Just to clear something up. Of course there is room for Open world games. This video is not about them going away. It’s just pointing out that for every BOTW and Elden Ring are a ton of games every year that are wasting potential for the sake of the open world marketing point. Where a great deal of these games are far better off scaling down and focusing on bettering other aspects of the game versus giving putting out uninspired games
Open world is fine, just hard to execute right. I think it would be cool if every game was open world, with no loading screens and the entire game being one large continuous world instead of a series of rooms.
@@OnlyBlix Right but there's a perception some have that ff16 not going open world makes it outdated. This video isn't necessarily an argument against open world, but it's saying it's not strictly necessary and that more games should reconsider if an open world truly fits into the vision or not.
The problem is that you're heralding FF16 being the pioneer of this idea even though the game is not out yet? There's no guarantee that the game will be good.
I love the wide-linear and semi-linear approach. I was really impressed with the wide linear level design done in the Seatle portion of The Last of Us Part II. It was the perfect balance of focused but giving you enough room to explore if you wanted. I also love the Semi-linear approach in the last two Deus Ex games and Divinity Original Sin 2. FF7R and Rebirth are top of my next to play list!
Like they say, it isn't about the size of your open world, but how you use the space. Nothing worse than making players waste 10 mins of running generic open fields to complete meaningless checklist style sidequests.
to be fair, it's premature to say that FFXVI proves anything at this point, the game isn't even out yet. But I do agree that not every AAA games need to be open world. Elden Ring's open world is great but I don't really want another open world anymore. Small hub/open zones that are filled with details and activities are better than empty vast open world. Yakuza/Like A Dragon games are great at it, Deus Ex too and the older FF are excellent at it too
@@brianclarke9861 yeah I get tired of people claiming this or that even though the thing itself hasn't come out yet. Was pretty pissed about people claiming Armored Core being a souls game too back when Fromsoftware haven't said anything or when people claiming Cyberpunk will change AAA industry when it wasn't out yet. This type of claim without basis serve no purpose other than just boosting your own ego or narrative. Apparently being patient enough to see a game released is hard for some players
I'd only object to the Yakuza games, I just think that the map is extremely small there. Is not only that it feels a bit claustrophobic, but the game has you running through the exact same areas again and again.
@@MehdiGlz i heavily disagree. yes it is small in Yakuza games and you run through the exact same areas over and over again but the way the games gated some substory, side story and minigames that you can unlock each chapter is amazing. Every couple chapters or so, there are new substories to discover and some minigames unlocked. Also being in a small map, you can pretty much memorize all the layout in 1 hour of gameplay, right now I pretty much turn off the minimap as I already memorize each street of Kamurocho and when NPC talk about certain street name, I already know which street it is without looking up the map. And it's not claustrophobic because the streets are quite large for pedestrian
If the game is fun I'll play it. Open world or not. I just want fun game that are well made. Sometimes open world's can feel tedious but linear games can feel short and boring so it's a balancing act
That's a great approach. People are already claiming ff 16 to be a great game, but they just don't realize that they are making an impossible expectations for themselves. That's why I'll wait for a few reviews before buying, cause if it's just mediocre, it's better to wait for a ps plus addition or sale.
Eh. JRPGs are normally linear...but they often also have comparatively low quality side(Non mandatory) content compared to Western games. Linear games can be and often are filled with not great content.
it really depends how story focused ure game is. Open world can really disrupt pacing of storys expecially if u go anywere from the beginning but it works really well in sandbox type games. This mix between open areas and liniar is perfect for FF.
@@sirnonsense5033 Depends on the structure of the open world and content. You can have a very non linear open world game and a strong story. Like the original Fallout games had. Like some other older Western PC titles were praised for having. Many recent(2000s) AAA open games on consoles have linear stories and on rails missions, filled with non interactive cutscenes and heavily scripted gameplay sequences similar to more linear games or JRPGs. like Rockstar's games usually do. But not all games with open worlds are designed this way. You wouldn't think that though from all the people criticizing the idea of open world's in games only by the faults present in this one specific type of game.
Take a small world like Kamurocho in Like a Dragon and make it more dense; make it so you can go in every room in every building (within reason) and make the npcs and enemies more interesting with refined AI and make the story feel more real with consequential changes (ex: a bombed out building is sectioned off and slowly rebuilt). Put all that in a smaller world you get way more substance and the world becomes a memorable character in itself.
I'd also like to add Crossbell City from the Trails series as an example of a small open world being memorable. It's telling that by the end of the game, I don't even need the map to tell me where I need to go or how to get around. You come to know the city like the back of your hand.
I like both, but what I really miss is overworlds. I loved the overworld in FF7 and wish they'd bring it back. It really felt like you were actually in a giant world or region instead of just a big city or area that open "worlds" employ.
I agree. I'm not sure if that will make a comeback though. A big part of why overworlds like FF7 existed in the first place was due to hardware limitations. They want the world to feel big but didn't have the resources to build out a full open world. I think if a company tried to implement something like that a lot of people would perceive it as lazy or low budget open world. It's kind of funny that people will use a 2D map to travel between large open zones and see no problem but, if you swapped the 2D map with a basic 3D map and swapped the cursor with a character model, it could feel cheap. Idk though. I'd like to see that. Maybe someone will pull it off in an interesting way.
how do you imagine that to look like? A mini Cloud figure walking across a miniature globe? And when hitting a town, you get a load screen and are loaded into the town?
@@NoctLightCloud Doesn't have to be more complicated than that but with today's tech who knows how creative you could get with it. Heck if you had the capability, you could even combine open world and overworld with overworld being like fast traveling, though I imagine that'd be quite ambitious. Doing corridors or big areas would probably be more reasonable.
I want more small but dense open worlds. The problem with open worlds is that they keep going wider when they instead need to go deeper, and by deeper I don't just mean verticality, but the level of detail in a small space. Tho verticality is definitely a part of it.
@Tom John yakuza doesn't have the verticality I'm looking for and the side quest and activities aren't my speed. I'm thinking more like if the areas in Dishonored were larger.
The issue with open world is that a lot of the world does not use the space well at all. It's why, even though I think BotW had some amazing innovations and ideas, it felt more like a tech demo than a complete game. A majority of the game was: finding and completing shrines, killing the same horde of 4 bokoblins, finding koroks. Rinse and repeat. I'm excited for Tears of the Kingdom, because it seems like they will actually put more emphasis on story and dungeons, with varied mechanics.
Hard disagree. The open world is a conversation piece. It tells you some lore and asks you a question: What happened? For instance, why do we have a great plateau?
Not only that, each area is designed to have you climb an obstacle to discover another point of interest. You guys are just hard wire to tackle the main mission and quest and not soak in the world itself and listen to the questions and answers it speaks to you.
@@switchitup3709 An open world is only as fun as the content within it. The problem with a lot of open worlds nowadays is that it's a ton of empty land with barely anything to do. Lore implication is cool and all, but when the rest of the incentive to explore is so lackluster, I'm going to lose interest. You say "soak in the world," I say "there's only so much world I can soak in before it starts to feel repetitive." Elden Ring is a better example of an open world and I'm hoping Tears of the Kingdom gives us much more to seek out.
@@ApexGale I think that comes down to a preference. You don't care about much of the lore as someone like me. Also you have to remember the world is also designed with big boss in the over world and horseback riding. That long lay of land in central hyrule is meant for you to run and fight the guardians.
Same. As a long time Zelda fan I found botw boring and excruciating. World is too barren and music is too subtle for my liking. Character interaction is sparse and side quests are mid. That said, I'm excited for totk as the trailer showed a lot of welcomed changes. It'll be icing on the cake if they bring back dungeons
The thing about open worlds that I generally appreciate the most is the idea of it being a sandbox. I can pick any direction, take off running, and encounter some new experience and emergent gameplay that wasn't carefully crafted or planned for by the developer. If all I'm doing is going down a wide funnel to experience an on-rails game, then yeah, an open world adds nothing to this other than wide empty areas that must be traversed.
That would be the ideal, but most open worlds don't have sandbox mechanics. Most aren't BotW or Elden Ring. Hell, most sandboxes are linear or semi-linear titles, like Deus Ex, Dishonored, or DMC 5 (combat sandbox), because they require that a ridiculous amount of development time be spent on the player character's kit, enemy design and AI, level design, physics, and making sure all of these can mesh, which is hard to do if you're also making a huge open world and neat story to go along with it.
@@ThroughfulGamer95 Elden Ring the exact opposite of a sandbox. It has zero randomization and zero emergent gameplay due to its bonfire reset mechanic. I agree it's much more difficult to develop a sandbox and there will always be bugs, but that's something I've grown to accept with games like the Elder Scrolls.
@@kaizer-777 It is a combat-oriented sandbox, between the various options the player has (magic, melee, ashes of war, talismans, the physick flask, status effects, consumables, etc.), how they can all work n tandem and affect one another, and then apply that to enemies and bosses, a lot of the times even using their own AI and abilities to expand this element even further. Sure, there isn't much emergent gameplay when it comes to things like questing, traversal, and such, but it does offer a lot of it in combat.
@@ThroughfulGamer95 By that definition, any Diablo game is a sandbox. I think we have different ideas of what the genre is. I do appreciate the build diversity in Elden Ring though. I would just never call it a sandbox game. It is open world though.
FF12 has taught me you don’t need open world to succeed. It had multiple divers areas with its own theme (musically as well) to justify we do not need pure open world to have an excellent world to explore.
Not to mention there are several massive regions in FF12 that the story never even makes you go to. You have to discover them yourself, which makes the game world feel incredibly alive.
i somehow feel like the comments being made in this video didn't age that well considering FF7 Rebirth ended up being actual open world even though the general expectation was that it would be wide linear. but you were correct in the sense that Rebirth followed in Remake's footsteps in balancing the feel of a big world against the openness of sidequests. while i still think open world wasn't necessary in 16 either, Rebirth does seem to point out some of its biggest flaws in terms of world design, what with how much you can do and explore in Rebirth. having so many functioning RPG towns is simply glorious
I'm not concerned this game will be successful, just curious to see how much. A lot of people think FFXVI is being done by first timers because most of the people doing XVI have worked entirely on FFXIV--but really, XIV was a massive testing ground for the game design we're going to see in this game. I've seen people ooh and ah about the seamless transition between cutscene and action in FFXVI, but I can tell right away those people have never played XIV. FFXIV used to have cinematic cutscenes like a lot of games, but they made a design choice a long time ago to go with cutscenes featuring ingame models. The reason that's genius is, it means your character can be there for every big cinematic moment in the game. It's no wonder people get so attached to their WoL. Whether you're glammed like a badass, or a tiny frog, you're there for every high and low. You can see this approach in FFXVI, too. Instead of cutting away to a pre-planned cinematic, FFXVI just uses the in-engine assets, which means they can transition in and out of cutscenes flawlessly--sometimes even mid fight. I expect this to become an industry standard after FFXVI (if it's as successful as it could be). Just like cinematic cutscenes, FFXIV was the testing ground for how biomes are going to function in XVI. The biomes in FFXIV are way more limited than these ones are likely going to be. For one, it looks like the PS5's tech has allowed them to camouflage load screens with mechanics, like squeezing through tight spaces. Instead of giant areas with nothing, you're going to traverse massive biomes that are full of mobs and meaningful architecture/geography. If you've never played FFXIV, don't be fooled into thinking this team are noobs; they've been testing these systems for a decade, and all they managed to do was unseat another MMO that nobody ever thought could be unseated.😅
You know. I've been seeing you in many comment sections surrounding ff16. It gladdens me to see another ff14 player who is as excited as I am for ff16. And who is also annoyed at many people who very obviously have preconceived notions about ff16 ending up like ff15 because they're both action games. The comment that irks me the most is everytime someone comments that ff16 looks like a generic action game. All I want say to them is what actions game do they know that looks and plays like ff16? (besides obviously capcom games) I want NAMES! I wanna try these "generic action games" that I'm apparently unaware of. Lol
I have finally found my people in this comment thread. I agree with you all. I have heard a lot of people claim that because Yoshi-p is showing so much gameplay, the story will be non-existant, and I just feel like I'm the crazy one.
