What can’t be done in the open world games?

11.01.2023 0 By admin

[Falcon] Open world games
have gotten pretty advanced.

The worlds are big, amazing

and more dense than ever
and yet there’s still

some stuff that just shouldn’t be there.

Hi folks, it’s Falcon
and today on “Gameranx,”

10 things open world games
need to stop doing immediately.

At number 10, launching in a buggy state.

It’s a real minefield out there

for people who like open world games

especially if you’re the type

of person who likes to get
a game the day it comes out.

‘Cause a lot of these, they
are a buggy mess on launch day

like the recent “Saints Row,”

“Cyberpunk 2077,” “Assassins Creed Unity,”

these are some of the
more prominent examples

but almost every open
world game has some issues

that have to be dealt with at launch.

I mean, I get it.

These are some of the biggest

and most complex games out there.

So like it’s actually understandable

that there’s gonna be bugs.

I’m not saying

like every single game has
to be absolutely perfect

with zero bugs in it at launch,

these games are just too big for that.

What I am saying is
that some of these games

at launch ere unacceptable,
like just doing basic stuff.

If that’s a problem or you’re seeing

like graphical glitches all the time

to the point where it’s
actually detracting

from what’s going on,
there’s something wrong.

“Cyberpunk” managed to get
to a mostly functional state

after years of patching,
but it’s hard to forget

just how rough that game
was when it first came out.

And if anything, the recent
“Saints Row” was worse.

Like most of “Cyberpunk’s”
stuff was visual glitches.

Some of it really detracted from the game

but it was visual glitches.

“Saints Row” had some completely
game breaking stuff in it.

Like sometimes it was not
possible to shoot a gun

in an open world crime game.

That’s ridiculous.

“No Man’s Sky” is
another infamous example.

We famously have made videos

about this game on both
its good and bad times

but this game wasn’t just
buggy when it came out.

It was kind of barely a game.

The developers didn’t give
up on it though and it’s gone

on to great success after years
of free patches and updates.

But it was rough, like rough.

Also they said a bunch of
stuff was gonna be there

that wasn’t, also they faked a tech demo

and the fact that they turned
it around as drastically

as they did is incredibly
impressive actually.

But the story in “No Man’s Sky”

and we wouldn’t call common, right?

Especially when you’re talking

about smaller developers working

on what amounts to be an independent game.

A lot of open world games
remain broken to this day.

Like the PC ports of the prototype games,

they’re published by
Activision of all people.

But trying to play these
games on a modern PC is,

well, it’s an exercise and frustration.

There’s a lot of issues and they’re not

like fun bugs like visual
glitches that make you laugh.

They’re just freezes and crashes.

Like even some of the best
games have bugs and issues.

“Elden Ring” still struggles
with some stuttering

on PC and I remember running into a lot

of problems with “Horizon Forbidden West”

when it first came out.

Most of those bugs have
been patched out by now

but I’d rather not have dealt
with them at all, you know?

At number nine, not letting
you name your save files

or only having auto saves.

Open world games are huge, complex

and can take hundreds
of hours to complete.

So it’s kind of bizarre how few

of them actually have decent save systems.

That is to say, is it that much to ask

to have these games let
you name your save file

so that you can mark your progress?

I know most of the games are built

for consoles where typing
can be pretty awkward

but at least give us the
option if we want it, you know?

If you wanna go back to a specific section

of a game before a major
choice or something

then finding the specific
save file is really annoying.

Like I don’t really wanna sift

through about 100 save
house saves or whatever

just to guess the date and
time I made a save that I want.

I know I’m kinda dreaming on this one

’cause there’s so many open world games

where just being able to make
a manual save is a luxury.

Like so many of these games
are auto save or nothing now.

The amount of open world
games that do this is just

like out of control at this point

and they really just rub salt in the wound

by not giving you a way to
replay emissions or anything.

So you wanna go back to a
certain part of the game.

Tough luck.

Your only option is to
start this 100 hour game

from the very beginning.

I don’t wanna start the game over again.

I just wanna play this cool part again.

Is that a lot? Is that so much to ask?

