Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 

Open World Gaming: is bigger better?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 31-01-2013, 19:49
thomas2400
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 3,290

These days we continually here about how vast skyrim is or how massive fallout is or the fact that GTAV is bigger than GTA4, Red dead and whatever else combined, is this a good thing though

i've been playing Vice City which is an incredibly small game by today's standards but when it comes to the game asking me to go to a certain place i can drive there without looking at the map if there are hidden weapons or items they are easier to find

but if i put GTA4 on i'll just get a taxi across the map or fast travel in fallout because the maps are so huge, ask me to drive somewhere on GTA4 and it would need to either be on the map as a location or you'd need to tell me where the way points needs to be, even after 4 years i could barely tell you where anything is on GTA4

So is bigger better?
thomas2400 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 31-01-2013, 20:03
Steveaustin316
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 10,887
If there's enough going on (like GTA San Andreas), then yes.
Steveaustin316 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-01-2013, 20:13
MsLurker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 947
It depends on the game really. While I imagine some in games it will be tedious after awhile looking for every cave or village but in other games you might just want to stay weeks still finding little secrets because it's so good.

I wish Far Cry 3 and Sleeping Dogs had bigger maps but on the other hand I'm thinking about getting Skyrim but the sheer scale of it's world seems quite daunting I'm not sure if I will be able to fully enjoy it.
MsLurker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-01-2013, 20:14
CD93
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lancashire, UK
Posts: 10,103
All the above. An open world needs to have enough going on in it in order for it to work. I'll take Far Cry 3 or San Andreas over Skyrim or GTA IV, for example, because I find them on the whole lots more fun.
CD93 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-01-2013, 20:43
kendoguk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: My Bedroom
Posts: 8,492
Skyrim isn't all that big really
kendoguk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-01-2013, 20:49
treefr0g
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 7,822
I enjoyed the scale of San Andreas because the driving experience was so enjoyable. In Red Dead Redemption I rode everywhere irrespective of the distance - I never took the carriage - again because I enjoyed the experience. There was always lots to do and look at.
With GTA IV however, whistling for a taxi became second nature. I wouldn't drive down the road let alone across the map. Nothing to do with the scale. I just hated driving.

Not quite open world, but the one game that I remember being frustrating due to the large maps was Tomb Raider 3. You could easily go miles in the wrong direction.
treefr0g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-01-2013, 21:00
jenzie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: BUDDIETOWN
Posts: 16,474
i say the BIGGER the BETTER!!!

unlocking a part of the map is a big deal!!!
jenzie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-01-2013, 21:23
Pyramidbread
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Frescho FastTrack
Posts: 9,124
No, anyone who has played Just Cause 2 knows that, sure its a fun game, but there's not really much to see.
Pyramidbread is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-01-2013, 21:27
Just Vogue
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Cher
Posts: 729
As long as walking around in the world is entertaining and has a huge number of things to do in it then yes, bigger is better.

That's one of my major gripes with Skyrim, navigating its huge map doesn't really entertain me. Walking from one mission to the next should be an adventure, not a chore. Skyrim is the only game in which I regularly used fast travel.

Far Cry is the absolute opposite. I find the world fun to be in and walk around in, quite often getting side tracked for half an hour following just one tiger. Not into another mission, but doing something completely random.