@@ebonyglow2442 That's another sign that the person who made that comment has never played FFXIV. Whatever you, meaning the person who says they've shown too much, think you know about the story from the trailers, you're dead wrong; Yoshi-P loves red herrings, and I guarantee whatever he's shown you is there to throw you off.
Ocarina of Time did it best, imo. It opened more up as you progressed the story, and you could go back to previous areas to unlock more stuff, once you had new items or abilities. Morrowind is also a great open world. Fallout 4 too
I've been wanting open worlds to go back to OoT like design for almost a decade. There was almost nothing wrong with the way it did its world. It felt focused but left enough for you to explore. It also didn't have quest markers, but keywords and clues left by NPC and interacting with the world. It was much more immersive that way.
@@Steven9567 I never said it was open world. I was just stating I think it was one of the best ways to create worlds in games as it has a nice balance of focus and exploration. It was as big as it needed to be.
The classic Final Fantasy 7 was perfect in that regard. It had a linear story but there were so many secrets to discover and to work on. Hope 16 is the same
@@IAmTheEagleHTM Not sure about that. I've been playing Octopath Traveller and tbh I am having troubles to motivate myself to finish it because of the random encounters and too many secrets/dungeons. I'm a perfectionist with limited free time, and that combination is awful for me, because I am not willing to go explore and try to find secret areas if I get attacked and the battle screen loads every 15 seconds💀 Secret areas are usually empty anyways, or they simply contain rare fiends and items as rewards. I personally prefer areas and fiends to be built into the story (like Hell House in FF7R) or at least obvious side tracks, cause otherwise you can miss already coded and implemented awesome areas/creatures and fiend mechanics simply because of bad luck and skipping them. BOTW did secret areas great, but you can dogde, run, fly, and explore better in BOTW than in any FF game.
@@touthoj1987FF3 for SNES (later changed to FF6) was equally as important and impressive. The enormous amount of diversity in characters (except skin color) and their various fighting abilities was impressive even by today's standards. It was linear through the first half, then the world changed due to the cataclysm and the second half was only partially linear with multiple main characters that you could skip getting in order to beat the game, 4 optional characters, one optional assassin character who was considered untrustworthy but actually had a huge heart and lots of back story (including being another character's unknown father). Also had a dog that fought with him and you could cause the character to die depending on your choices at the end of the first half of the game. Just such a well-done game with lots to do, awesome side quests, a surprising amount of freedom for 1993 games, great story, great characters, great weapons, lots of secrets and a very large overworld map that changed halfway through. Will always be top tier RPG and did so much for the genre. A true masterpiece up there with FF7 and hopefully FF16 will be another milestone. I also liked FF2 and FF9 a lot. Even FF1 was pretty damn cool as well as FF Tactics and Crisis Core.
I didn't realize but I was burnt out on the open world idea, when I first played the remake of final fantasy 7 I was so hooked and enthralled with every part of the story and game. I would much rather have a game with a smaller world but have it be over filling with story and character building. The open world games have their place but it's just not the move anymore.
@@dantederi5062 there is no such things as 'great side quests'. it's either talk quest, fetch quest, or tracking quest. the only great side quest if ever made, is the truly dynamic side quest
@@altairscauldron9776 you should play Horizon Forbidden West, I think they nailed it with the side quests, as each of the side quest have their own meaningful storyline and some of the characters you meet are very interesting. Some of the side quest also have direct impact on the world too. I hope FF16 have these kind of meaningful side quests
@@thevloggerwannabe8599 I gave up playing HZD due to its nature of open world is such a hassle to play and finish... I have this thing called open wolrd fatigue and the only OW game that doesn't give me this, is Ghost of Tsushima
I absolutely love how FFXV used it’s open world. You get a nice long road trip with your bros doing all the JRP side quest stuff then as the story get weightier and the burden of the crown weighs on noctis. That open world becomes an ever more bleak direct path towards fate and turns into a linear path.
Me too. Seems like people are afraid of big open spaces and prefer games that would lead them by hand everywhere, idk but tha's more like interactive movies for me. Yes, it might be more difficult to create open world, you need to put efforts into designing explorations and fill world with some events, but usually games provide so many means of transportation that even empty spaces can be easily traversed, eveything is covered with quest markers as well so you potentially have exactly the same experience as in corridor games but with additional feature of exploration and without loading screens that break immersion. Not every game needs open world but if done right it brings much more immersion
Ff15 was too easy tho and the story was rushed like a mf but with all the DLC and later updates it became a decent product but overall a good first timer game for sure, but not my favorite final fantasy game
FFXV world was horrendous. Cities didn't had any immersion, were absolutely not protected in the middle of the fucking monster plagued woods. Filled with NPC. Also insanely large empty space. FFXV is the definition of how NOT to make a world.
@@matiasdextre9080 but they did mention daemons being afraid of strong lights(or some type of it), and we already know most towns have them. And they do have city guards and hunters getting rid of monsters, so I don't think that is the problem. Just a bit annoying with all the stupid side quests, could have done them better.
1. This game isn’t out so it doesn’t prove anything yet. 2. I don’t think anyone thinks a game can’t exist without an open world People realize there are still plenty of non open world games right?
There's actually far more linear games coming out than open world games people are just quick to forget all the linear games for some reason. It just seem like people saying they are bored of open world, but no one is actually going out and buying the linear games they will still buy open world anyway and say they are burned out.
MGSV should have done this zone approach. It suffered greatly from the "hey look, our game is open-world now" trend. If there were things to do between the wide open areas in between missions, that would be reasonable, but just a few camps and literally 5-10 minutes of just pushing forward on an analog stick was ridiculous. Good video on hopefully a dying trend of games focusing on an open-world over story, or just havng an open-world for the sake of saying, "the game is open world, please buy it"
I hope so too. It looks like people are getting tired of both open worlds AND GaaS which is music to my ears as they are trends I despise. I still like Zelda's and Yakuza/Judgment's open worlds though.
What's important is density, not size. A huge map with very little in it is pointless and just annoying to navigate, while a smaller one with lots of handcrafted touches and interesting places/activities feels a lot more alive and fun. I always use the Yakuza series as an example - most of the games share the same relatively small map, but there are so many things to do in it that it feels really expansive and lively. I know I'd much rather run around Kamurocho than most of the open worlds out there
While I agree it's important for an open world not to feel empty, I also think it's important to point out that "density" just for the sake of density isn't much better. As pointed out in this video, an excess of side-content and collectible checklist stuff can actually get in the way and detract from the critical path. The feeling should be "Oh! I've stumbled upon something interesting!" not "Damn, I really want to see the next important plot point... but I should probably do these sidequests first while I'm here just in case one is actually interesting or has something neat for me." Sure, the side stuff is optional, but if it isn't interesting to do then why put it in the game?
I'm pretty much convinced that what they have shown for FF16 is probably a fraction of the actual story. There is probably some banger plot that all of what happens in the trailers leads and that could be an entire part in and of itself. It's kind of like how Tales of Arise had amazing pacing in Part 1, but in Part 2 the pacing goes to shit and many of the plot elements that you would have liked to experience and find out is just explained to you in the form of a lore dump because development time or whatever. Point is the second half suffered greatly. My prediction is FF16 is going to have a second act but it will actually have good pacing and writing.
the game has 11 hours of cutscene. we barely see anything from trailers also based on the devs work with FF14, they used to mislead audience with wrong impression from trailer while hide other massive area and big important plot.
The developers have shown us quite a bit, but there's still a lot we don't know. We don't even know who or what the main antagonist will be. Clive looks to have rivals like Benedikta and Barnabas, but I don't think either are main antagonists.
FF15 was one of the rare open world I loved to go at any place, finding secrets and easter eggs. Completing it almost 100% And for the best open world games design, you may want to check the Just Cause franchise (what they fucked up was the scenario ngl)
Open World games rarely utilize their open world in a way that makes any sense. Breath of the Wild was way too big, yet had nothing interesting to explore. It's also a testament on how too much freedom can hurt the sandbox more then help. The world loses all sense of structure when you can climb any vertical surface. Elden Ring failed to bring the open world to a Souls like in a way that benefited it. Torrent makes exploration a mindless endeavor as you gallop past everything freely. In souls games, they do really well because you are almost always in danger, rather you're at full health and still 3 hits from death or constantly observing the terrain for traps, it kept you engaged and immersed. The open world loses all of that, but it doesn't have to. Something I feel like people aren't ready to admit about open world games is what the design brings to the table for them. Most have told me they want the open world to be easy to traverse and not take long to traverse. What exactly is the point of the open world if it's not challenging or immersive?
Unnecessary that so much is true. However, the open world has advantages -- relax and chill streams just exploring. -- illusion of linearity is completely gone -- places to hide bonus dungeons like FF XV'S Pitioss. -- bonus side quests -- immersion -- reward of finding hidden towns not in the main quest -- additional mlbonus cut-scenes. However there is 1 rule that applies to most experiences: -- if something is too hard or complex, people will give up. -- you must give FEEDBACK so people who don't want to explore have markers and know exactly where to go. -- if people have a frustrating experience, they may just day F it -- if it becomes not engaging anymore, people will give up. --if I get lost, do I have an exit? If the answer is no to all of these, you better make your game linear. While some people wouldn't mind an open world hunting and everyday simulator where you can hunt in the woods and craft things to survive an everyday life, Final Fantasy fans probably don't want their game to be a life simulator -- an empty wasteland without purpose. I think you can make a successful open world game but you again must check these boxes off: --if something is too hard or complex, people will give up. -- you must give FEEDBACK so people who don't want to explore have markers and know exactly where to go. -- if people have a frustrating experience, they may just day F it m -- if it becomes not engaging anymore, people will give up. --if I get lost, do I have an exit? If the answer is negative for everything, you better make your game linear. While some people wouldn't mind an open world hunting and everyday simulator wgmjere you can hunt in the woods and craft things to survive an everyday life, Final Fantasy fans probably don't want their game to be a life simulator -- an empty wasteland without purpose.
Open worlds were a direct response to load times becoming increasingly giant back during the era they first started appearing in. But processing improvements have directly killed that notion. FF16's ability to load into an area in as little as 2 seconds makes the entire notion of open worlds basically obsolete. FF16 doesn't NEED to simulate the entire world in order to stay away from from scary loading screens. So they can spend that 'potential' building meaningful area's for us to explore.