I mean, at least now manual saving is

again becoming more common in games

but it’s still not everywhere.

Open world games need to cut this out.

Put in manual saving,

let me name my saves is
that much to ask really.

And number eight is when character
creation comes out wrong.

This is just as much as an RPG
problem as an open world one.

But at least with RPGs
they usually just start

out with a character
creator right at the start

while open world games,
they get cute with it.

You know what we’re talking about here?

We, you’ve all been there,

you’ve spent a long time
meticulously creating the

perfect character in all the settings.

You start the game and
they just don’t look right.

It’s a never ending problem

that still pops up all over the place.

Games really wanna show
off their characters

so they use like flattering lighting

and high detail models
for the character creator.

But when you exit it,
your character gets hit

with an ugly stick
because the flat lighting

in the actual game, you
know, using less resources

and all that, certain games try their best

to give you the tools to make
your character look right,

like different lighting
options in the creator.

But it’s never perfect.

READ  Is Destiny 2 Too Hard since the Lightfall Update?

Certain games make it so you can change

everything about your character later.

But most games limit things

to just make up and hair and clothes.

So if you screw up during
the initial creation,

you’re stuck with the freak
you’ve mistakenly created.

This is when an open world game’s tendency

to show off becomes an issue

because you wanna try again

but you’re gonna be stuck

through a long opening
sequence all over again.

You might have to replay the prologue

as a faceless character and only after all

that does the game let you
customize your character again.

It’s the worst.

It’s also the reason why a bunch

of opening sequences to games
are burned into my brain.

At least make it so you
can skip the prologue

if you’ve seen it already.

It’s not like it makes a
difference how I do there.

I just want to change the character.

Why do some games have to
make this so difficult?

And number seven, making the
worlds way too big and empty.

One of the most appealing things
about an open world game is

when you can see things
like a mountain or a city

in the distance and then
you can actually go there.

I know everybody jokes
about the Todd Howard line,

“See that mountain?

You can go there,” but
I mean there’s still

something impressive
about that On some level.

A big open world can still be impressive

but some games go a little overboard

and make the world bigger,
but forget to fill it

with the stuff that
actually makes exploring an

open world interesting.

So you got this gigantic map

but not much to do in it.

A lot of games that I would have

in the biggest open
world games are like this

like “The Crew 2” which
is meant to recreate the

entire United States in an enormous,

at least for a video
game, 1,900 square miles.

That’s an impressive number,

but if you actually play the game,

you quickly notice how much
of it is smoke and mirrors.

Lot of copy and pasted
buildings, repeated roads,

massive stretches of empty nothing.

You know, nothing really
interesting or exciting.

“Ghost Recon Breakpoint” and
“Just Cause 4” are similar.

The maps are so big that a huge chunk

of your time is spent just trying to get

from one place to another and
it gets boring after a while.

Games that intentionally go for realism

like flight simulator, fine,

recreating the entire world is
part of the fun of that game.

And it’s not like I’m gonna
go stop at a gas station

and try to figure out
exactly how detailed it is.

You’re flying an airplane,
you’re in the air.

I’m mostly talking about
normal open world games here.

Bigger, not always better.

I much prefer open world
games that are dense

and interesting with a
lotta unique landmarks

and unique designs for areas.

It’s like the difference

between “Arkham Knight”
and “Gotham Knights.”

The city in “Gotham Knights”
is more realistic and bigger

than the one in “Arkham
Knight,” but it’s pretty boring.

It’s just a bunch of buildings.

While “Arkham Night’s” city is a small

but dense and interesting city with ramps

and changes in elevation and
secrets all over the place

like I hate to break it to you

but like at least relating
to this real life is boring.

If you’re making an open
world game just make it fun.

At number six, introducing
annoying RPG mechanics

to non RPG series.

This one might be a little
divisive, I don’t know

but the way a lot of
developers are trying to sneak

in a lot of RPG mechanics

into standard open
world games kinda sucks.

You know what I’m talking about.

The recent “Assassins Creed” trilogy

of “Origins,” “Odyssey,”
“Valhalla,” the “Far Cry” games

like “New Dawn” and “Far
Cry 6,” “Ghost Recon Break.”

I guess it’s mostly Ubisoft games,

but considering how many open world games

these guys crank out, it’s kind of a lot.

And when I say RPG mechanics,
I don’t just mean leveling up.

That’s kind of an unavoidable feature

for pretty much every game.

I mean more invasive
systems or even versions

of systems like loot drops,
damage vaults, health bars,

things that weren’t part of a game series

and then got shoved into them anyways.

It’s especially weird
in “Far Cry New Dawn”

where you find enemies with
little skulls over them

that are bullet sponges, but
if you’re high enough level,

they suddenly become killable.

It’s not like your guns
or anything got stronger,

it’s just that you reached
the arbitrary level threshold

so you can fight ’em now.

It’s a huge immersion breaker

and it feels wrong in a shooter.

Like different level enemies
should probably not respond to,

you know, bullet wounds that differently.

The “Assassins Creed” games
used to be the same way.

They were basically action games

with some minor RPG elements

but the focus was on stealth and gadgets.

And with the recent trilogy

all that stuff has kinda
been pushed to the side.

It’s not the worst thing.

There’s actually a lot I like

about the recent “Assassin Creed” games

but it does kind of feel

like it’s losing its unique identity.

I’m hoping “Mirage” gets
the series sort of back

on track in terms of
that stuff, but at least

at the time of this writing
we don’t really know

what exactly the direction
the series is committing to.

And this also isn’t to say

that some RPG stuff is bad, it’s not.

Some games implement some
minor RPG stuff pretty well

but I am kinda tired of open world games

just becoming numbers filled RPGs.

Obviously I love RPGs but
not everything has to be one.

At number five, not tracking objectives

and confusing completion tracking.

If you’re a completionist,

this is easily the most annoying thing

about open world games.

They really love to pack these things

with all the collectibles you can imagine

and depending on the game,

going for 100% completion
might seem like a fun goal.

If a game’s good about keeping
track of what you found

and what you haven’t, getting
everything isn’t that bad.

But when it doesn’t, oof, it is misery.

The example I always come back to for

this one is “Crackdown.”

It’s a great game but it does
nothing to track agility orbs.

So if you wanna find all of them

READ  The origin of the first generation of Pokémon games is a fascinating tale that involves real life bug catching

then you better be ready to find 99%

of ’em pretty easy and then
spend another 20 hours looking

and re-looking and trying to find the one

or two missing orbs that you
missed the first time around.

It’s an extreme example, but
a lotta open world games are

really bad about tracking stuff.

Like games that do not show you

if you’ve found something on
the map, but give no indication

if it’s been collected
and completed or not.

Some games erase things you’ve done

from the map completely, which
can be extremely annoying

if you’re trying to return
to a spot you’ve already been

because you’ve missed
the treasure, you know,

or something like that.

Bad map tracking one thing,

but certain games are terrible
at quest tracking too.

Mass Effect Andromeda
among its many problems

has some truly terrible quest tracking.

Even stuff as simple as fetch
quests are poorly marked.

They don’t tell you how many

of a thing someone
wants or where they are.

And a game like this where
there’s pretty big maps,

multiple planets, it can get
really easy to miss this stuff.

I’m not saying every game
should cover your screen

with objective markers all over the place

but at least give us a decent checklist

and a description of what
we’re supposed to do.

And number four is pointless
unfun mini games and systems.

The grand unifying ethos
of open world games is more

and more and more and
more quests, more maps,

more points of interests,
more systems, more everything.

And it can be tiresome after a while

especially when the games
start getting overwhelmed

with pointlessly complex systems
that don’t feel relevant.

The “Assassins Creed”
series loves this stuff

but easily the worst examples
show up in “Assassin Creed 3.”

Remember that whole
confusing caravan system

or the tunnel system thing?

I don’t even really know
but nobody bothered with it,

the tunnel thing.

If you played the game you
know what I’m talking about

’cause you remember the introduction

to it and all that but you didn’t use it.