GTA 3 is much the same, it isn't fun to walk around in. Only way to make it fun to me is to hop in a car and mow down pedestrians/smash into things
Just Vogue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-01-2013, 21:27
Jimmy_McNulty
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Baltimore, M.D
Posts: 10,430
As long as there is enough interaction in each area, I couldn't care less. Also, you're not going to learn a map if all you do is fast travel.
Jimmy_McNulty is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 31-01-2013, 21:32
Sick Bullet
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chadderton
Posts: 9,167
Skyrim isn't all that big really
It is very big still though, but I was surprised with the world on Assassins Creed 3 it's huge probably the biggest open world game I've played.
Sick Bullet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-01-2013, 21:52
mred2000
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 6,755
...but I was surprised with the world on Assassins Creed 3 it's huge probably the biggest open world game I've played.
Really?
mred2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-01-2013, 22:15
Vast_Girth
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,938
Big is good, but there is definitely such a thing as too big. Skyrim for example, i think i would have preferred to be half the size, but with a vast increase in the variety and quality of the quests...
Vast_Girth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-01-2013, 22:16
bob2005
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: London
Posts: 3,275
Don't mind big open world games as long as theres enough to do in the game spanning the whole map. Played so many games where it'll be better having a much smaller detailed scale.
bob2005 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-01-2013, 22:37
tombigbee
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Manchester
Posts: 3,439
I enjoyed Vice City more than I did San Andreas so I'd have to say I prefer a smaller map. Bully was also a really fun game and that map was tiny in comparison. It all depends on what you get to do in the world. Plus I get more satisfaction out of learning a map and if the world gets too big then that can get pretty difficult.
tombigbee is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 31-01-2013, 23:15
Prebono
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 77
Based on these images, it's most certainly not. In fact, there's a pretty clear inverse correlation between game quality and game world size, with a few exceptions.
Prebono is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-01-2013, 23:20
0lly
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 156
I don't like San Andreas and one of the reasons is because I found it boring driving so much just to get from one point to the other. Love Vice City though. So no, for me bigger doesn't mean better.
0lly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-01-2013, 23:38
Dan27
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: By The Sea
Posts: 9,478
Bigger isnt better.

I'd rather walk 20 yards to get my next bit of content than spend 5 minutes driving to it.
Dan27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 02:27
Gevans81
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: South Wales
Posts: 511
Just Cause 2 was a huge world, and it looked spectacular, I remember trying to drive from one end to the other one afternoon and it literally took hours to achieve, gave up in the end. Skyrim was pretty big I guess but I didn't like the snow areas, thought it all looked a bit messy.

San Andreas hit the nail on the head for me, perfect map size, plenty to do and see, vastly differing tones and cultures, that's why it's still my favourite game of all time.

Bigger the better for me, as long as the content is there, which sadly it 's isn't from most games these days, Far Cry 3 was a good example of this.
Gevans81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 10:05
Sick Bullet
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chadderton
Posts: 9,167
Absolutely unless you taking the mick and have it and think it's not? for sure bigger than Skyrim.

I'm not a fan of Just Cause alot of people say this I would agree even from the demo.
Sick Bullet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 10:39
SaddlerSteve
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,583
Bigger is better.... as long as it's filled with content.

Nothing worse than a huge map of nothing going on!

OF: Dragon Rising made this mistake!
SaddlerSteve is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 10:57
CSI-uk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,317
Going by some of the posts a cod map would be to big, crazy people.

A good example of an open world game with a to small map is Forza Horizon, I got the the achievement for driving on every road in 2 days, you could drive round the entire island in 20 mins. I think it would have really benefited from a map, maybe twice the size.

Generally I think bigger is better but at the end of the day its what the game creators do with that space, that's what it boils down to.
CSI-uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 11:47
Hotbird
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 9,001
As long as the world is well designed and thought out properly then bigger is better.

San Andreas got this right for me, each area was well defined and had its own identity, navigating was from one city to the next was easy enough without needing to constantly refer to the map and even with a map so large you could always find something to do near by.

With the abundance of sandbox games these days I find it disappointing when you can drive from one side of the map to the other in less then a minute, it that's the case you map is too small.
Hotbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 14:00
logansdad
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 765
It's all about the atmosphere thats been created in that world. I rode everywhere in Red Dead, even spent hours just wandering about and exploring areas. GTA4 fell flat a bit for me because so much of the city is just for show, would have liked a few buildings to be accesable that weren't neccesary to the plot, just to explore and find secrets.
logansdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 14:27
2Dshmuplover
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Norfolk UK
Posts: 8,014
Both, depends on what you are looking for. I like a compact game world with many things to do as much as I like a large sprawling one which is more sparse in events, yet can make up for the lack of content in other ways such as sense of exploration and atmosphere.

Skyrim is great for this, likewise GTA IV and Mafia II, both of which have a lack of events/side quests compared to many of today's sandbox games but make up for it in the sheer detail that's been poured into the environment which even by today's standards is staggering and exploring it is a total pleasure! For me anyway. Sleeping Dogs may be compact but it's not nearly as enjoyable walking around and exploring the game world as it feels like a last gen title in comparison to either GTA IV or Mafia 2. Sometimes I prefer detail to be put into the game world itself as it tends to draw you into the experience more.
2Dshmuplover is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 16:38.