I think what's ultimately important when making explorable open maps, is not how VAST you can ultimately make them, but rather how DENSE you can make them. A good example of a game that utilizes this philosophy is the upcoming Dead Island 2, the maps in that game aren't really big at all, they're pretty small in fact, but they are so jampacked with stuff to do and explore that you don't really notice nor care that they're small, because the density is enough to make them feel sizable in their own right. And FFXVI also seem to have understood this fact, just because your open world is as vast as New England doesn't automatically makes it as deep as the actual New England, you need stuff to FILL in that space otherwise you end up with a very pretty, but ultimately empty wasteland.
After the release of games like God of War Ragnarök/God of War and Jedi Survivor, I feel like the semi-open world style of game design has become a lot more popular. I like open world games and all (Skyrim is my favorite game ever after all), but to be honest I kind of prefer this new style with smaller, more refined worlds that teeter on the edge of linearity with just enough freedom between story missions to scratch that itch. I'm just getting tired of overly long and inflated open worlds that boast world size when really it's boring and poorly utilized space.
Open world games can be easy to drop, because like you said, you can get caught up in the side stuff when the world is ending. And then you drop it, come back a month later, and forget what you were doing. Traveling in an open world isn't too hot either.
Not a popular opinion but this is the reason why BotW didn't track well for me. I don't want to fast travel, or at least I don't want to feel obligated to.
TFW this many years later I probably still haven’t covered every possible nook and cranny of Skyrim (to say nothing of randomly generated events just to keep things happening) but I can memorize a 100% run of say a Zelda game with its “you can’t do this until a specific tool is unlocked” formula
@@Repaduski I doubt it will take it anywhere we haven't seen but as long as the story combat and bosses and endgame are good then im good too since open worlds are in no way something i need in a game (especially with how much reuse their formulae gets wich just makes them unnecessarily big and repetitive instead of just repetitive wich is admittedly bound to happen to anything)
@@GameDesignAndy that's probably a factor but for me the main reason is how they all ultimately copy paste each other since that ends up making all open worlds the same in some ways wich ends up making the experience tedious and repetitive
Im soo tired of open worlds. They feel like such a chore to explore. I got chronic fatigue and need to feel engaged so i dont fall asleep lol, but open world games HELP me fall asleep.
It's kinda incomparable but one thing I love about the Witcher 3 is that it technically is open world but is split into multiple giant open levels. This game still looks to be massive, and the density of it is what I'm really excited for. A dense world with things to do has always been more enjoyable than a generic empty one that's really large and long to traverse
Don't get me wrong. Witcher 3 is a masterpiece but the world content besides contracts and a few side quests were terrible. Most of the question marks were nests or lone chests with nothing ever useful. And don't even get me started on the filler in skellige....
@@ltlsWhatltIs oh 100% you're correct and it's going to really age poorly in comparison to some other games. I think that the splits are cool but yeah you're definitely right in that regard
I fully agree with your stance on open-worlds and I do think a lot of games have made great efforts to make their worlds seem massive without needing to actually have them entirely explorable. That said, I think you picked the worst example with Final Fantasy XVI. I love the game and I'm having an amazing time with it, but I've never felt more disconnected from a FF world than this as a result of it's broken-up and segmented map system. Every area I've been to in about 20 hours has felt so tiny, unremarkable and lacking any real significance meant to endear me to the location. Coupled with the lack of any real reason to explore outside of a few mundane side quests and a chest or two to find, and all I find myself doing is itching for the next major story beat to come up and return to the game's strongest points. Personally, I'd much rather see a world that's small, freely explorable but densely packed, like you'd find in Yakuza games. That way I get intimately acquainted with the place I'm in and feel a connection to the world they're building.
The style of world design that FFXVI is going for is one that I personally prefer over a typical open world, thanks to the Xenoblade Chronicles Series. Xenoblade Chronicles has had this segmented open zone design since the first game on the Nintendo Wii, and has continued to the most recent game Xenoblade Chronicles 3 last year, and likely the story expansion coming out in a few days of writing this. The design gives some of the best aspects of open world design, while removing a lot of the filler needed for the world to feel seamless whilst allowing for more unique locales to be larger relative to the total map area. Incredibly well made video.
One of the reasons I loved Dragon Age. A world map with separate but detailed zones. It made everything feel larger, like it takes the characters days to go to travel to different regions.
Pretty much why I believe that the notion that mmos need to be one mega server with no loading is complete BS. You may create a fully filled and living large zone.., But it'll never be seamlessly full world.
FF-16 didn’t prove anything all it proved was the series is dying and square is lazing at making open worlds that are good it’s probably one of the most boring so called rpg I’ve played in years weapons have no stat effects side quest are boring combat is lazy the only thing the world had going for it is the lore but this was the most half ass rpg I’ve played in a long time
I totally agree. It looks like this game will give you most of the benefits of an open world without most of the flaws, such as too much copy/paste, lack of intricate design and unique set pieces. Also not making the entire continent explorable also allows the vistas to look much larger in scope and realistic, i.e most open worlds have important landmarks feel too close together compared to how they would be in real life.
Great video! I love this topic. Fully open world ganes are not only not used to their full potential but also making development times and cost way bigger than they should be. I know Xenoblade is a lot smaller, popularity wise, than FF. However, it feels like FF16 has a more Xenoblade approach to making the world feel huge and vast without without being fully open world.
ff16 take inspiration from ff12 and 14. Xeno are great, but not open worlds too. Are big big large zones, but dont have sensation of a entire world. On ff16 u have all the world map of a "real world", not 2 or 5 titans like xenoblade.
@@abelald1310 "dont have sensation of a entire world" idk what you mean xc1 and 3 are all on one giant land mass xc2 is the only one with multiple titans making it feel like separate islands
Definitely in the camp of atmospheric contextual content in linear games being more substantial in terms of running to a destination or endless grinding to unlock fast travel as a company's means of padding hours of wack-a-mole stagnant gameplay.
Well, that's fine but bring back world maps! I can understand why not everyone likes open world game but I really enjoy the travel aspect, actually journeying to a destination. I love sailing around the map in Black Flag/Odyssey or flying around it in many other games knowing I can just stop and land wherever I want. Let's not take our personal preferences and assume everyone shares them. I think it's the same thing when anything becomes common and over-used; There is tendency to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
I remember dragon age inquisition making me realize that while a good open world game is really good smaller more varied hubs or linear areas are both easier to put together and are just as good
There are few that I feel are perfect examples of an open world. The Witcher 3, Elden Ring, Zelda botw, Ghost of Tsusima. There are plenty more, but these are my favorites. A lot of games have tried to implement an open world to varied enjoyment and successes(AC I'm talking about you 😜), but it's a hard thing to pull off perfect. I also have to say when an open world is done with passion it is easily my preferred genre...
IMO Witcher 3 fits better as one of the worst examples. The world was so unnecessarily big that the devs had to fill it with the stereotypical map clutter so make it seem less empty. Witcher is about the quests, ultimately, so just make the world smaller.
@@AlfonsoSRT I disagree with you, though one of the first things I did when getting past the first area was to turn off the white question marks in the menu and just do them when I came across them naturally, which to me feels like what CDP wanted to do originally cause it made it wat more immersive then chasing them around the map and many had their own little stories. I also stopped myself from using the fast travel and explore the world more, and I started noticing a lot more details. Like how they designed rivers with proper depiction of erosion and how settlements around it had to adapt to their geographical environments. It just felt very lived-in which I cannot say for many other open worlds where stuff is just put in to fill up the space without much thought behind how people would actually live there.
Ghost of Tsushima is filled with copy paste bandit camps to clear out like every other Ubisoft open world game. I don't think the haikus, springs, graphics or platforming make up for that.
I'm confused. Is he saying that a company that has 90% mainly done linear games is showing that open world game is unnecessary? Why do people need to compare everything. If you like linear game that's great I do too but why do people have to say that another genre is not good because of that. People like Rpg's because some have puzzles in them like Resident Evil, but does that mean they are better them 100% puzzle games. I don't think it does. oh, and I think that if a game is lacking in whatever it is people want it's not the genre (cause genre is just a category) but the dev's not putting it in their game. so, if you didn't like a game then you need to do a video on the dev's next time.
He's a bootlicker. If SE returns to open world games in the next installment, he'll be talking about how open world games are the answer to the limitations of linearity.
I think if youre gonna make an open-world it should not only help the character grow but also help you immerse yourself in. Horizon Forbidden West, God of War and RDR2 accomplished this. The side quests felt apart of the story and showed us more about the character we're playing. I think by doing linear open-world, we can learn more and engage with our characters. Legend of Zelda and Elden Ring although fantastic broke the mold because it immersed you into its world spectacle that other games just can't win. TL:DR Open-Linear worlds focus more on the characters and making you grow with them. Open world games, the world IS the character and these days its hard to be unique.
Be honest with me. At this current moment. Do you feel any emotional attachment to aloy? Would you feel affected if she died. I think horizon rocks. But it’s biggest flaw is that I don’t know anyone who is attached to its characters. It’s like the world is the only character and the humans are just supporting
@@Repaduski Mannnnn 🤣. Listen just cause I said characters dont mean it always mean main characters. I love Horizion Forbidden West world but what interests the most are the tribes. Their way of life, how they think and how weird they can be. I dont wont Aloy to die, but she needs a love interest to make her stop being as dull wet cardboard 😭
I've played both Horizon games, and after spending a lot of time with each game, the open world just falls flat after awhile. I might not play the third Horizon game if it copy's n pastes from it's previous installments.
Open worlds require a lot more than just space. If the gameplay and content aren't there, then the open world is pointless, I personally got bored of the ubisoft open world a couple hours into ass creed 2.
It seems to me they want to go for a few medium contained rather than a small linear one with stuff to do or massive world with nothing. I can get behind this approach. I still think there are ways to create a massive world that's ground breaking even with BotW and Elden Ring out, but that takes a lot of money. Plus it's not needed. It will be interesting to see how well both this and FF7 Rebirth handle this.
Botw is very empty with not much in it to be honest. Strip out the shrines and korok seeds and you basically have no incentive to explore. There's not even anything all that cool to look at or find either. It's a decent turn off your brain and walk around simulator but not much more than that.
@@jhonayo4887 'strip out the..'. stripping a game of it's content will make it more empty. I agree. BOTW has it's survival mechanics, larger dungeons, areas and Unique equipment to explore for though. I think it's less 'empty' with it's content stripped than many other games would be. Imagine TLOU with all of it's cutscenes, dialogue, set pieces and objectives stripped. That's a damn empty game.
Thank you. This video is needed for so many people that defend open world games void of any meaningful event. It's just tedious and honestly a waste of my time after a day of work.
I like what ff16 did with this. Having a very big open world and running to your next location can be a bit time consuming and ff16 eliminates that. I liked that.
Elden ring is the only open world game that i love, the rest...... even XV, meh, i don't like it. Elden ring hide mysterious places so well, is so fascinating. I was waiting XVI be in this way, but you can make a game with same mistery level of elden ring, but not open world and it can work very well.
XV is the example of bad open world. The world is big but the story is too linear that everything presented in the open world isn't important. The world is devoid of interesting things like there is almost no reason to explore. It's waay to empty.
Mirrors edge was a game that was ruined by an open world sequel. That sounds good on paper but made the game super repetitive due to the pathing always being the same
@@Repaduski I agree, while I did enjoy the sequel towards the end with it feeling like a different path to get to the objective it didn't match the original where they could go crazy on where you were suppose to go.
