new home after dealing with whoever might live there or by buying it or simply living there, if it's for sale or abandoned.

Maybe that is "too much" again, but just throwing it out there as additional possibility. At least, I could see demand for this. Imagine this once release is here or some time after that: Players talking about how they escaped police or assassins by running and hiding in some random house or by jumping out of the window at the back. Or people simply setting a new home somewhere where they like it.

Hey, don't throw stones at me, just stating the ideal possibilities or scenarios here.
 
Last edited:
walkingdarkly;n9583341 said:
One idea I can think of, is if I'm on the run from someone it would be someplace I can duck into to hide or try to lose the people on my tail by going through the front door, up the second floor and out a backside window.

Oh, you only meant lobby and staircase...

Metropolice;n9583351 said:
Look at open world games or RPGs like the Fallout or TES series: People (NPCs) live somewhere, usually houses.In there, you can usually find clutter and personal belongings, not counting their place to sleep and live of course. And that is not including possible unique items such as personal notes or quest items / areas, of course.

They also have "cities" smaller than a public playground in a real city and populated by a couple of dozen (often less) NPC's.

In my mind I'm already preparing to download a 1000GB game in 2030 where you can do in Night City what you can do with the NPC's and their houses in Skyrim or Fallout 4. :p

Although, if the game worked with smaller hubs instead of one openworld map, it might be done for a certain number of NPC's.

Metropolice;n9583351 said:
Hey, don't throw stones at me, just stating the ideal possibilities or scenarios here.

No stones, just trying to discuss those possibilities or scenarios. I've given my own earlier in this thread already (more or less like yours, but more abstract).
 
Last edited:
kofeiiniturpa;n9583371 said:
Oh, you only meant lobby and staircase...
No, I meant running through a guy's living room to run up to his bedroom to jump out a window as an idea but you just want to be a snide stuck up jerk about it and attack my ideas like some others have in this forum.
 
The dreams of today will be a reality of tomorrow - sounds cheesy, quote also likely exists already but those are my thoughts about possibilities and tech.

Today we may scoff at the notion that a large city in a game actually has every house covered and fleshed out as it's too much (manual) work beyond a certain set of houses and / or NPCs that should populate those houses - but eventually, either modders will tackle this (there are mods for Fallout games where they add more interiors to city areas) if the game allows that type of modding or technology will become better so that you can generate houses and interiors with clutter more easily - or at least save a lot of manual work in the process.

Sure, this won't happen tomorrow or so, but I'm sure we will be surprised at the tech in one decade, and then maybe two decades.
 
Metropolice;n9583351 said:
Look at open world games or RPGs like the Fallout or TES series
there are lots of buildings in fallout 4 that you can't enter. you just ignore them, because there are enough interesting ones. I fully expect the same in cp.

Metropolice;n9583711 said:
or technology will become better so that you can generate houses and interiors with clutter more easily
I'm personally very much against having too many "open" buildings, because as a (semi)completionist I would be afraid of missing the actually interesting ones.
I think if they had the tech to generate every interior in a city of millions of people, it would feel the same as if no buildings were enterable, because it would all be just uninteresting scenery. even if they could dynamically spawn handcrafted interiors in your way after n amount of generatred rooms you entered, I would just get bored of exploring, because the majority of them were nothing but filler..
 
Of course, the "freedom" (of being able to enter or try to enter any house or room) might be overwhelming or appear useless or anything but special to someone at one point.

But I like to go by the abundance mentality there: Better to have it and not need it than to need or want it and not have it. I consider it situational benefits if you want to steal from random people or if you need to suddenly escape from someone - or look for someone that could be hiding in those places.

In other words, I wouldn't even want to try to get into every house if there were thousands - but being able to get into any or most when you have or want to, that is the aspect I like. I frankly do not expect it for CP2077 - not in the extreme form at least, as it would likely be too much work, assuming we get to see a major urban area.

And hey, that is still fine I suppose. In the end, the city or areas simply have to feel realistic, and if you can enter enough interiors seamlessly or so, that's fine. Anything but GTA where it's very few houses or places in relation to all visible buildings.
 
Metropolice;n9584071 said:
Better to have it and not need it than to need or want it and not have it.

I disagree, in this instance. there is a point where "more options" just becomes "diluting the experience". random and meaningful interiors are indistinguishable until you explore them, so anything interesting will disappear in a sea of mediocrity. yes, normally you don't wanna try to get into every random house, but you do wanna get into the unique ones – but you have absolutely no way of knowing where to find that 1%. you might play through the game finding only a fraction of the more meaningful places the devs created.

Metropolice;n9584071 said:
And hey, that is still fine I suppose. In the end, the city or areas simply have to feel realistic, and if you can enter enough interiors seamlessly or so, that's fine. Anything but GTA where it's very few houses or places in relation to all visible buildings.

yeah. there is a balance they have to strike. right now for interiors it's probably between time/money and amount of content. but if they have more resources/better tech, the balance between content and meaningful content is also important. the ? marks of witcher 3 come to mind, though those were a much more distinct part of the experience than interiors would be.
 
kofeiiniturpa;n9583331 said:
What would you do with all those interiors if you had them all rendered?
I mean, isn't the point ultimately interactivity? You'd need content there too, stuff to do, or it'd be but of little difference between entering a building and watching it from outside.
Exactly.

Metropolice;n9583351 said:
Look at open world games or RPGs like the Fallout or TES series: People (NPCs) live somewhere, usually houses. In there, you can usually find clutter and personal belongings, not counting their place to sleep and live of course. And that is not including possible unique items such as personal notes or quest items / areas, of course.
<clip>
Hey, don't throw stones at me, just stating the ideal possibilities or scenarios here.
No, you're correct.
The "problem" is most players either don't care to collect forks OR collect every fork in the game. Either of these behaviors will have am effect on the game, assuming you can sell them, because in the long run the price of 20,000 used forks adds up.

lord_blex;n9584031 said:
I'm personally very much against having too many "open" buildings, because as a (semi)completionist I would be afraid of missing the actually interesting ones.
And this is also a problem.
Most games that have lots of interior areas hide one or two really "good" items somewhere in them. So unless you explore 500 interior areas (or get REALLY lucky) you never acquire the items.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom