Written by I’ve known it for a very long time, but Batman: Arkham City has confirmed it: videogames set in a sandbox-like open world just aren’t for me.
I didn’t get into videogames because of open world games. I started my gaming affection with Space Invaders in the arcades and kept it going with an Atari 2600. These were designs that thrived on a simple idea, and you got your fix in quick five-minute shots. Even on the NES, Genesis and Super Nintendo, unless it was a Final Fantasy epic, games were pretty straightforward.
Grand Theft Auto arguably set the precedence of “do anything at any time” in game design. Deviate from the story and just tool around. Rack up points by stealing cars and finding the coolest jump in the world. Climb to the top of the tallest building and simply jump off to see what happens. I certainly appreciate the encouragement that I can do whatever the hell I want, and there’s definitely a thrill in finding something new outside of the designated game progression.
The problem: I find it difficult to return to the fixed path.
Maybe it’s my insanely short attention span, that I’m easily distracted. But when game designers dangle carrots to encourage me to stray from the main storyline, I’ll take it. When I don’t, I end up with this nagging sensation that pokes at me: what am I missing if I don’t jump on that side quest that just opened up for me?
Open world games have gotten so complex in their web of extraneous tasks that I find it nearly impossible to enjoy the core experience.
I think the only open world game I finished was Grand Theft Auto: Chinatown Wars, but that really doesn’t count since the designers were limited in scope by the restrictive power of the Nintendo DS hardware, and it was designed around the get in/get out environment of the portable market. My last attempt to truly enjoy an open world game was Red Dead Redemption, but by the time I got to Mexico I just couldn’t find myself galloping any further.
It’s clear to me that, after completing games like Ico and Shadow of the Colossus, I appreciate videogames when they’re far more structured. When the designers have a set vision for their game, and don’t depend on extraneous gimmicks to make a game “longer.” I get a far greater sense of accomplishment when I play out a simpler game to the end, not when I complete a little segment from a vast videogame experience.
Now you know why I’m into handheld gaming: I feel more at home with short spurts of a linear design.
As soon as I picked up a telephone in Batman: Arkham City and opened up the Victor Zzazz challenges I realized I was in trouble. There are so many tiny tasks here that will certainly appeal to people who want their videogames to last them nearly forever, but for me, I just don’t have the focus for all these distracting little butterflies.
In short: don’t expect me to get excited for Grand Theft Auto V.
I agree with your main argument about how you are tempted to deviate when the carrots are presented, but what about a game like Mario Galaxy (or to a lesser extent Sunshine)? These games obviously have their main quests and certain worlds/levels can only open up upon completion of the past ones. However, there is a large hub world that the developers encourage you to explore. I spent hours in Galaxy just wandering around the hub ship/planet talking to all of the toads and exploring all the side quests/green stars. Even reading the book was interesting (to a degree).
My main point is, I feel like these games set a happy compromise, and though I agree with the problems of an open world game, I feel that they can be executed properly with enough care.
Your contention that “The problem: I find it difficult to return to the fixed path” is tough to tie together with Batman.
I just finished my first playthrough of Batman: Arkham City, and the game did nothing but remind me what the main story path was. Every loading screen is a reminder of what you have done and what you have to do next in the main story arc.
I think the open world nature of Arkham City fails in general, but not for the reasons you mention. The main story involves a feeling that Batman is in a big rush. Alfred constantly reminds you that time is running out, as does Hugo Strange. This took away from the open world, I thought. The atmosphere created a sense of urgency that compelled me to ignore the side quests, and so I completed the main story without 100%ing any of the side quests at all.
But I didn’t mind.
Rocksteady has really made a polished game here. Once you finish the game, you can continue the game in their Game Plus Mode. It is in playing again here that I will try out the side quests. I have more gear and can traverse the city better, and I won’t be nagged by the main story’s impending doom because “I already solved that problem” in my previous playthrough.
Arkham City felt a lot like InFamous in its setup. But with Infamous I didn’t feel inclined to ignore side quests and completed most of them alongside the main story.
My first true taste of open world came from Fallout 3, then games like Assassin’s Creed 2, Red Dead Redemption, and InFamous. After doing so, I thought I was ready for the most famous open world game: GTA. I was mistaken. The problem with GTA is opposite of Arkham City: the side quests are encouraged *too* much. I can’t even accomplish the main story in GTA4, because it won’t tell me what it is. It keeps telling me to buy clothes and other things I have no interest in doing.
A few games have done open world correctly (Fallout 3, Red Dead, InFamous), and the key to making them work is solving the main problem you have with them Craig: it needs to be obvious where the main story is and how to get back to it.
I’m a very similar person. I always find open world games to be the antithesis of what I enjoy about gaming. I want to go on a well sized well paced roller coaster, not a bunch of smaller roller coasters that I have to drive 20 minutes between amusement parks to visit.
I feel like open world games are just artificially lengthened for no necessary reason. A game may be 200 hours long, but there’s really only 10 hours of actual gameplay and 190 hours of travel.
I prefer something like Mega Man. While it’s very linear in gameplay design, you can do the levels in any order. You don’t have to travel to each level though. You just teleport there.
I am the exact same way. I have tried playing through Fallout 3 as well as Oblivion numerous times and haven’t been able to get anything done–my interest wanes extremely quickly (this could have been due to the boring art styles and shoddy game mechanics though). However, I do love GTA titles if only for the aspect of messing around in the city.
But in general I am the same as you–I prefer more linear titles that allow the developer to have more control. Not in the way of QTEs or the like, but more in a gameplay focused way, i.e. Mario Galaxy, Mega Man or Metroid. There is still a lot of freedom in these titles but there is still a relatively set path that you must follow.
When developers create mindless open world games I like to experiment as well, mainly to see what would happen if I did this or that, and then get bored easily once I’ve seen it. I enjoy games that are design linear, but are sort of open world so I don’t feel restricted. Games like Uncharted are great examples of open 3D enviornments but a set path is in place.
Batman is a whole kettle of different fish to GTA…
As mentioned above GTAIV was a really hard game to get into I played about 10 hors of it and just got thougherly bored.
Batman is different, the side quests are simple and usually dont take more than 5 mins to complete each section… and if you dont want to find the Riddler stuff then you dont have to, but its a nice little aside when the main action gets a bit boring (not that it ever does).
Its strange though as we have a very similar gaming background, I am a retro nerd too and still have a load of my old devices and games, and “learnt my trade” in arcades, however (other than GTA games) I love open world games… Fallout 3 and New Vegas I never actually finished, but I sunk over 100 hours into the games just messing around and having fun.
Personally I don’t see aht all the fuss is about over GTA, much like Call of Duty, they are games that don’t fit my playstyle. I like a good yarn these days and not mindless 1st person shumps or a game where crime is the motivation to succeed. I’m not morally against the games, I just want my experiences to be positive and make me feel like the hero or emotionally tie me into their story, and not by shooting dudes in the face.
You better give us your impressions of Skyward Sword when it comes out.