I just played through Xenoblade series and those games are really perfect at showing off that big open areas ARE much better than open world when done right. Sometimes I even forget Xenoblade (3 mainly) aren’t open world just because of how entirely open they are while still being packed and showing off beautiful sceneries.
The world is about to end. A major character in the party just died. The villain is escaping. I think I’ll challenge this random NPC to a card game to win a rare card😂
I've learned over time that I seem to prefer semi open world as opposed to full open world. Like, I really didn't enjoy exploration in Zelda: Breath of the Wild, but loved exploring in Xenoblade Chronicles 3.
Great video and a solid point. I'm an indie developer working on a character driven story game in a semi-open world, and I've been facing a lot of the considerations you addressed. I want the player to have the freedom to go anywhere, but even with triggered events and conversations, it's been difficult to keep some of the dialogue ordered in a way that makes sense. Lots of variables and lots of challenges.... and I'm only just working on the demo so far. 😅
Another call-back or comparison could even be made to Dragon Age: Inquisition. A map that had areas you’d load into, but each “area” was massive in scale and provided different environments, weather conditions, and stories of their own that fit the narrative. That went on to be one of the most successful games for the year (2014, I believe). Definitely not to be a one-on-one comparison, but that open-linear structure worked really well for them, and I believe it’ll work great for FFXVI.
Im all for open world games, but after playing tales of arise and finishing final fantasy 16, I honestly like that approach 100% better. Open world games lack story/cut scenes and the open space is just filler for the lack off meaningful content.
Extremely well written script. Your voice is also pleasant to listen to. Keep it up and you will be huge. Also, I 100% agree with you on the open world from a GPU standpoint. Building open worlds means that the render distance is often much more than just more closed linear world design. Being able to know exactly what will be on screen in any given area means that the game can be much better optimized for the hardware, and therefore allow for more beautiful graphics and effects. I think FFXVI is really truly showing off what the PS5 can do. Bought a PS5 for this game and GT7 VR. I just couldn't hold back any longer. I hope it gets 9's
I don't disagree that higher graphic fidelity is possible on smaller maps. People forget that manpower (Artist dev time) is a bottleneck. But. Final fantasy XVI seems to have worse graphics and less detailed environments than many Western, AAA open world games last gen (2013-2021) and noticeably worse than cross gen titles like Horizon Forbidden West. So that argument sucks. I thinks it's just a matter than Japanese games, including FF are much smaller, cheaper productions than the largest Western games. FF isn't open world because they can't afford to make a beautiful open world game.
FF12 had my favourite world map design although I couldn't care less for the story. I also love the Xenoblade games' area design. To a smaller degree, Kingdom Hearts has adopted such larger zones, too.
Apparently fans did wine about FF7 Remake being leaner. I couldn’t agree more. Like how they also complained the combat being real time for recent games in general.
@@MrGamer07100 Honestly I just want shorter games. I don't mind 80 hour grand adventures with a huge cast and an expansive open world but only a few with those parameters can really make it memorable (Ghost of Tsushima, Yakuza, FF7, BOTW). The games that really kinda stuck with me the hardest when PS5 came out was Miles Morales, Astro's Playroom and Dead Space remake. If we could just get more stuff like that where the main game content is fulfilling and the endgame content makes it a masterpiece I'm all for it.
@@MariusBoss11458 I guess that's a main exception. But I wish they could break up that flow like arcs. Persona does it in an interesting way where each palace is it's own arc with a introduction, rising action, climax, falling action, and it's own conclusion leading into the palace/arc. Or I guess just overall better pacing instead of one long broadway performance.
I think Elden Ring and Breath of the Wild have set the bar so incredibly high that I think the more open linear design is the best way about going forward. The Ubisoft tower checklist has gotten so boring to me, but the dark souls games are much more "linear" although there are typically more than one way to progress the games I have found much more entertaining recently.
I feel like the recent God of War games tackled linear open world the best, the locations were fun little areas where you could explore every nook and cranny but not feel overwhelmed by it. Two big games last year, though fun in their own rights had me not wanting to play either of them once I was done with them, that being Horizon Forbidden West and Elden Ring. Both amazing games, especially Elden Ring and though Elden Ring definitely tackled an open world setting the best since Breath of the Wild once that "Wow factor" faded I found myself just not caring to explore and wanting to be done with the game by hour 50. Developers are really going to have to get creative because I'm tired of capturing a watchtower to unlock a portion of the map or securing a camp to fast travel.
Elden ring is literally the only game with a open world design that made me want to keep exploring. Every other game is a chore to explore when you see 900 seeds (zelda) and question marks everywhere when they are 99% of the time pointless (witcher).
Witchers questions marks are awful but the koroks seeds arnt invasive. You never see them on the map. You also don’t need to get many of them to extract the value of inventory expansion
Elden Ring justified it to me. Most people praise the game and by all means it was the greatest game of 2022… But Sekiro and DS3 give so much more fun. Both in “peak” emotion and in constant happiness when replaying.
@@Repaduski Assassins Creed Origins, you know, Very big open world with ? scattered throughout the map. you know what else? I'm doing all those Question marks, slowly and methodically because there's a silver trophy with my name on it.
@@Mychel_Nox it's actually pretty chill listening to RUclips while clearing enemy outposts or exploring. I'll usually pause RUclips when there's dialogue or something but for the most part it's just care free gaming
@@DoubleDelta10 That’s great. Alas, not every game needs to be 100% all of the time. Nothing wrong with a little dilly dally shilly shally here and there. ✌️
It is a good thing that XVI isn’t open world. JRPG studios in general have issues being able to create such big vistas. Side content is also never integrated with said world. Killing 10 wolves to bring to a villager girl because her older brother is sick isn’t not saying anything about the surrounding world. It’s not bringing anything to the table in terms of world immersion and narrative. It’s important that you focus on things you are good at and improve slowly on things you are not good at in life. This is true for game dev. A studio gambling big money on a project is never the right answer especially if it’s chasing trends. You’ll almost always be behind the ones who are the best at that particular trend.
What hurts with those types of side content is that their so so close to getting it right. Like it doesn't make sense to bring 10 wolves to a villager girl for being sick but it's not fun to find some magical flower to heal them ether. If they could find that balance where you have to communicate with them to figure out what would be best that would be more entertaining. Give us a reason to care on getting those 10 wolves or that magical flower instead of just "Oh no, my brother is sick! please random main character who's overpowered, I need help!". Some main examples to back that up is how the NPCs in KOTOR 2 behave and some missions from Ghost of Tsushima where a villager will refuse your help until you find them again slaughtered from a nearby camp because they didn't want you around. A fusion of those I feel like would go a very long way.
A good example for me is the mini open world session when you first arrive at the city in TLOU 2. You have freedom and it’s big, but its not an open world, if the game is a series of areas like that = chef’s kiss
You are right man. Horrible game that I see endless praise for from fans and incredible reviews. But you are right, you the outlier. You speak for everyone.
@@Repaduskilol you’re replying to somebody who literally doesn’t even own a ps5. I’ve seen this guy comment on several FF16 videos talking about how it’s going to suck, even before it came out lol.
I've always enjoyed semi-open worlds MUCH more than the traditional open world design that most games take. It's open enough to encourage exploration and discovery, but still focused enough to provide a sense of urgency to playing through the game's story.
Just to clear something up. Of course there is room for Open world games. This video is not about them going away. It’s just pointing out that for every BOTW and Elden Ring are a ton of games every year that are wasting potential for the sake of the open world marketing point. Where a great deal of these games are far better off scaling down and focusing on bettering other aspects of the game versus giving putting out uninspired games
Open world is fine, just hard to execute right. I think it would be cool if every game was open world, with no loading screens and the entire game being one large continuous world instead of a series of rooms.
Then they are necessary for many games, which is not what your title says
A more intimate version of Dark Souls sounds great
But we *are* getting sick of NPCs dying at the end of their questlines.
@@OnlyBlix Right but there's a perception some have that ff16 not going open world makes it outdated. This video isn't necessarily an argument against open world, but it's saying it's not strictly necessary and that more games should reconsider if an open world truly fits into the vision or not.
The problem is that you're heralding FF16 being the pioneer of this idea even though the game is not out yet? There's no guarantee that the game will be good.
the wide linear approach with diverse open zones is a smart approach, I’m glad 7 rebirth is doing this too
Rebirth with this approach will be chefs kiss. I cannot wait to see the visuals
Is it confirmed?
@@The_Ghozzt It's been confirmed for quite a few years now in multiple interviews.
I love the wide-linear and semi-linear approach. I was really impressed with the wide linear level design done in the Seatle portion of The Last of Us Part II. It was the perfect balance of focused but giving you enough room to explore if you wanted. I also love the Semi-linear approach in the last two Deus Ex games and Divinity Original Sin 2. FF7R and Rebirth are top of my next to play list!
Dont have your hopes up too high, in the hands of nomura its sure to be another convoluted mess
Like they say, it isn't about the size of your open world, but how you use the space. Nothing worse than making players waste 10 mins of running generic open fields to complete meaningless checklist style sidequests.
It's why Yakuza is still my fave open-world games. Might not be the biggest in size but they have so much content.
Yeah I heard that from a girl once
Forspoken be like big world but so little substance
@@lordkrauser agreed I have fun slow walking looking at all the detail in the shops and streets in Yakuza like a dragon. Mini games galore!
@@golden-sun ????
to be fair, it's premature to say that FFXVI proves anything at this point, the game isn't even out yet. But I do agree that not every AAA games need to be open world. Elden Ring's open world is great but I don't really want another open world anymore. Small hub/open zones that are filled with details and activities are better than empty vast open world. Yakuza/Like A Dragon games are great at it, Deus Ex too and the older FF are excellent at it too
Thank you for this measured approach. Getting tired of people 'proving' their claims with things that haven't even dropped
@@brianclarke9861 yeah I get tired of people claiming this or that even though the thing itself hasn't come out yet. Was pretty pissed about people claiming Armored Core being a souls game too back when Fromsoftware haven't said anything or when people claiming Cyberpunk will change AAA industry when it wasn't out yet. This type of claim without basis serve no purpose other than just boosting your own ego or narrative.
Apparently being patient enough to see a game released is hard for some players
I'd only object to the Yakuza games, I just think that the map is extremely small there. Is not only that it feels a bit claustrophobic, but the game has you running through the exact same areas again and again.
@@MehdiGlz i heavily disagree. yes it is small in Yakuza games and you run through the exact same areas over and over again but the way the games gated some substory, side story and minigames that you can unlock each chapter is amazing. Every couple chapters or so, there are new substories to discover and some minigames unlocked. Also being in a small map, you can pretty much memorize all the layout in 1 hour of gameplay, right now I pretty much turn off the minimap as I already memorize each street of Kamurocho and when NPC talk about certain street name, I already know which street it is without looking up the map.
And it's not claustrophobic because the streets are quite large for pedestrian
Deus Ex really did this very well. At least with some of the games. A game does not have to be very big to feel believable.
A meaningful, smaller world >>>> a massive, open world
Every day of the week
I think Mario64 and sunshine are still great proof of this. Heck ocarina, mask, and link to the past also do this.
Couldn't agree more.
If only companies like Ubisoft and Bethesda could learn this lesson.
An empty meaningless open world
If the game is fun I'll play it. Open world or not. I just want fun game that are well made.
