• 75 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by Demoskinos (14757 posts) -

So this always bothered me.... just about every open world game ever has a map screen right? I'll list some maps just for reference. Why is it in a large majority of these games it seems like they are living in a proverbial water world on an archipelago? I mean I get why developers do this because its an easy way to rope people in and what not without having to create invisible walls/barriers but there has to be a more believable way to do that without making everything into waterworld.

Liberty City as seen in multiple GTA games.
Steelport as seen in SR3
#2 Edited by mfpantst (2574 posts) -

yarp.
 
you know, if you ignore san andreas from your list and all.

#3 Posted by doobie (605 posts) -

always bothered you. always. or are you exaggerating

#4 Edited by PenguinDust (12491 posts) -

Crackdown, too. I think it's to keep the player isolated while allowing them free roam. Otherwise, the gamer will wonder why they can't just drive, fly or climb out of the playable area. Freedom is an illusion, and that's okay because it's necessary to believe you can do anything while being restricted from doing anything.

Map of all Agility orbs
#5 Posted by Dagbiker (6964 posts) -

There has to be a better way, you just dont know them right? Its walls or valleys, take your pick.

#6 Posted by Demoskinos (14757 posts) -

@mfpantst: Thats why i said "large majority" and not "all"

#7 Posted by Fobwashed (1984 posts) -

Scale back enough, and every body of land is surrounded by water. I get that in games, it's a lot less land but there's a lot more going on that's unrealistic in most games than the water to land ratio. Who knows, maybe the globe those games all take place in are much, much smaller than the Earth -_-;;

I've got 99 problems, but my masses being surrounded by water ain't one of them.

Online
#8 Posted by Dagbiker (6964 posts) -
@Demoskinos

@mfpantst: Thats why i said "large majority" and not "all"

In your title you said "every open world game"
#9 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

OK, now I just want a Waterworld-based open world game.

#10 Posted by mfpantst (2574 posts) -
@Dagbiker said:
@Demoskinos

@mfpantst: Thats why i said "large majority" and not "all"

In your title you said "every open world game"
This.  And the penultimate red faction game.
#11 Edited by Pie (7078 posts) -

@mfpantst: I haven't played much San Andreas but it looks like a land mass surrounded by water to me. or islands or whatever

#12 Posted by Ubersmake (754 posts) -

A solution might be to implement some sort of food/fuel mechanic, so that you'd eventually have to turn back toward civilization after trying to find the edge of the world. But whether that would be fun or not is another question.

#13 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

@Ubersmake said:

A solution might be to implement some sort of food/fuel mechanic, so that you'd eventually have to turn back toward civilization after trying to find the edge of the world. But whether that would be fun or not is another question.

When has that ever worked? Also, I'm certain somebody could find a way around that.

#14 Posted by Emperor_Jimmu (249 posts) -

I agree, the sense that there is more beyond the space one inhabits is one of the greatest strengths of the Elder Scrolls and Witcher game worlds. It should work like Trackmania 2, textures become more and more shitty until you ascend into the sky.

Online
#15 Posted by prestonhedges (1965 posts) -

Red Dead Redemption

Skate 1/2/3

Burnout: Paradise

etc. etc.

#16 Posted by Ubersmake (754 posts) -

@Video_Game_King said:

@Ubersmake said:

A solution might be to implement some sort of food/fuel mechanic, so that you'd eventually have to turn back toward civilization after trying to find the edge of the world. But whether that would be fun or not is another question.

When has that ever worked? Also, I'm certain somebody could find a way around that.

I don't think anybody's tried it, or they have and they killed it before the game was released. Food/fuel just strikes me as the easiest way to justify forcing the player to return to the game world after they've clearly stepped out of its bounds, without actually setting those bounds through something obvious, like a body of water.

#17 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

@Ubersmake:

No, it's been tried before, at least in Dragon Quest Monsters: Caravan Heart and the first Ultima game. Surprisingly, neither of those games were very enjoyable.

#18 Posted by Neeshka (118 posts) -

I'll list a few reasons:

1) You cannot really create an infinite world. Using the open sea as a limit is much more natural than having a sudden invisible wall. Instead of open seas some games use mountains (skyrim and far cry 2 i think).

2) The games you listed are loosely based on cities that actually do have a lot of waterways in them.

3) If the sanbox game has some form of area based progression, opening up a new island seems more natural than invisible walls lifting.

4) It's easy to add in vehicles that go on water if there is water nearby.

