The Hot Topic Returns

[Maryokutai]

36 minutes ago, mfnick said:

I was listening to TCGS this week and David Turner kept going on about how old AC 6 felt just because it was a level based game. He wanted to be flying around an open world. Bitch that’s an entirely different game. Of which there’s already a million of. Piss off. 

 

I do find some consumer hopes and expectations a bit off-putting as well. I remember stumbling across a thread on reddit where some people wanted Metroid Prime 4 to be open world, despite the classic Metroid template not being compatible with it at all. That's a part I don't really get – if you really enjoy a non-open-world game, why would you want the follow-up to throw away its foundation and become something else instead? I realise people enjoyed Arkham City because it played into the power fantasy of being Batman arguably better than Asylum, but it's a very different game, and not necessarily objectively better.

 

Personally I don't dislike open worlds as much as I did roughly ten years ago, but I also didn't play a lot of those games mentioned here, so maybe I'm just dodging the fatigue symptoms through my gaming choices.

 

(I did enjoy the first sled area in Gears 5, was a nice change of pace. The second one felt unnecessary though.)

[spatular]

I never used to like open world games, i dont mind as much now, maybe just got used to them as so many games went that direction, not sure. The two latest zelda games make a good argument for open world. Think im quite good at ignoring open world stuff, like witcher 3 and cyberpunk i can just ignore a lot of the map markers and get on with the main quest.

[OCH]

Structured narrative. That's what I enjoy. Open World can be fun, to a point. Zelda is a good example. Typically, 20 or 2 full lines of hearts, doubled magic meter and a Special sword/armour. Those three things are the signifiers you have achieved everything in-game. I can look at a saved game for everything from Zelda 1 to Skyward Sword and see that I've done all there is to do from the main menu. Tears of the Kingdom, I didn't even get two full lines of hearts. I have no idea how many shrines were still left to unlock, nor side quests that remained undiscovered in the world? It doesn't matter. Because I finished the story. The main game. The reason for purchase.

 

Open World tends to mean a very superficial experience and not one wherein every part of that gaming world actually matters. So what's the point of it? I completely mapped the underground. It has Zero impact on the story or any NPC interaction. It doesn't even unlock anything useful. Much like fully unlocking the overworld and sky island maps.

[shinymcshine]

What I loved about some open world games was the time when you'd have a conversation, or read a book / find a note about a 'a village a few miles to the southwest' or when you'd get a sketch map - then had to navigate yourself to actually find the place (rather nowadays when an icon pops up).

 

Pretty sure that's how the Elder Scrolls games use to do it (pre Skyrim) and was a great part of exploration in RDR when treasure hunting (against the vague map). It actually felt way more rewarding than just travelling towards a location flag.

[Metroid66]

I'm a fan of open world games to be honest. If course the best ones are the ones where you can just wonder off and find a quest by chance or an interesting location to explore and plunder. It's an illusion that you're 'making your own adventure ' but certain games, like Oblivion, have a good go at trying to make that feel real.

 

I hope Starfield has a go, but I'm not convinced it can, given what I've read about the way it sets out it's stall. 

 

I have to say that I'm less thrilled by Zelda this time around. I really did start to feel I was going thru the motions after about 40 hours. Still, it took 40 hours!

I'm not sure I'll ever finish that one.

[DANGERMAN]

I don't dislike open world games, but I didn't like that era where everything was open world, which maybe we're still in, I mean Zelda, even Mario to a point.

 

Theoretically, the ones I don't like are the ones where the open world and incidental missions are the game. It's not quite a true open world, but Dragon Quest Treasures and the recent Pokemon one felt like they had no meat to them, no core game, just the act of existing in the world. I liked Dragon Quest, but it was a bit like work.