Sometimes open world's can feel tedious but linear games can feel short and boring so it's a balancing act
The only opinion I love,I have same thought and feeling about it too.
That's a great approach. People are already claiming ff 16 to be a great game, but they just don't realize that they are making an impossible expectations for themselves. That's why I'll wait for a few reviews before buying, cause if it's just mediocre, it's better to wait for a ps plus addition or sale.
Eh. JRPGs are normally linear...but they often also have comparatively low quality side(Non mandatory) content compared to Western games.
Linear games can be and often are filled with not great content.
it really depends how story focused ure game is. Open world can really disrupt pacing of storys expecially if u go anywere from the beginning but it works really well in sandbox type games. This mix between open areas and liniar is perfect for FF.
@@sirnonsense5033 Depends on the structure of the open world and content. You can have a very non linear open world game and a strong story. Like the original Fallout games had. Like some other older Western PC titles were praised for having.
Many recent(2000s) AAA open games on consoles have linear stories and on rails missions, filled with non interactive cutscenes and heavily scripted gameplay sequences similar to more linear games or JRPGs. like Rockstar's games usually do. But not all games with open worlds are designed this way. You wouldn't think that though from all the people criticizing the idea of open world's in games only by the faults present in this one specific type of game.
Take a small world like Kamurocho in Like a Dragon and make it more dense; make it so you can go in every room in every building (within reason) and make the npcs and enemies more interesting with refined AI and make the story feel more real with consequential changes (ex: a bombed out building is sectioned off and slowly rebuilt). Put all that in a smaller world you get way more substance and the world becomes a memorable character in itself.
I'd also like to add Crossbell City from the Trails series as an example of a small open world being memorable. It's telling that by the end of the game, I don't even need the map to tell me where I need to go or how to get around. You come to know the city like the back of your hand.
The "enter any room" illusion is one of those things that are TERrIBLY lacking in modern day jrpgs .....
I still remember the first convenience store I went in in Yakuza 1, and the adult magazine inside haha
I like both, but what I really miss is overworlds. I loved the overworld in FF7 and wish they'd bring it back. It really felt like you were actually in a giant world or region instead of just a big city or area that open "worlds" employ.
I agree. I'm not sure if that will make a comeback though. A big part of why overworlds like FF7 existed in the first place was due to hardware limitations. They want the world to feel big but didn't have the resources to build out a full open world.
I think if a company tried to implement something like that a lot of people would perceive it as lazy or low budget open world.
It's kind of funny that people will use a 2D map to travel between large open zones and see no problem but, if you swapped the 2D map with a basic 3D map and swapped the cursor with a character model, it could feel cheap.
Idk though. I'd like to see that. Maybe someone will pull it off in an interesting way.
how do you imagine that to look like? A mini Cloud figure walking across a miniature globe? And when hitting a town, you get a load screen and are loaded into the town?
@@NoctLightCloud Doesn't have to be more complicated than that but with today's tech who knows how creative you could get with it. Heck if you had the capability, you could even combine open world and overworld with overworld being like fast traveling, though I imagine that'd be quite ambitious. Doing corridors or big areas would probably be more reasonable.
@@ggg21201 Those ideas sound like a mess to me tbh🤔
I want more small but dense open worlds. The problem with open worlds is that they keep going wider when they instead need to go deeper, and by deeper I don't just mean verticality, but the level of detail in a small space. Tho verticality is definitely a part of it.
Kinda like yakuza?
@Tom John yakuza doesn't have the verticality I'm looking for and the side quest and activities aren't my speed. I'm thinking more like if the areas in Dishonored were larger.
ffxv hundred floor dungeon has all the vertical you need
The issue with open world is that a lot of the world does not use the space well at all. It's why, even though I think BotW had some amazing innovations and ideas, it felt more like a tech demo than a complete game. A majority of the game was: finding and completing shrines, killing the same horde of 4 bokoblins, finding koroks. Rinse and repeat. I'm excited for Tears of the Kingdom, because it seems like they will actually put more emphasis on story and dungeons, with varied mechanics.
Hard disagree. The open world is a conversation piece. It tells you some lore and asks you a question: What happened? For instance, why do we have a great plateau?
Not only that, each area is designed to have you climb an obstacle to discover another point of interest. You guys are just hard wire to tackle the main mission and quest and not soak in the world itself and listen to the questions and answers it speaks to you.
@@switchitup3709 An open world is only as fun as the content within it. The problem with a lot of open worlds nowadays is that it's a ton of empty land with barely anything to do. Lore implication is cool and all, but when the rest of the incentive to explore is so lackluster, I'm going to lose interest.
You say "soak in the world," I say "there's only so much world I can soak in before it starts to feel repetitive." Elden Ring is a better example of an open world and I'm hoping Tears of the Kingdom gives us much more to seek out.
@@ApexGale I think that comes down to a preference. You don't care about much of the lore as someone like me. Also you have to remember the world is also designed with big boss in the over world and horseback riding.
That long lay of land in central hyrule is meant for you to run and fight the guardians.
Same. As a long time Zelda fan I found botw boring and excruciating. World is too barren and music is too subtle for my liking. Character interaction is sparse and side quests are mid. That said, I'm excited for totk as the trailer showed a lot of welcomed changes. It'll be icing on the cake if they bring back dungeons
The thing about open worlds that I generally appreciate the most is the idea of it being a sandbox. I can pick any direction, take off running, and encounter some new experience and emergent gameplay that wasn't carefully crafted or planned for by the developer. If all I'm doing is going down a wide funnel to experience an on-rails game, then yeah, an open world adds nothing to this other than wide empty areas that must be traversed.
That would be the ideal, but most open worlds don't have sandbox mechanics. Most aren't BotW or Elden Ring. Hell, most sandboxes are linear or semi-linear titles, like Deus Ex, Dishonored, or DMC 5 (combat sandbox), because they require that a ridiculous amount of development time be spent on the player character's kit, enemy design and AI, level design, physics, and making sure all of these can mesh, which is hard to do if you're also making a huge open world and neat story to go along with it.
@@ThroughfulGamer95 Elden Ring the exact opposite of a sandbox. It has zero randomization and zero emergent gameplay due to its bonfire reset mechanic. I agree it's much more difficult to develop a sandbox and there will always be bugs, but that's something I've grown to accept with games like the Elder Scrolls.
@@kaizer-777 It is a combat-oriented sandbox, between the various options the player has (magic, melee, ashes of war, talismans, the physick flask, status effects, consumables, etc.), how they can all work n tandem and affect one another, and then apply that to enemies and bosses, a lot of the times even using their own AI and abilities to expand this element even further. Sure, there isn't much emergent gameplay when it comes to things like questing, traversal, and such, but it does offer a lot of it in combat.
@@ThroughfulGamer95 By that definition, any Diablo game is a sandbox. I think we have different ideas of what the genre is. I do appreciate the build diversity in Elden Ring though. I would just never call it a sandbox game. It is open world though.
FF12 has taught me you don’t need open world to succeed. It had multiple divers areas with its own theme (musically as well) to justify we do not need pure open world to have an excellent world to explore.
No one is saying you need an open world to succeed.
I've always viewed that as an open world...
Not to mention there are several massive regions in FF12 that the story never even makes you go to. You have to discover them yourself, which makes the game world feel incredibly alive.
12 was sooo underrated. easily in my top 3 fav ff games.
@XIIIR It was in the top ten best selling PS2 games and the critics loved it. Doesn't sound like nobody liked it.
Heres the gist of FF16 gameplay: Walk in a straight line, button mash, cutscene, walk in a straight line, button mash, cutscene. Repeat for 50 hours.
i somehow feel like the comments being made in this video didn't age that well considering FF7 Rebirth ended up being actual open world even though the general expectation was that it would be wide linear. but you were correct in the sense that Rebirth followed in Remake's footsteps in balancing the feel of a big world against the openness of sidequests.
while i still think open world wasn't necessary in 16 either, Rebirth does seem to point out some of its biggest flaws in terms of world design, what with how much you can do and explore in Rebirth. having so many functioning RPG towns is simply glorious
Brilliant video!!! Nodded my head the entire time.
Thank you as always. Means a lot 🙂
Nodding like a true WoL would do 😎
I'm not concerned this game will be successful, just curious to see how much. A lot of people think FFXVI is being done by first timers because most of the people doing XVI have worked entirely on FFXIV--but really, XIV was a massive testing ground for the game design we're going to see in this game.
I've seen people ooh and ah about the seamless transition between cutscene and action in FFXVI, but I can tell right away those people have never played XIV.
FFXIV used to have cinematic cutscenes like a lot of games, but they made a design choice a long time ago to go with cutscenes featuring ingame models. The reason that's genius is, it means your character can be there for every big cinematic moment in the game. It's no wonder people get so attached to their WoL. Whether you're glammed like a badass, or a tiny frog, you're there for every high and low. You can see this approach in FFXVI, too. Instead of cutting away to a pre-planned cinematic, FFXVI just uses the in-engine assets, which means they can transition in and out of cutscenes flawlessly--sometimes even mid fight. I expect this to become an industry standard after FFXVI (if it's as successful as it could be).
Just like cinematic cutscenes, FFXIV was the testing ground for how biomes are going to function in XVI. The biomes in FFXIV are way more limited than these ones are likely going to be. For one, it looks like the PS5's tech has allowed them to camouflage load screens with mechanics, like squeezing through tight spaces. Instead of giant areas with nothing, you're going to traverse massive biomes that are full of mobs and meaningful architecture/geography.
If you've never played FFXIV, don't be fooled into thinking this team are noobs; they've been testing these systems for a decade, and all they managed to do was unseat another MMO that nobody ever thought could be unseated.😅
You know. I've been seeing you in many comment sections surrounding ff16.
It gladdens me to see another ff14 player who is as excited as I am for ff16.
And who is also annoyed at many people who very obviously have preconceived notions about ff16 ending up like ff15 because they're both action games.
The comment that irks me the most is everytime someone comments that ff16 looks like a generic action game. All I want say to them is what actions game do they know that looks and plays like ff16? (besides obviously capcom games) I want NAMES! I wanna try these "generic action games" that I'm apparently unaware of. Lol
@@sinfulbluez1634 right?? show me the games!!
totally agree
I have finally found my people in this comment thread. I agree with you all. I have heard a lot of people claim that because Yoshi-p is showing so much gameplay, the story will be non-existant, and I just feel like I'm the crazy one.
@@ebonyglow2442 That's another sign that the person who made that comment has never played FFXIV.
Whatever you, meaning the person who says they've shown too much, think you know about the story from the trailers, you're dead wrong; Yoshi-P loves red herrings, and I guarantee whatever he's shown you is there to throw you off.
Ocarina of Time did it best, imo.
It opened more up as you progressed the story, and you could go back to previous areas to unlock more stuff, once you had new items or abilities.
Morrowind is also a great open world.
Fallout 4 too
Yeah that formula still works as well. Jedi fallen order used it
I've been wanting open worlds to go back to OoT like design for almost a decade. There was almost nothing wrong with the way it did its world. It felt focused but left enough for you to explore. It also didn't have quest markers, but keywords and clues left by NPC and interacting with the world. It was much more immersive that way.
