Also, the final sizzler take: even Symphony of the Night isn’t as good as the image of it people have in their heads. Circle of the Moon is kinda legit tho??
@“2501”#p86329 I will say having recently played SotN for the first time, that game really clicked with me. I will say that the genre and gaming as a whole has progressed a ton since '97, but the game still was a blast. Part of the reason RotN is kind of a let down.
BUT I'm not miserable playing it, and a homie told me it gets better as it goes along so I'm gonna keep playing.
@“2501”#p86329 for me, it's that Circle of the Moon was never as bad as folks acted like it was when it came out, something that becomes a little more obvious once you try playing it today. And that SoTN has lost some of its shine in the face of some excellent games that have come out since then. Still good, but there are some extremely compelling games that do it better!
>
@“yeso”#p86306 our criticism here is meant to be constructive and never intended as a personal attack on the competence, taste, or morality of the developers except when it’s about TLoU2
I think my views on this subject are summarized quite succinctly in [this ](https://store.steampowered.com/app/505230/Pathologic_2/)article.
>
@“yeso”#p86306 never intended as a personal attack on the competence, taste, or morality of the developers except when it’s about TLoU2
"haha _honhon_ it is évident you did not play me game"
About the open world discussion:
This is a weird one for me, because as has already been discussed, I've been thinking most open worlds and executions of the idea have been very unsuccessful for the longest of times. It makes sense to me why those games were commercially demanded, but I didn't think they delivered on its promise most of the time. As of 2022 I see most open worlds falling into one of few categories, also already briefly touched upon during the discussion:
Glorified selection menu aka Mario 64 on steroids: Games like the most recent Spiderman, which include an open world, but intelligently funnel you through a traditionally linear level design once you get on a story mission. These games often try to add some minor activities as dressing for the open world segment, as a means to make it feel more alive, but the real protein in this experience is found on the actual progression, with the open world working as a moderately successful complement.
**Failed open worlds aka the checklist syndrome**: most Ubisoft games or any other variant in which there is a limited array of 5-15 (the amount doesn't really matter) of activities that get iterated upon and distributed all over the game space.
**Linear games that happen to take place on an open world**: Death Stranding and MGSV both feel a bit like this. Both games have an open world but you are never intended to wander around or inhabit the space. There is always a mission objective funneling you from point A to B and then from B to whatever the place, so the open world itself is more like a background for everything you are doing. Crucially, these games either don't reward or actively disencourage exploration, you are not supposed to make use of the space itself, it's only the means to an end.
**(Somewhat) successful exploratory open worlds**: in my personal experience there are only two games that have somewhat delivered on the promise of what an open world supposedly was. Elden Ring and Breath of the Wild, and both have its fair share of problems. But in broad terms, both games have both the specificity to the world and the lack of direction required to make the world feel significant and populated with interesting stuff you can discover. Or at least, that is the goal both games are working towards. To a degree some of Bethesda's open world RPG's could be inserted here, but there is the problem that you get to a point where you see all the recycled assets, repeated enemies, props, etc. at which point the illusion fades away. ER and BotW are both are guilty of these too, but they managed to made their worlds feel fresh for the longest amount of time, even though that repetition eventually settled in.
I don't know where I would fit the Xenoblade games here. The first game was a traditionally structured and linear jRPG that happened to take place in a unusually big space, but there was a strong sense of progression in the story that made into a mostly linear journey. Xeno X and 2 I haven't played but I would put 3 in a middle point between what Xeno 1 offered and the second point in this classification.
@“Kez”#p86149 lol I have no idea why it's never occurred to me to use that
>
@“JoJoestar”#p86351 Death Stranding
>
never intended to wander around or inhabit the space
>
don’t reward or actively disencourage exploration
>
not supposed to make use of the space itself
With respect, JoJoestar: What??
Death Stranding must have fallen short of your expectations or else failed to communicate itself in some vital way, because if it doesn't encourage you to make use of the wide open spaces between points A and B, then I'm not sure what the game even is. (The description does fit MGSV pretty well, although I don't know that it actively discourages exploration either.)
I felt DS if nothing else did more thoughtfully examine MGSV's design blueprint: it draws your focus away from what you are walking to, and reframes the walking itself as the good stuff. You are going not just from A to B, but back again, and are encouraged to make multiple passes between those points, modifying and refining the path each time. Is that not how you played it?
idk I don't mean to sound like I'm taking this [personally](https://forums.insertcredit.com/d/986-kojima-number/20), I'm just a little surprised
the mountains could be bigger
@“JoJoestar”#p86351 Reading this makes me wonder how you would classify the Yakuza games. I‘m not sure where I would classify them according to this system, but that’s less because the system can't accommodate it, and more because they play like they belong in the more derogatory of your categories, but are actually quite successfully executed open world games.