 

The worst examples I can think of are both made by the same studio I think. Mad Max and Rage 2. There's virtually no difference between a small encampment along the road, something you do just to tick off a thing on the map, and the story missions. Rage 2 was marginally the better of the two with this, but it felt like a very cynical, paint by numbers game, just with some really good gunplay. That sort of thing is detrimental to gaming I think, same with procedurally generated content, there's a "laziness" to it, something has looked at the data and just regurgitated them back to us with no art 

[shinymcshine]

That latter para reminds me of the Mafia or LA Noire games - where you just had to drive from location A to B with nothing particular to note or find anywhere that might divert your attention (in their 'open world / city') - so your journey always felt like some sort of elongated 'loading screen'.

[radiofloyd]

I don‘t have any strong feelings about open world games but they are a big time commitment.

 

Cyberpunk does a good job of being open world but not being overwhelming. You can play it very linearly if you like. But I liked driving around with the in-car first person view so much that I drove everywhere anyway.

[DisturbedSwan]

I do like open world games, but I've learnt from my time with Breath of the Wild, Elden Ring and Tears of the Kingdom that that style of desolate open-world where you figure out what to do with survival elements just isn't for me, it's just boring to me.

 

My ideal Open World is a Ubi open world or Bethesda GS open world really, plenty of stuff to do but still able to get utterly lost in the world without getting bored.

[Sly Reflex]

You do it right, it's great. You do it wrong, it's fucked.

 

You look at something like Bully. That was great. I played this through recently and it's still densely packed, although not as densely packed as you remember. You can have an idea of where you are within the world just by looking at the areas around you. I think part of it is to do with it being quite small compared to some games where nearly each place in the game has a reason for being there. I think Rockstar is generally very good at open world stuff. Yes, it'd be nice if we could go in everywhere and do anything, but within the confines of the games they work really well. You could play Geoguesser in those games and know where you were.

 

I think there's a middle ground between good and bad. I'd chuck most of Bethesda's games here. A good example of it being good is that bit between getting into Riverwood and heading into Whiterun. You come out of the bit where you escape and you have the presence of Bleakfalls Barrow up on the hill, you have the standing stones overlooking the water that leads to Falkreath , nestled in the mountains is the little village barricaded by the look out gates either end is Riverwood, which then meanders through the mountains and waterways into Whiterun, were it's just barren flat land either way with the castle of Whiterun being perched up on the only elevated landmass.

 

For each part of level design like this, there's a handful of places that are pretty featureless. There's no ruins, caves, builds, nothing visible outside the flora, even if you do see a little hut or ruin it might be nothing. There's a whole lot of fuck all in that game where you're out in the wilderness with only the sounds of nature, your thoughts and the stars above you. This isn't just something Skyrim gets flak for, the other TES games also have a lot of barren space in them. This argument could also be levelled at Fallout 3, New Vegas and Fallout 4. Out of those I think New Vegas has the best map, there's more packed in to the topographic and for the most I feel out of the recent games in this series, if you were to put lines of sight on each location you can see from a distance that draws you in and makes you want to wander about I think this map would almost all be painted in. I think stuff that has super elevated terrain allows you to know where you are without needing to consult the map. It still has a lot of areas that are just completely barren where all you can see are brown rocks as far as your draw distance will allow though.

 

The worst ones I've played recently as far as terrible maps is Fallout 76. I sort of ended up really digging this game, it's nowhere near as bad as a lot of people would suggest, but in the same vein, I think the map size and the fact a lot of it is barren on purpose so that people can build on it. They sort of have biomes between areas but there's so so so much of it that is just areas for you to trek though with nothing really that interesting going on. You might luck out and stumble across some environmental story telling, but for the most it'll be a building of zero importance that has a few enemies in it, maybe a world event so it attracts people to mill about it, and chances to find junk to build your base. It's not good.

 

The final one I want to talk about in regards of a bad world is Days Gone. The more I played it, the more I realised it was absolutely pointless and drab. Everything looks more or less the same. Nothing really stands out. Even when you look off into the distance there's nothing really of interest. It relies on you finding towers to climb (except they are bunkers in this game) to find points of interest. There's all sorts of camps and barricades but you're just stuck wandering around them, maybe clearing a few zombies before stripping them of their craftable loot supplies. I just finished the game at 60+ hours and I think if you took all the pissing about in that game it would be maybe 10 hours. There's so much padding with the constant riding about and forcing you to clear roads to fast travel and stuff. Fun game for the most, but by golly that open world felt like a massive waste of time.