@@Drstrange3000 those weren't open world though heck old fantasy games are open world if that the case
@@Steven9567 I never said it was open world. I was just stating I think it was one of the best ways to create worlds in games as it has a nice balance of focus and exploration. It was as big as it needed to be.
Oh now what does that remind you of…. Oh yeaaaa 3D platformers….
The classic Final Fantasy 7 was perfect in that regard. It had a linear story but there were so many secrets to discover and to work on. Hope 16 is the same
Unfortunately they've already confirmed that there's no optional dungeons, all dungeons serve the story in a way or another
@@IAmTheEagleHTM Not sure about that. I've been playing Octopath Traveller and tbh I am having troubles to motivate myself to finish it because of the random encounters and too many secrets/dungeons. I'm a perfectionist with limited free time, and that combination is awful for me, because I am not willing to go explore and try to find secret areas if I get attacked and the battle screen loads every 15 seconds💀 Secret areas are usually empty anyways, or they simply contain rare fiends and items as rewards. I personally prefer areas and fiends to be built into the story (like Hell House in FF7R) or at least obvious side tracks, cause otherwise you can miss already coded and implemented awesome areas/creatures and fiend mechanics simply because of bad luck and skipping them. BOTW did secret areas great, but you can dogde, run, fly, and explore better in BOTW than in any FF game.
best exploration game ff 7 back in the 90s......
@@touthoj1987FF3 for SNES (later changed to FF6) was equally as important and impressive. The enormous amount of diversity in characters (except skin color) and their various fighting abilities was impressive even by today's standards.
It was linear through the first half, then the world changed due to the cataclysm and the second half was only partially linear with multiple main characters that you could skip getting in order to beat the game, 4 optional characters, one optional assassin character who was considered untrustworthy but actually had a huge heart and lots of back story (including being another character's unknown father). Also had a dog that fought with him and you could cause the character to die depending on your choices at the end of the first half of the game.
Just such a well-done game with lots to do, awesome side quests, a surprising amount of freedom for 1993 games, great story, great characters, great weapons, lots of secrets and a very large overworld map that changed halfway through.
Will always be top tier RPG and did so much for the genre. A true masterpiece up there with FF7 and hopefully FF16 will be another milestone.
I also liked FF2 and FF9 a lot. Even FF1 was pretty damn cool as well as FF Tactics and Crisis Core.
I didn't realize but I was burnt out on the open world idea, when I first played the remake of final fantasy 7 I was so hooked and enthralled with every part of the story and game. I would much rather have a game with a smaller world but have it be over filling with story and character building. The open world games have their place but it's just not the move anymore.
Even with ff7 remake it still have some problem on side quest. I'd rather have a few great side quest rather than dozens of fetch quest
@@dantederi5062 there is no such things as 'great side quests'.
it's either talk quest, fetch quest, or tracking quest.
the only great side quest if ever made, is the truly dynamic side quest
@@dantederi5062 those were the only parts done by FF13 director Toriyama. Not a fan of any of his other work.
@@altairscauldron9776 you should play Horizon Forbidden West, I think they nailed it with the side quests, as each of the side quest have their own meaningful storyline and some of the characters you meet are very interesting. Some of the side quest also have direct impact on the world too. I hope FF16 have these kind of meaningful side quests
@@thevloggerwannabe8599 I gave up playing HZD due to its nature of open world is such a hassle to play and finish...
I have this thing called open wolrd fatigue and the only OW game that doesn't give me this, is Ghost of Tsushima
I absolutely love how FFXV used it’s open world. You get a nice long road trip with your bros doing all the JRP side quest stuff then as the story get weightier and the burden of the crown weighs on noctis. That open world becomes an ever more bleak direct path towards fate and turns into a linear path.
Me too. Seems like people are afraid of big open spaces and prefer games that would lead them by hand everywhere, idk but tha's more like interactive movies for me. Yes, it might be more difficult to create open world, you need to put efforts into designing explorations and fill world with some events, but usually games provide so many means of transportation that even empty spaces can be easily traversed, eveything is covered with quest markers as well so you potentially have exactly the same experience as in corridor games but with additional feature of exploration and without loading screens that break immersion. Not every game needs open world but if done right it brings much more immersion
Ff15 was too easy tho and the story was rushed like a mf but with all the DLC and later updates it became a decent product but overall a good first timer game for sure, but not my favorite final fantasy game
FFXV world was horrendous. Cities didn't had any immersion, were absolutely not protected in the middle of the fucking monster plagued woods. Filled with NPC. Also insanely large empty space. FFXV is the definition of how NOT to make a world.
@@matiasdextre9080 but they did mention daemons being afraid of strong lights(or some type of it), and we already know most towns have them. And they do have city guards and hunters getting rid of monsters, so I don't think that is the problem. Just a bit annoying with all the stupid side quests, could have done them better.
That boring as heck. I just wanted to get to the place already after 15 times of doing that.
1. This game isn’t out so it doesn’t prove anything yet.
2. I don’t think anyone thinks a game can’t exist without an open world
People realize there are still plenty of non open world games right?
There's actually far more linear games coming out than open world games people are just quick to forget all the linear games for some reason. It just seem like people saying they are bored of open world, but no one is actually going out and buying the linear games they will still buy open world anyway and say they are burned out.
MGSV should have done this zone approach. It suffered greatly from the "hey look, our game is open-world now" trend. If there were things to do between the wide open areas in between missions, that would be reasonable, but just a few camps and literally 5-10 minutes of just pushing forward on an analog stick was ridiculous. Good video on hopefully a dying trend of games focusing on an open-world over story, or just havng an open-world for the sake of saying, "the game is open world, please buy it"
I hope so too. It looks like people are getting tired of both open worlds AND GaaS which is music to my ears as they are trends I despise. I still like Zelda's and Yakuza/Judgment's open worlds though.
I couldn't agree more! It's one of the many reasons I'm not a fan of MGSV.
What's important is density, not size. A huge map with very little in it is pointless and just annoying to navigate, while a smaller one with lots of handcrafted touches and interesting places/activities feels a lot more alive and fun. I always use the Yakuza series as an example - most of the games share the same relatively small map, but there are so many things to do in it that it feels really expansive and lively. I know I'd much rather run around Kamurocho than most of the open worlds out there
While I agree it's important for an open world not to feel empty, I also think it's important to point out that "density" just for the sake of density isn't much better. As pointed out in this video, an excess of side-content and collectible checklist stuff can actually get in the way and detract from the critical path. The feeling should be "Oh! I've stumbled upon something interesting!" not "Damn, I really want to see the next important plot point... but I should probably do these sidequests first while I'm here just in case one is actually interesting or has something neat for me."
Sure, the side stuff is optional, but if it isn't interesting to do then why put it in the game?
I'm pretty much convinced that what they have shown for FF16 is probably a fraction of the actual story. There is probably some banger plot that all of what happens in the trailers leads and that could be an entire part in and of itself. It's kind of like how Tales of Arise had amazing pacing in Part 1, but in Part 2 the pacing goes to shit and many of the plot elements that you would have liked to experience and find out is just explained to you in the form of a lore dump because development time or whatever. Point is the second half suffered greatly. My prediction is FF16 is going to have a second act but it will actually have good pacing and writing.
the game has 11 hours of cutscene. we barely see anything from trailers
also based on the devs work with FF14, they used to mislead audience with wrong impression from trailer while hide other massive area and big important plot.
@@kumomeme7852 Pretty much
The developers have shown us quite a bit, but there's still a lot we don't know. We don't even know who or what the main antagonist will be. Clive looks to have rivals like Benedikta and Barnabas, but I don't think either are main antagonists.
This game will redefine life itself
Honestly it might fix all of earths issues
Cringe
@@Repaduski 😂
@@pogoacct8611 People unironically saying cringe is pretty cringe.
@@Sincleaver if I say so
*Cringe*
glad i got recommended this, good take and actually got me engaged, hadn't heard much about ff16 but this has got me interested in it.
Thanks so much!
Watch some trailers, get hyped and wait for June :)
FF15 was one of the rare open world I loved to go at any place, finding secrets and easter eggs. Completing it almost 100%
And for the best open world games design, you may want to check the Just Cause franchise (what they fucked up was the scenario ngl)
Open World games rarely utilize their open world in a way that makes any sense.
Breath of the Wild was way too big, yet had nothing interesting to explore. It's also a testament on how too much freedom can hurt the sandbox more then help. The world loses all sense of structure when you can climb any vertical surface.
Elden Ring failed to bring the open world to a Souls like in a way that benefited it. Torrent makes exploration a mindless endeavor as you gallop past everything freely. In souls games, they do really well because you are almost always in danger, rather you're at full health and still 3 hits from death or constantly observing the terrain for traps, it kept you engaged and immersed. The open world loses all of that, but it doesn't have to.
Something I feel like people aren't ready to admit about open world games is what the design brings to the table for them. Most have told me they want the open world to be easy to traverse and not take long to traverse. What exactly is the point of the open world if it's not challenging or immersive?
Unnecessary that so much is true. However, the open world has advantages
-- relax and chill streams just exploring.
-- illusion of linearity is completely gone
-- places to hide bonus dungeons like FF XV'S Pitioss.
-- bonus side quests
-- immersion
-- reward of finding hidden towns not in the main quest
-- additional mlbonus cut-scenes.
However there is 1 rule that applies to most experiences:
-- if something is too hard or complex, people will give up.
-- you must give FEEDBACK so people who don't want to explore have markers and know exactly where to go.
-- if people have a frustrating experience, they may just day F it
-- if it becomes not engaging anymore, people will give up.
--if I get lost, do I have an exit?
If the answer is no to all of these, you better make your game linear. While some people wouldn't mind an open world hunting and everyday simulator where you can hunt in the woods and craft things to survive an everyday life, Final Fantasy fans probably don't want their game to be a life simulator -- an empty wasteland without purpose.
I think you can make a successful open world game but you again must check these boxes off:
--if something is too hard or complex, people will give up.
-- you must give FEEDBACK so people who don't want to explore have markers and know exactly where to go.
-- if people have a frustrating experience, they may just day F it m
-- if it becomes not engaging anymore, people will give up.
--if I get lost, do I have an exit?
If the answer is negative for everything, you better make your game linear. While some people wouldn't mind an open world hunting and everyday simulator wgmjere you can hunt in the woods and craft things to survive an everyday life, Final Fantasy fans probably don't want their game to be a life simulator -- an empty wasteland without purpose.
Open worlds were a direct response to load times becoming increasingly giant back during the era they first started appearing in. But processing improvements have directly killed that notion. FF16's ability to load into an area in as little as 2 seconds makes the entire notion of open worlds basically obsolete. FF16 doesn't NEED to simulate the entire world in order to stay away from from scary loading screens. So they can spend that 'potential' building meaningful area's for us to explore.
While I agree, it absolutely doesn't make the notion of open worlds obsolete, it just means less games require them.
Honestly the “1000 worlds” line for star field to my isn’t a really good selling point
I love that the background theme is Ul’Dah at night.. ah so peaceful 😌
I think what's ultimately important when making explorable open maps, is not how VAST you can ultimately make them, but rather how DENSE you can make them.
A good example of a game that utilizes this philosophy is the upcoming Dead Island 2, the maps in that game aren't really big at all, they're pretty small in fact, but they are so jampacked with stuff to do and explore that you don't really notice nor care that they're small, because the density is enough to make them feel sizable in their own right.
