Open World? Sandbox? Or the main story?

[111elf]

I have to agree, Bethesda's Fallout 3 was so lackluster from the RPG prospective I almost didn't bother with New Vegas. And after Fallout 4 I certainly won't bother with Bethesda's Fallout 5 unless they make a 180 degree turn around which I really don't expect.

I had so hoped Fallout 4 would be that 180 degree turn :cries: There was this one interview after Skyrim where Todd Howard said they are now really good creating interactive worlds and they're now going to focus on characters and story. And I was like 'OMG YES!'. Shortly before the release of Fallout 4 he mentioned that pacifist runs are no priority for them (which sucks given the legacy of Fallout 1, 2 and New Vegas) and well, then came the release and we all know how that turned out

I don't think I'll hate Fallout 4 - but they really really went in the opposite direction of what I had hoped Maybe there's hope for a new Obsidian Fallout - maybe...

To get back on topic: The more I think about it the more I tend towards main story. Open worlds can be great when the story, characters and locations really create a dense and interesting place. I think that probably only works for smaller worlds - the bigger it gets the harder it is to fill the world with life. I'd be really happy with a medium or even small sized open world as long as it's well tied in with the story. There has to be a lot going on - and not just this one time the player is doing the quests in the area. Because that results in a world that feels depressingly empty once you return to any area that you have already "cleared".

 

[braindancer12]

CD is looking for Junior Sandbox Designer

http://en.cdprojektred.com/jobs/sandbox-designer/

 

[metalmaniac21]

I had so hoped Fallout 4 would be that 180 degree turn :cries:

Well, it is a 180 degree turn. Fallout 3 actually was an RPG, just poorly done, but the system is always there. New Vegas just added traits and put stat/perk checks into a better use.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

Well, it is a 180 degree turn.

Not quite that sharp turn, really -- something like "45 degrees" at most (to use that kind of scale). They just refurbished their halfbaked mechanics (fixed them in the wrong way... or right when something closer to a shooter was what they aimed for), not much actually changed.

 

[Suhiira]

CD is looking for Junior Sandbox Designer

http://en.cdprojektred.com/jobs/sandbox-designer/

Wonder if they want to hire a broken-down retirement age lady?

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

Wonder if they want to hire a broken-down retirement age lady?

What kind of sandbox content would you go for?

 

[Suhiira]

What kind of sandbox content would you go for?

Something akin to Fallout 2 with a dual 1st Person/FPS and 3rd Person with pause/RPG combat system.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

Something akin to Fallout 2 with a dual 1st Person/FPS and 3rd Person with pause/RPG combat system.

Sounds good enough.

Although, as you might've guessed, I'd be more ambiguous with the FPS term. 1st person combat doesn't necessarily need play like an ordinary FPS.

 

[Suhiira]

Although, as you might've guessed, I'd be more ambiguous with the FPS term. 1st person combat doesn't necessarily need play like an ordinary FPS.

True, but let face it, most of the people using it will expect it to.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

True, but let face it, most of the people using it will expect it to.

Sure. But then make it clear in the marketing campaign, manuals, box covers, pre-release presentations, etc, that it won't so, so there won't be legit confusions or blames of misleading about it.

 

[Sardukhar]

Sure. But then make it clear in the marketing campaign, manuals, box covers, pre-release presentations, etc, that it won't so, so there won't be legit confusions or blames of misleading about it.

This will happen regardless, as ideas of what an RPG is, what open world means, what a shooter is and what degree of modding is allowed will all cause accusations of misleading statements.

Not to mention if the developers make the heinous mistake of changing their minds, and then showing people the new stuff. The unrelenting cruelty!

Frankly, this is why I like preview, do-as-you-want plays of the game. Really clears up the confusion. Then, when things change, more plays. Everyone will be on the same page.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

This will happen regardless

Of course. I simply meant that if there's something to be confused about (with the topic we had), underline it as thickly as possible so that the information is out there easily found and there's no-one else to blame for "getting confused" other than ones self.

Frankly, this is why I like preview, do-as-you-want plays of the game. Really clears up the confusion.

Yeah, agreed.

 

[Zagor-Te-Nay]

Both...Imo, it's a misconception of sandboxes inherently having weaker main plot and pacing issues. Problem is with developers always making a mistake of designing it too similar( or the same) as in linear games : Main story--> Unrelated sidequests and killing things (so you could level up+loot)---> Main story...
They should be based on same concept as the setting they're in...in this case, freedom to dictate your own pacing, discovery and exploration.
Instead of classical "Bioware-ian" plot of building urgency early on, leaving a clear direction from one main mission to another, story/antagonist(s) should be more "behind the scenes" mystery that slowly builds on, with the rest of the world largely unaware of it.
To progress from each point to next, player would play the part of a "detective" and discover their workings through different side quests ( some standing on their own, others, more important, "higher level" ones, integrated as part of other questlines), environmental clues/storytelling, etc around the world. Almost like a puzzle game, where you have to discover, pick up pieces and learn of their actions/motivations by yourself ( only part of it explained explicitly to the player): Knowledge would be the driving point. There would be no: finish one main mission, next journal entry directly states: Next, go there!

More structured like a web, than a straight line.

 

[Sardukhar]

More structured like a web, than a straight line.