There was also ship combat,

the homestead, crafting,

everything felt like it was
designed by a separate team

and nothing really came
together quite right,

even if some of it was pretty cool

like the ship combat,
I mean, that was great

but it just felt totally
disconnected from everything else.

Seriously, the “Assassins Creed”
games are kind of the kings

of pointless stuff like this.

Like there was tower defense
missions and revelations.

It was bomb making and revelations.

What was that about?

And you know, a lot of
the settlement stuff

from “Fallout 4” I’m thinking of now,

it felt pretty tacked on,

like especially the settlement defense

which was way more
annoying than interesting.

Yeah, you could make some cool stuff

with settlements for
sure, but the settlement

always felt weirdly disconnected
from everything else.

Like often I was questioning
why I was doing it.

I have a story to complete.

Allegedly I should care about that,

but I’m here in the
settlement wasting time

defending these people that
are doing nothing for me.

And you know, crafting
systems count here too

especially in games where you
have absolutely like no choice

but to engage with it
to make any progress.

I’m not saying some
games don’t do this well,

there’s some great crafting systems

in some open world games,
but a lot of them are kinda

just annoying checklists
that force you to do

boring hunting stuff to get
upgrades to your character

that would be stuff you could
just buy in a different game.

It’s like a fetch quest
under any other name

and it’s usually more
frustrating than fun.

“Horizon Forbidden West”
was absolutely great

but I don’t want to waste my time hunting

down bunnies to upgrade my weapon pouch.

Please get that crap outta my face.

And number three, forcing you to engage

with a quest without any warning.

A huge part of the fun of open
world games is exploration.

You know, taking things at your own pace

seeing what you can do,
seeing what you can find.

These types of games are really perfect

for just zoning out and
taking it easy sometimes.

They’re podcast games.

Part of the appeal is knowing
when the story stuff is

and where the open world stuff is.

It’s not always the most immersive thing

but, wow, do I hate it when
open world games force you

into doing something outta your control.

Like you wander too close to a quest

and the game forces you to engage with it.

Or if a mission starts automatically

at a certain point like give
me a warning or something,

don’t just steal the control away

and force me into some mission
I don’t wanna do right now.

I’m hunting collectibles

or just trying to clear out the map.

I’m not trying to advance the story

or get stuck in long
dialogue with a stranger.

I’m obviously not saying
every random encounter is bad

but when a game forces you
away from something you’re

in the middle of and maybe have
been doing for a long period

of time and are in the zone
on, it’s really annoying.

The obvious example here is “Far Cry 5”

where if you did too much
damage to a certain region,

the leader will start to just hunt you

and eventually you get
forced into a story mission.

You can try to avoid these for a while,

but eventually the game just forces you

to do ’em no matter what.

They’re not short either.

They’re long and when they’re
over they usually dump you

out in some random part in the map,

sometimes miles away from where you were.

Very counterintuitive to what
makes an open world game fun.

And thankfully most games know better

than to try and copy it.

Another example actually
less egregious one

but still annoying is “Sonic Frontiers”

where you get close to a random boss enemy

and it pulls the camera
control away from you.

focuses it on the boss and
it’s not the worst thing

’cause it doesn’t force you to fight it,

you can just run away.

But if you play the game long enough

it starts to get really annoying

because you’re probably
trying to do things

in the open world that aren’t
the bosses at this point.

READ  NVIDIA’s incredible new AI that can create images, and more

I don’t know, open world games almost more

than anything else are games
where you really wanna be

in control of what you’re doing.

So taking the control away can
be just really aggravating.

And number two is annoying
and unfun mission types.

Let’s start this one off right by talking

about some standard mission types that pop

up a ton in open world
games that no one likes.

I’m talking about stuff like fetch quests

which are ubiquitous to the genre.

They’re unavoidable, usually pretty dull,

you know what I mean.

Like the classic collect
five random bits of garbage.

If you can do that,
I’ll give you five gold

just like “Tony Hawk’s
Pro Skater” level crap.

And just to be fair

like it was actually okay
in “Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater”

because getting around
was the point of that game

and it was another reason
to get you to skate.