[DANGERMAN]

Yeah. I didn't hate Days Gone, but it didn't feel... Curated. It felt a bit more like an MMO in terms of things happening 

[Sly Reflex]

I feel like I should probably write something about it.

 

You know what? When they originally pitched it they said that herds would move through the map. I can count maybe 3 times I saw this in game. There's a graveyard up top you need to burn out where the game starts I saw one, I saw one at a Nero checkpoint as I was trying to loot it and maybe one more.

 

All the other huge herds were build into the game a checklist things. Never once was I riding somewhere and had to do the "Oh shit!" thing of turning around and finding another way because there were too many zombies in the way. 

[Nag]

 

Quote

Readers name their favourite online and couch co-op games, from retro classics like Bubble Bobble to Gears Of War.

 

The subject for this week’s Hot Topic was suggested by reader Hammeriron, who asked who you were playing with, and did you choose them for the game or the game for them? How experienced was the other player and how did that factor into the experience?

 

Most people admitted to enjoying co-op and wished there was more local multiplayer in particular, since it’s often the best way to get a family member interested in gaming.

 

[OCH]

Co-op...?🤔

I think the last co-op I played was RE5 back in '09. Which is really the most positive way to enjoy that game. I can't think of another game after that? My brother stopped getting co-op games, none of my friends since are gamers and I mostly stick to solo adventures. Even the recent (4-player) Disney's Illusion Island, I finished in 1-player mode.

[DANGERMAN]

I think I've told this story before, but back when I played football there was a lad who used to park at our house because it was near the pitches. To kill time we got in to the habit of playing House of the Dead 2.

 

It got to the point where he was turning up an hour early for football, I'd see him pulling up, set up the light guns, then just hand him one as he walked in to the room, and we'd just play from beginning to end 

 

There was a fair bit of Sonic 2 and the Streets of Rage games as kids. I've played through a fair few of the Halo games with @spatularbut I think he hated every minute

 

I miss playing Apex Legends with Hendo too, that was great. I like Co op, would like to play more I think 

[one-armed dwarf]

Yeah RE5 is weirdly good in co-op. It's one of the worst REs by yourself.

[mfnick]

Back in the day I used to play co-op loads with a close friend - our main games were Streets of Rage 1 & 2 and Die Hard Arcade. We played through those dozens of times. 
 

I have a very soft spot for Gain Ground on the Mega Drive too. That’s one game my Mum used to play with me when I was young. 
 

These days I don’t really play them. Played a bit of Overcooked with my partner but it just gets way too difficult for her way too quickly so that didn’t last long. Same story with Moving Out. Far more difficulty and accessibility options are needed in those games to really pull in other people IMO. We also really need to try It Takes Two. 

[Sly Reflex]

Easily my favourite type of gaming. It's next to impossible to do it all the time unless you can get someone that doesn't have kids, family or an overbearing job to deal with. 

[DisturbedSwan]

Probably haven't played much in co op for a few years now.

 

Enjoyed playing through the first couple of Gears games in co op, same with Halo 1-3, Kane and Lynch 1-2 back in the day, lots of stuff of that era really. I'd play a lot of N64 stuff with the kids up the road from me when I was a kid, Goldeneye, Cruis'n USA, Cruis'n World, probably a load of other stuff I'm forgetting.

 

Online co op I used to play Fortnite, Apex and Minecraft quite a lot when I was with my ex. Enjoyed playing through No Way Out with Si a few years back, It Takes Two with Char a few years back (took a bit of convincing but she stuck with it lol).

[Sly Reflex]

A Way Out was great. I need to play It Takes Two at some point.

 

Josef Fares sort of need to move on from this template though. I'm interested to see what else he cane do.