Solid thinking. Thing is, we don't see that. The prejudice against Open World storytelling is rooted in experience - they've always been weaker stories. Thing is, if you build your future plans on past failures, you aren't really going to build a whole lot. "We've never successfully put a bridge across the XX River! Can't be done!" "Video games are for kids, no one has ever used one to create real art!"

That's what we see a lot of in the no-good-open-world-storytelling camp. And, you know, they are right, so far. But, Witcher 3 was pretty good and here's hoping CP can up the game even more.

Because near-life immersion as seen in open-world games isn't going anywhere. There will still be a place for tight, controlled settings and stories, but like isometrics and platformers, they will generally move into a niche position.

Developers will be forever trying to provide more freedom, more immersion, more "whoah".

 

[NightSavior]

There's actually some really good points made about open world vs. main story in this thread (and I think some other threads had ideas about it too).

I actually like how CDPR informed early on that the story of CP2077 would revolve more around the growth of the main character rather than a big main story where you save the world (or even the city). As people have mentioned, this is a weakness for open world, sandbox games where you, in theory, live your own life. A big main story has the inevitable effect of drawing all the attention and making a sense of urgency, which then breaks the immersion if you go on doing some little stuff and the plot just waits for you to pick it up.

What I'd like to see is the kind of wet of stories Zagor mentioned, where there wasn't any clear "main story" but they'd form a bigger arch where the main character grows from gutter to somewhere else. In addition, I'd love to see that some missions or subplots were time dependent and would end differently if you didn't do the given out tasks in time. This running out of time shouldn't even need to be visible for the player. This way there would be a lot more variation with how every play through gives a different kind of impression.

 

[Suhiira]

There's also the Marketing Department to deal with.
​Most people want great graphics, an interactive combat system, and a game that will take them days to finish. The story falls in fourth, and last place for your average action gamer.

 

[Meccanical]

There's actually some really good points made about open world vs. main story in this thread (and I think some other threads had ideas about it too).

I actually like how CDPR informed early on that the story of CP2077 would revolve more around the growth of the main character rather than a big main story where you save the world (or even the city). As people have mentioned, this is a weakness for open world, sandbox games where you, in theory, live your own life. A big main story has the inevitable effect of drawing all the attention and making a sense of urgency, which then breaks the immersion if you go on doing some little stuff and the plot just waits for you to pick it up.

What I'd like to see is the kind of wet of stories Zagor mentioned, where there wasn't any clear "main story" but they'd form a bigger arch where the main character grows from gutter to somewhere else. In addition, I'd love to see that some missions or subplots were time dependent and would end differently if you didn't do the given out tasks in time. This running out of time shouldn't even need to be visible for the player. This way there would be a lot more variation with how every play through gives a different kind of impression.

That would be interesting and most likely for the best.

Maybe the narrative could work in a way in which the player decides what's most important to their character, what they feel they need to accomplish, and the story could change depending on what you want to drive your character.

Don't know how in the world it would work, but I think having essentially different "main quests" would be cool.

In the case of the Witcher 3, I enjoyed the various stories that were being told throughout the world moreso than the actual main quest.

 

[NightSavior]

In the case of the Witcher 3, I enjoyed the various stories that were being told throughout the world moreso than the actual main quest.

This!
I love it when stories are told through the world in addition to typical quest storytelling. What I've been missing since Morrowind is that in MW you couldn't always make the difference between questlines and story snippets that weren't part of any actual quest. The addition of quest markers has ruined that a bit since now you always end up running after the markers most of the time (at least this happens for me).

 

[Zagor-Te-Nay]

Ideally, the way I see it, well told main story in sandbox/CP, at first would not even be recognizable from regular quests. Only when you progress further on, you start to see the connections and realize a familiar pattern between them, with each one leaving a new trail for player to explore in the world. Not your typical villain escaping with : Mwahahaha! and pointing you straight to your next objective. O'dimm antagonist manipulating and using others for his own ends, trying to clear his tracks and using different aliases.
Sort of like storytelling in Fromsoft games, but on a much more larger and interactive scale: quests, environments, dialogue...player's observance and how far he's willing to discover/explore every facet of the world( isn't that one of main reasons for sandbox/open world games...shouldn't main story reflect that as well?) would determine his understanding, progress and outcome of the main plot.
At some point it would have to become more straightforward, but in much later stages of the game.

 

[Suhiira]

At some point it would have to become more straightforward, but in much later stages of the game.

​In an ideal open world/snadbox game you have/find opportunities to do things from square one, and won't have a clue what the "main quest" is until somewhere in your explorations you stumble across it or some events take place you have no control over and force you into it. Yes, a game where you don't have a clue what the main story-line is until after you've played it for a few hours.

Why do we need "Do X and save the world/yourself" thrust in our face from the moment we create our character?
​Those of us that play PnP games know we are creating our character to partake in a game world not a specific adventure.

​90%+ of games assume players are to stupid to figure things out for themselves and must be led by the nose. OK, true for some, a VERY small minority of players, and probably for the adrenaline junkies (because they want to dive into the action and the story-line is merely sometimes inconvenient backdrop they have to suffer thru to get to the action). But is CDPR making a game with either of these audiences in mind much less targeted?