This is not so in these
types of missions nowadays,

they’re also common RPGs as
well as open world games.

But one thing you’ve pretty
much almost only ever see

in open world games is the
tedious trailing missions.

They come in two types,
they’re pretty much never fun.

The “Assassins Creed” type where
you have to follow somebody

without getting spotted, which
is at best is kind of boring

and at worst is frustrating.

Then there’s the “GTA” type
trailing mission where you’re

in a car and you have to stay
within a certain distance

of the other car and, you
know, if there’s some kind

of meter telling you how close
or far you’re supposed to be.

they’re not usually that much trouble.

But there’s so many of
these games out there

that straight up don’t tell you
where you’re supposed to be.

So you’re constantly
getting too close or too far

without being able to tell what the game

actually wants you to do.

While we’re talking
about standard annoying

open world game types,

anytime a game forces you
to herd anything sucks

like recently “Sonic
Frontiers” made you do this

and “Sonic Frontiers” is a
really pleasant experience

in terms of 3D sonic games
and it just slows it down.

Like is this the worst version
of this I’ve ever seen?

No, but it’s really not fun.

It slows down the game,

takes you outta the stuff
that you wanna be doing

which is actually a decent
amount of stuff in that game.

All these mission types, they’ve been used

and overused to death at this point.

There’s gotta be somebody out
there that loves these things

but I don’t.

The reason they show up so
much in open world games is

probably just because they’re
easy to program and implement.

But if I never saw another
trailing mission in my life,

I’d die happy.

And finally at number one,
blatant story padding.

I don’t know about you

but one of the most annoying
things in open world games is

when they start getting
blatantly padded out.

I’m talking about stuff like unlocking the

true ending in “Arkham Knight.”

It’s a great game obviously

but they make you get
every single Riddler trophy

in the game to unlock the real ending.

Like could 75% have not been enough?

I feel like that could have been enough.

Another game that goes

way too long is “Assassins
Creed Valhalla.”

Seriously, there’s no reason

to have to conquer every single country

on the map before the
ending becomes available.

Like why make it so you
can select a story arc

if the game forces you
to do ’em all anyway?

It’s already massive.

Is it really that necessary
that you have to take control

of everything before you
can do the final mission?

In “Assassins Creed Syndicate,”

you only need to conquer three

of the boroughs to be
able to finish the game.

Imagine how much of a slog it would be

if you had to clear out everything.

Like I don’t mind a game
having some requirements

but some open world games are
really ridiculous with it.

Like “Middle-Earth:
Shadow Of War” used to be

one of the worst games about this.

The shadow war section took forever.

It was just the most tedious
and frustrating thing

but the game was patched

and it made that whole section

significantly easier and shorter.

Usually I’d be really disappointed
by something like that

but in this case it made
the game way better.

“Mafia III” is another open world game

that pads things out like crazy.

There’s no reason why you
have to take out every racket

in the area before you can
actually take out the leader.

It’s just shameless and
it makes the game longer

and that’s the only reason it’s there.

Doesn’t matter if it makes sense or not,

that’s why it’s there.

Like open world game
designers, don’t do this.

Or really any of like, if
you’ve listened to this point,

open world game designers,

just like find alternatives to this stuff.

Or if you have to do some
of them, make it good.

Like I said, like there’s good examples

of most of this stuff in games.

It’s just gonna be hard
for you to do it that way

because you’re gonna
have to find a new way

to do something that we’ve done

about a million times at this point.

So I would recommend leaning

towards not doing this
stuff and finding new stuff.

That’s me though.

I’m just a bird.

What do I know?

That’s all for today.

Leave us a comment, let
us know what you think.

If you like this video, click Like.

If you’re not subscribed,
now is a great time to do so.

We upload brand new videos
every day of the week.

Best way to see them first
is of course a subscription,

so click Subscribe.

Don’t forget to enable notifications.

And as always we thank you very much

for watching this video.

I’m Falcon, you can follow
me on Twitter, FalconTheHero.

We’ll see you next time
right here on “Gameranx.”