How much changes when the world is open, but is comparatively small? I'd feel far too bold saying that all it takes is reducing tedium in traversal. One thing that I actually really like about the _Yakuza_ games is that the relative teeny-tininess of the open world means that story events as well as sidequests overlap geographically fairly often, in such a way that the same neighborhood or landmark or even street corner can become more meaningful to the player over time, as the player experiences more individual events while in that specific location. Never mind the fact that many of the games have reused the same open world maps, and your associations with different parts of Kamurocho and Sotenbori (and even across different periods of time if you play pretty much any _Yakuza_ game and _Yakuza 0_), as well as surely Isezaki Ijincho district in subsequent games after _7_, build up across multiple games.
@“rear admiral (lower half)”#p86361 I was very close to adding a clarification to that specific point because I could imagine someone having this reaction but: Death Stranding‘s design invariably pushes you to take a delivery at the spot just as you complete one, and that delivery already sends you to another spot in the open world design. There is no relaxing time in the world itself and you are always on your way to a destination. That fact coupled with the inventory and equipment degradation system, in my opinion, encourages you to do the opposite of chilling out in the open world portion of the game. Doing that is risking a) damaging the delivery package, b) degradation of equipment and/or resources, c) risking a encounter with scavengers/BTs, d) inevitably lowering the score once you complete the mission. So yeah, I don’t really think Death Stranding encourages you to explore at all!
This could very well be just a semantics debate on what each of us understands by "inhabit". Refining and optimizing my path is something I totally did during my time with the game, in that sense I made use of that space, but that's not a playful or appropriative use of it (which is what I really meant to say). I could also see the building mechanics and populating the world with all the different structures as a form of "habitation", but that world is supposed very inhospitable and hostile by both mechanical and narrative design. All the breaks and relaxation from the adventure, the actual "inhabiting" of the world is designed to happen on Sam's room imho.
yeah despite all the wide open spaces, the actual pathing is pretty limited. I love all the empty space don‘t get me wrong but it’s still big shoeboxes connected by paper towel tubes
@“Gaagaagiins”#p86364 Well, this is a very, very old debate I‘ve seen many times, but my stance here is that I don’t personally consider the Yakuza games to be open world. To me they are all riffing on the traditional structure of a classic jRPG or action-jRPG. Closest comparison to me would be something like Ocarina of time, there is an “open world” element in the form of the Hyrule fields acting as a hub connecting all the different areas, but we would all LOL very much at the idea of calling OoT an open-world game. They also show aspects of the first of my points, in the sense that Kamurocho acts as a hub that leads to certain setpieces/dungeons/locations with a specific mechanical function, while having the map as a space to have random encounters and engage with all the different activities available.
>
@“JoJoestar”#p86368 This could very well be just a semantics debate on what each of us understands by “inhabit”
I have a feeling we mean the same thing, I just have different standards of friction which let me get that feeling out of a game I guess.
>
world is supposed very inhospitable and hostile by both mechanical and narrative design
The world's hostility is much more narrative than mechanical imo. BTs and MULEs felt pretty toothless most of the time, at least when you're on a bike. Maybe it was just my dumb luck that I managed to skirt by most opposition.
I hope in Death Stranding 2 they make Sam's room _more_ inviting. MGSV and DS do share the (what I see as a) problem of having buildings which feel sterile and uninteractible. Get the camera off the radial dolly track and let me walk around with the analogue stick, or else give me some more virtual pet-type activities to do with my Sam. You get button prompts to look at your gear in the tanks on the wall, I guess, but the camera is at this restrictive distance the whole time
@“rear admiral (lower half)”#p86347
Monsieur Cagé???
>
@“JoJoestar”#p86375 Well, this is a very, very old debate I’ve seen many times, but my stance here is that I don’t personally consider the Yakuza games to be open world. To me they are all riffing on the traditional structure of a classic jRPG or action-jRPG. Closest comparison to me would be something like Ocarina of time, there is an “open world” element in the form of the Hyrule fields acting as a hub connecting all the different areas, but we would all LOL very much at the idea of calling OoT an open-world game.
I don't know who is the bigger maverick here between you and I, then, because I would probably argue that _Ocarina of Time_ is an open world, at least a proto one given its limitations imposed by the contemporary state of the technology. However, that's probably a pretty definitive sign we are definitely veering into the potentially unsatisfying realm of arguing about semantics.
@“Gaagaagiins”#p86405
I also consider that an open world. I seem to be of the opinion, though, that Zelda games are among the only good open world games.
For me, I think open world games need to remain separated from games with a strong narrative behind them. The things that necessitate an open world are so at odds with the things that necessitate a driving narrative that it makes no sense to me that the two have become so entwined.
I for one, have open world fatigue, and that does not apply to retro games at all.
I could play Virtual Hydlide and feel better than if I were to play Elden Ring or BotW.
my partner and I are playing through secret of mana on my snes-mini and having a pretty good time, but there are some weirdly frustrating things about this game. why are the menus so slow to use and why does it pause the action for both of us when one of us wants to cast a spell (spell spam being essential for most boss fights)? also I think they forgot to write a story for this one, idk
Just found out I’ve got covid, so I’m taking this as the sign I needed to get Splatoon 3. Any tips for a beginner to the entire series?