And FFXVI also seem to have understood this fact, just because your open world is as vast as New England doesn't automatically makes it as deep as the actual New England, you need stuff to FILL in that space otherwise you end up with a very pretty, but ultimately empty wasteland.
I don't think density is all that's important. It's important that time players spend doing gameplay or content is fun or interesting.
If an open world is too dense it break the exploration and the immersion.
After the release of games like God of War Ragnarök/God of War and Jedi Survivor, I feel like the semi-open world style of game design has become a lot more popular. I like open world games and all (Skyrim is my favorite game ever after all), but to be honest I kind of prefer this new style with smaller, more refined worlds that teeter on the edge of linearity with just enough freedom between story missions to scratch that itch. I'm just getting tired of overly long and inflated open worlds that boast world size when really it's boring and poorly utilized space.
I tend to drop most games with open world. The last open world game I managed to finish was the Witcher 3 and it took me a couple of years.
fkn loved that game
Open world games can be easy to drop, because like you said, you can get caught up in the side stuff when the world is ending. And then you drop it, come back a month later, and forget what you were doing. Traveling in an open world isn't too hot either.
Not a popular opinion but this is the reason why BotW didn't track well for me. I don't want to fast travel, or at least I don't want to feel obligated to.
TFW this many years later I probably still haven’t covered every possible nook and cranny of Skyrim (to say nothing of randomly generated events just to keep things happening) but I can memorize a 100% run of say a Zelda game with its “you can’t do this until a specific tool is unlocked” formula
Agreed even the new ideas will get copied by the rest of the industry and the overuse of the same formula will make it boring eventually
Thankfully we are starting to see more of this. I just hope 16 takes it to the next level
@@Repaduski I doubt it will take it anywhere we haven't seen but as long as the story combat and bosses and endgame are good then im good too since open worlds are in no way something i need in a game (especially with how much reuse their formulae gets wich just makes them unnecessarily big and repetitive instead of just repetitive wich is admittedly bound to happen to anything)
@@GameDesignAndy that's probably a factor but for me the main reason is how they all ultimately copy paste each other since that ends up making all open worlds the same in some ways wich ends up making the experience tedious and repetitive
Im soo tired of open worlds. They feel like such a chore to explore. I got chronic fatigue and need to feel engaged so i dont fall asleep lol, but open world games HELP me fall asleep.
It's kinda incomparable but one thing I love about the Witcher 3 is that it technically is open world but is split into multiple giant open levels. This game still looks to be massive, and the density of it is what I'm really excited for. A dense world with things to do has always been more enjoyable than a generic empty one that's really large and long to traverse
Don't get me wrong. Witcher 3 is a masterpiece but the world content besides contracts and a few side quests were terrible. Most of the question marks were nests or lone chests with nothing ever useful. And don't even get me started on the filler in skellige....
@@ltlsWhatltIs oh 100% you're correct and it's going to really age poorly in comparison to some other games. I think that the splits are cool but yeah you're definitely right in that regard
I fully agree with your stance on open-worlds and I do think a lot of games have made great efforts to make their worlds seem massive without needing to actually have them entirely explorable. That said, I think you picked the worst example with Final Fantasy XVI. I love the game and I'm having an amazing time with it, but I've never felt more disconnected from a FF world than this as a result of it's broken-up and segmented map system. Every area I've been to in about 20 hours has felt so tiny, unremarkable and lacking any real significance meant to endear me to the location. Coupled with the lack of any real reason to explore outside of a few mundane side quests and a chest or two to find, and all I find myself doing is itching for the next major story beat to come up and return to the game's strongest points.
Personally, I'd much rather see a world that's small, freely explorable but densely packed, like you'd find in Yakuza games. That way I get intimately acquainted with the place I'm in and feel a connection to the world they're building.
You know, experiencing certain moments in the exact way that was intended, in a specific order, is exactly what I watch movies for.
The style of world design that FFXVI is going for is one that I personally prefer over a typical open world, thanks to the Xenoblade Chronicles Series. Xenoblade Chronicles has had this segmented open zone design since the first game on the Nintendo Wii, and has continued to the most recent game Xenoblade Chronicles 3 last year, and likely the story expansion coming out in a few days of writing this. The design gives some of the best aspects of open world design, while removing a lot of the filler needed for the world to feel seamless whilst allowing for more unique locales to be larger relative to the total map area. Incredibly well made video.
completely agree, its kinda like a huge open 3d metroidvania which its great
One of the reasons I loved Dragon Age. A world map with separate but detailed zones. It made everything feel larger, like it takes the characters days to go to travel to different regions.
You talking about origins right? Inquesition ruined it for me
@@crystalpath4264 if only there was a total conversion mod to make it play like origins
@@crystalpath4264 In general.
Pretty much why I believe that the notion that mmos need to be one mega server with no loading is complete BS.
You may create a fully filled and living large zone.., But it'll never be seamlessly full world.
FF-16 didn’t prove anything all it proved was the series is dying and square is lazing at making open worlds that are good it’s probably one of the most boring so called rpg I’ve played in years weapons have no stat effects side quest are boring combat is lazy the only thing the world had going for it is the lore but this was the most half ass rpg I’ve played in a long time
I totally agree. It looks like this game will give you most of the benefits of an open world without most of the flaws, such as too much copy/paste, lack of intricate design and unique set pieces. Also not making the entire continent explorable also allows the vistas to look much larger in scope and realistic, i.e most open worlds have important landmarks feel too close together compared to how they would be in real life.
Great video! I love this topic. Fully open world ganes are not only not used to their full potential but also making development times and cost way bigger than they should be. I know Xenoblade is a lot smaller, popularity wise, than FF. However, it feels like FF16 has a more Xenoblade approach to making the world feel huge and vast without without being fully open world.
ff16 take inspiration from ff12 and 14. Xeno are great, but not open worlds too. Are big big large zones, but dont have sensation of a entire world. On ff16 u have all the world map of a "real world", not 2 or 5 titans like xenoblade.
@@abelald1310 "dont have sensation of a entire world" idk what you mean xc1 and 3 are all on one giant land mass xc2 is the only one with multiple titans making it feel like separate islands
Definitely in the camp of atmospheric contextual content in linear games being more substantial in terms of running to a destination or endless grinding to unlock fast travel as a company's means of padding hours of wack-a-mole stagnant gameplay.
Well, that's fine but bring back world maps! I can understand why not everyone likes open world game but I really enjoy the travel aspect, actually journeying to a destination. I love sailing around the map in Black Flag/Odyssey or flying around it in many other games knowing I can just stop and land wherever I want. Let's not take our personal preferences and assume everyone shares them. I think it's the same thing when anything becomes common and over-used; There is tendency to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
I remember dragon age inquisition making me realize that while a good open world game is really good smaller more varied hubs or linear areas are both easier to put together and are just as good
There are few that I feel are perfect examples of an open world. The Witcher 3, Elden Ring, Zelda botw, Ghost of Tsusima. There are plenty more, but these are my favorites. A lot of games have tried to implement an open world to varied enjoyment and successes(AC I'm talking about you 😜), but it's a hard thing to pull off perfect. I also have to say when an open world is done with passion it is easily my preferred genre...
IMO Witcher 3 fits better as one of the worst examples. The world was so unnecessarily big that the devs had to fill it with the stereotypical map clutter so make it seem less empty. Witcher is about the quests, ultimately, so just make the world smaller.
@@AlfonsoSRT I disagree with you, though one of the first things I did when getting past the first area was to turn off the white question marks in the menu and just do them when I came across them naturally, which to me feels like what CDP wanted to do originally cause it made it wat more immersive then chasing them around the map and many had their own little stories. I also stopped myself from using the fast travel and explore the world more, and I started noticing a lot more details. Like how they designed rivers with proper depiction of erosion and how settlements around it had to adapt to their geographical environments. It just felt very lived-in which I cannot say for many other open worlds where stuff is just put in to fill up the space without much thought behind how people would actually live there.
Ghost of Tsushima is filled with copy paste bandit camps to clear out like every other Ubisoft open world game. I don't think the haikus, springs, graphics or platforming make up for that.
I'm confused. Is he saying that a company that has 90% mainly done linear games is showing that open world game is unnecessary? Why do people need to compare everything. If you like linear game that's great I do too but why do people have to say that another genre is not good because of that. People like Rpg's because some have puzzles in them like Resident Evil, but does that mean they are better them 100% puzzle games. I don't think it does. oh, and I think that if a game is lacking in whatever it is people want it's not the genre (cause genre is just a category) but the dev's not putting it in their game. so, if you didn't like a game then you need to do a video on the dev's next time.
He's a bootlicker. If SE returns to open world games in the next installment, he'll be talking about how open world games are the answer to the limitations of linearity.
I think if youre gonna make an open-world it should not only help the character grow but also help you immerse yourself in. Horizon Forbidden West, God of War and RDR2 accomplished this.
The side quests felt apart of the story and showed us more about the character we're playing. I think by doing linear open-world, we can learn more and engage with our characters. Legend of Zelda and Elden Ring although fantastic broke the mold because it immersed you into its world spectacle that other games just can't win.
TL:DR Open-Linear worlds focus more on the characters and making you grow with them. Open world games, the world IS the character and these days its hard to be unique.
Be honest with me. At this current moment. Do you feel any emotional attachment to aloy? Would you feel affected if she died. I think horizon rocks. But it’s biggest flaw is that I don’t know anyone who is attached to its characters. It’s like the world is the only character and the humans are just supporting
@@Repaduski aloy might honestly be Sonys worst protaganist. Kat is the female Sony protag I think of personally and she’s from a dead studio lol.
@@Repaduski Mannnnn 🤣.
Listen just cause I said characters dont mean it always mean main characters.
I love Horizion Forbidden West world but what interests the most are the tribes. Their way of life, how they think and how weird they can be. I dont wont Aloy to die, but she needs a love interest to make her stop being as dull wet cardboard 😭
God of War (although it seems like it) wasn't an open world. It took the open linear approach.
I've played both Horizon games, and after spending a lot of time with each game, the open world just falls flat after awhile.
I might not play the third Horizon game if it copy's n pastes from it's previous installments.
The only thing that game proves is that if enough marketing tells you that a turd is made of gold some if not most people will believe it.
Open worlds require a lot more than just space. If the gameplay and content aren't there, then the open world is pointless, I personally got bored of the ubisoft open world a couple hours into ass creed 2.
I enjoy zone based games like this. Ocarina of time did this, and it felt like I had full access to all of Hyrule. I hope ff16 is like that.
It seems to me they want to go for a few medium contained rather than a small linear one with stuff to do or massive world with nothing. I can get behind this approach. I still think there are ways to create a massive world that's ground breaking even with BotW and Elden Ring out, but that takes a lot of money. Plus it's not needed. It will be interesting to see how well both this and FF7 Rebirth handle this.
Small world's can be empty and larger ones can be full.
@@7dayspking Well of course. I never said that couldn't be a thing.
Botw is very empty with not much in it to be honest. Strip out the shrines and korok seeds and you basically have no incentive to explore. There's not even anything all that cool to look at or find either. It's a decent turn off your brain and walk around simulator but not much more than that.
@@jhonayo4887 'strip out the..'. stripping a game of it's content will make it more empty. I agree. BOTW has it's survival mechanics, larger dungeons, areas and Unique equipment to explore for though. I think it's less 'empty' with it's content stripped than many other games would be. Imagine TLOU with all of it's cutscenes, dialogue, set pieces and objectives stripped. That's a damn empty game.
@@7dayspking Strip everything from a game... do we have a game tho? That's the real question.
Well said dude lol
Strange to argue something is unnecessary based on a game that isn't released yet.
Thank you. This video is needed for so many people that defend open world games void of any meaningful event. It's just tedious and honestly a waste of my time after a day of work.
I like what ff16 did with this. Having a very big open world and running to your next location can be a bit time consuming and ff16 eliminates that. I liked that.
Elden ring is the only open world game that i love, the rest...... even XV, meh, i don't like it. Elden ring hide mysterious places so well, is so fascinating. I was waiting XVI be in this way, but you can make a game with same mistery level of elden ring, but not open world and it can work very well.
XV is the example of bad open world. The world is big but the story is too linear that everything presented in the open world isn't important. The world is devoid of interesting things like there is almost no reason to explore. It's waay to empty.
I'll always take multiple large populated areas over an empty open world.
Can we at least wait until the game is released?
Come back in 2 months and we can decide how it shook out
Come back in 2 months and we can decide how it shook out
I was so glad to hear that ff16 wasn't open world. Especially since FF games don't have good open world maps.
They also need to brink back lvl base games something similar to mirror edge or nioh
Mirrors edge was a game that was ruined by an open world sequel. That sounds good on paper but made the game super repetitive due to the pathing always being the same
@@Repaduski exactly that why the first mirror edge is still held up as a classic similar from point A to B lvl to lvl
@@Repaduski I agree, while I did enjoy the sequel towards the end with it feeling like a different path to get to the objective it didn't match the original where they could go crazy on where you were suppose to go.
I just played through Xenoblade series and those games are really perfect at showing off that big open areas ARE much better than open world when done right. Sometimes I even forget Xenoblade (3 mainly) aren’t open world just because of how entirely open they are while still being packed and showing off beautiful sceneries.
Xenoblade is definitely one of the few that use space correctly
Damn man honestly this video was breath taking honestly your narration and the way you move from one point to another is simply amazing great job man
The world is about to end. A major character in the party just died. The villain is escaping. I think I’ll challenge this random NPC to a card game to win a rare card😂
Me: Start watching video
Sultana: Dreaming. 😴
Sorry if I jigglypuffed you
I've learned over time that I seem to prefer semi open world as opposed to full open world.
Like, I really didn't enjoy exploration in Zelda: Breath of the Wild, but loved exploring in Xenoblade Chronicles 3.
Great video and a solid point. I'm an indie developer working on a character driven story game in a semi-open world, and I've been facing a lot of the considerations you addressed. I want the player to have the freedom to go anywhere, but even with triggered events and conversations, it's been difficult to keep some of the dialogue ordered in a way that makes sense. Lots of variables and lots of challenges.... and I'm only just working on the demo so far. 😅
Its still not released, what does it prove?
Another call-back or comparison could even be made to Dragon Age: Inquisition. A map that had areas you’d load into, but each “area” was massive in scale and provided different environments, weather conditions, and stories of their own that fit the narrative. That went on to be one of the most successful games for the year (2014, I believe).
Definitely not to be a one-on-one comparison, but that open-linear structure worked really well for them, and I believe it’ll work great for FFXVI.
Im all for open world games, but after playing tales of arise and finishing final fantasy 16, I honestly like that approach 100% better. Open world games lack story/cut scenes and the open space is just filler for the lack off meaningful content.
Extremely well written script. Your voice is also pleasant to listen to. Keep it up and you will be huge. Also, I 100% agree with you on the open world from a GPU standpoint. Building open worlds means that the render distance is often much more than just more closed linear world design. Being able to know exactly what will be on screen in any given area means that the game can be much better optimized for the hardware, and therefore allow for more beautiful graphics and effects. I think FFXVI is really truly showing off what the PS5 can do. Bought a PS5 for this game and GT7 VR. I just couldn't hold back any longer. I hope it gets 9's
I don't disagree that higher graphic fidelity is possible on smaller maps. People forget that manpower (Artist dev time) is a bottleneck.
But. Final fantasy XVI seems to have worse graphics and less detailed environments than many Western, AAA open world games last gen (2013-2021) and noticeably worse than cross gen titles like Horizon Forbidden West.
So that argument sucks. I thinks it's just a matter than Japanese games, including FF are much smaller, cheaper productions than the largest Western games. FF isn't open world because they can't afford to make a beautiful open world game.
FF12 had my favourite world map design although I couldn't care less for the story. I also love the Xenoblade games' area design. To a smaller degree, Kingdom Hearts has adopted such larger zones, too.
Apparently fans did wine about FF7 Remake being leaner. I couldn’t agree more. Like how they also complained the combat being real time for recent games in general.
Can’t please them all. It is what it is. This is the right path for sure! Expect rebirth to have a similar world structure
@@Repaduski I hope so! That put me at ease to be honest. I don’t need open world for the sake of it. Give me good, memorable world design. That’s it.
@@MrGamer07100 Honestly I just want shorter games. I don't mind 80 hour grand adventures with a huge cast and an expansive open world but only a few with those parameters can really make it memorable (Ghost of Tsushima, Yakuza, FF7, BOTW).
The games that really kinda stuck with me the hardest when PS5 came out was Miles Morales, Astro's Playroom and Dead Space remake. If we could just get more stuff like that where the main game content is fulfilling and the endgame content makes it a masterpiece I'm all for it.
@@NrettGHonestly, don't expect RPG's to be short. Fine I'll say JRPG's.
@@MariusBoss11458 I guess that's a main exception. But I wish they could break up that flow like arcs. Persona does it in an interesting way where each palace is it's own arc with a introduction, rising action, climax, falling action, and it's own conclusion leading into the palace/arc. Or I guess just overall better pacing instead of one long broadway performance.
I think Elden Ring and Breath of the Wild have set the bar so incredibly high that I think the more open linear design is the best way about going forward. The Ubisoft tower checklist has gotten so boring to me, but the dark souls games are much more "linear" although there are typically more than one way to progress the games I have found much more entertaining recently.
I feel like the recent God of War games tackled linear open world the best, the locations were fun little areas where you could explore every nook and cranny but not feel overwhelmed by it. Two big games last year, though fun in their own rights had me not wanting to play either of them once I was done with them, that being Horizon Forbidden West and Elden Ring. Both amazing games, especially Elden Ring and though Elden Ring definitely tackled an open world setting the best since Breath of the Wild once that "Wow factor" faded I found myself just not caring to explore and wanting to be done with the game by hour 50. Developers are really going to have to get creative because I'm tired of capturing a watchtower to unlock a portion of the map or securing a camp to fast travel.
Even recently resident evil 4 remake
Elden ring is literally the only game with a open world design that made me want to keep exploring. Every other game is a chore to explore when you see 900 seeds (zelda) and question marks everywhere when they are 99% of the time pointless (witcher).
Witchers questions marks are awful but the koroks seeds arnt invasive. You never see them on the map. You also don’t need to get many of them to extract the value of inventory expansion
16 has the worst world design lol
My favorite will always be hub-worlds. I especially loved how Sekiro and SW Jedi Fallen Order were designed.
Elden Ring justified it to me.
Most people praise the game and by all means it was the greatest game of 2022…
But Sekiro and DS3 give so much more fun. Both in “peak” emotion and in constant happiness when replaying.
The game: yet to be RELEASED.
This guy: Final Fantasy XVI proves it.
Its like that article that said "Calisto Protocol has Mastered Survival Horror before it released and we never heard from them again.
@@kennethyoung7457 hahahhaha
Watched this while playing an open world Ubisoft game.
Fight me
Which one 👀 then I’ll judge accordingly
@@Repaduski Assassins Creed Origins, you know, Very big open world with ? scattered throughout the map. you know what else? I'm doing all those Question marks, slowly and methodically because there's a silver trophy with my name on it.
You watch RUclips WHILE playing? Sounds like a very engaging video game you have there. 👍
@@Mychel_Nox it's actually pretty chill listening to RUclips while clearing enemy outposts or exploring. I'll usually pause RUclips when there's dialogue or something but for the most part it's just care free gaming
@@DoubleDelta10 That’s great. Alas, not every game needs to be 100% all of the time. Nothing wrong with a little dilly dally shilly shally here and there. ✌️
Sidequests sucks, always helping kids or finding cats
It is a good thing that XVI isn’t open world.
JRPG studios in general have issues being able to create such big vistas.
Side content is also never integrated with said world.
Killing 10 wolves to bring to a villager girl because her older brother is sick isn’t not saying anything about the surrounding world. It’s not bringing anything to the table in terms of world immersion and narrative.
It’s important that you focus on things you are good at and improve slowly on things you are not good at in life. This is true for game dev.
A studio gambling big money on a project is never the right answer especially if it’s chasing trends. You’ll almost always be behind the ones who are the best at that particular trend.
What hurts with those types of side content is that their so so close to getting it right. Like it doesn't make sense to bring 10 wolves to a villager girl for being sick but it's not fun to find some magical flower to heal them ether. If they could find that balance where you have to communicate with them to figure out what would be best that would be more entertaining. Give us a reason to care on getting those 10 wolves or that magical flower instead of just "Oh no, my brother is sick! please random main character who's overpowered, I need help!".
Some main examples to back that up is how the NPCs in KOTOR 2 behave and some missions from Ghost of Tsushima where a villager will refuse your help until you find them again slaughtered from a nearby camp because they didn't want you around. A fusion of those I feel like would go a very long way.
@@NrettG well back then you didn't need a reason you just help either for the reward or just cause
Does the gameplay at 0:26 seem different from the state of play? It looks weird
Laughs in elden ring. The best world ever created
facts
A good example for me is the mini open world session when you first arrive at the city in TLOU 2. You have freedom and it’s big, but its not an open world, if the game is a series of areas like that = chef’s kiss
Final Fantasy 16 doesn't prove anything because this game isn't even out yet what a dumb title for this video
The magic from FF7 to FF10 is gone.
This video did not age well at all lmao
Ff16 was the epitome of lack of direction equals a horrible game, as exemplified by ff16.
You are right man. Horrible game that I see endless praise for from fans and incredible reviews. But you are right, you the outlier. You speak for everyone.
@@Repaduski low standards, sorry if you suffer from it, but you should demand better.
@@fysl305 just out of curiosity what is your favorite game of all time
@@Repaduskilol you’re replying to somebody who literally doesn’t even own a ps5. I’ve seen this guy comment on several FF16 videos talking about how it’s going to suck, even before it came out lol.
@@Thats-What-We-Dewwwww yeah it seems that’s the case for most conversation like this that isn’t in any way constructive haha
imo, the recent GoW are the perfect mix of open world and linear
this vid aged like spoiled milk.. FF16 sux 😂
Yeah and considered that FF7 Rebirth dropped 7 months later and is a way better game than XVI in every way and also have an open world
Guardians of the galaxy game and Jedi fallen order did beautiful and immersive linear levels while maintaining the feel of an open world.
I've always enjoyed semi-open worlds MUCH more than the traditional open world design that most games take. It's open enough to encourage exploration and discovery, but still focused enough to provide a sense of urgency to playing through the game's story.
Everyone been saying this lately hella true open world games hype is way over