5) Finally, a lot of people actually like seeing water, seasides, docks, port areas, beaches, bridges and so on. It can be aesthetically pleasing to drive over brooklyn bridge in a taxi in GTA4 under the moonlight.

#19 Posted by SomeDeliCook (2291 posts) -

There's not really anything you could do to battle this besides doing invisible walls, and those fucking suck.

#20 Posted by Branthog (7510 posts) -

Unfortunately, we're a long time away from consoles having the resources to produce a world large enough that it could justify being spherical, like a globe (because it's unlikely you'd have a whole planet the size of a small city). Instead, it's easier to confine everything and implement silly "end of world" limitations, like "this bridge out of the city is always under construction".

There will be games/worlds that evolve to that point, eventually. The resources just dont' exist, yet. And even when they do, they'll almost certainly only apply to MMOs, because anything that is meant to tell a story or convey a particular experience will require a much smaller set of information and a smaller world. You don't need an entire planet/country/continent/etc to tell the story of Alan Wake, for example.

#21 Posted by MysteriousBob (6272 posts) -

Fun fact: All land masses are surrounded by water.

Its practically.

@SomeDeliCook said:

There's not really anything you could do to battle this besides doing invisible walls, and those fucking suck.

This, really. I was annoyed when I found invisible walls in Skyrim. Just Cause 2 did the best thing by making the water literally unlimited. You can go out to sea forever.

#22 Posted by Canteu (2821 posts) -

I'd say there are less open world games that are set in achipelagos than there are single land masses.

Most of the ones taking place on islands are usually in the spirit of a GTA clone.

#23 Posted by SomeDeliCook (2291 posts) -

I'm waiting for a sanbox game to have a repeating world. Think of it like Pacman: Once you get to the end of one side, you pop back over to the other side.

Ofcourse this would probably only work with a futuristic Sci-fi sandbox game so there could be some bullshit needless explanation. Though it would make getting from point A to point B a lot less infuriating when its clear across the map.

#24 Posted by Deleth (250 posts) -

Fallout 3 and Fallout Las Vegas weren't as far as I remember.

#25 Posted by kingzetta (4307 posts) -

not the assassin's creed ones, or red faction gurella, fallout, elder scrolls, dead rising 1 and 2, or yaukza 1-4.
that's a bunch that are not.

#26 Posted by BaneFireLord (2920 posts) -
@SomeDeliCook said:

There's not really anything you could do to battle this besides doing invisible walls, and those fucking suck.

I've always liked the idea of people journeying too far to the edges of a map in a fantasy game and then getting eaten by invincible wolves.
#27 Posted by Rafaelfc (1328 posts) -

@Video_Game_King said:

OK, now I just want a Waterworld-based open world game.

goddamnit yes!!! someone make it happen.

#28 Posted by Example1013 (4834 posts) -

@BaneFireLord said:

@SomeDeliCook said:

There's not really anything you could do to battle this besides doing invisible walls, and those fucking suck.

I've always liked the idea of people journeying too far to the edges of a map in a fantasy game and then getting eaten by invincible wolves.

This is basically the Borderlands method: unexplained lasers that shoot you if you walk too far past the borders.

#29 Posted by MariachiMacabre (7076 posts) -

@Video_Game_King said:

OK, now I just want a Waterworld-based open world game.

It would cost billions to make and ruin the career of the main voice actor. Let's do it.

#30 Posted by Demoskinos (14757 posts) -

@BaneFireLord said:

@SomeDeliCook said:

There's not really anything you could do to battle this besides doing invisible walls, and those fucking suck.

I've always liked the idea of people journeying too far to the edges of a map in a fantasy game and then getting eaten by invincible wolves.

I like the sound of invincible wolves. But they need to have laser beams attached to their head.

#31 Posted by SgtGrumbles (1024 posts) -

There's no reason they can't just make the water into a desert or just a large rolling field, even those open waters end up with an invisible wall, it might not solve all the problems but at least it'd be a change of scenery.

#32 Edited by MrCaptain (364 posts) -

@SomeDeliCook said:

I'm waiting for a sanbox game to have a repeating world. Think of it like Pacman: Once you get to the end of one side, you pop back over to the other side.

I would like too see this too. It would be hilarious in Saints row 3, maybe a bit hard too pull off though. I like the idea of a game with a repeating endless dessert too so you could stunt around on the dunes with a fast car or a motorcycle.

#33 Posted by phish09 (1109 posts) -

Red Dead managed not to do it. For all it's faults, somehow that world seemed endless.

#34 Posted by BoG (5187 posts) -

I think we can thank the need for barriers and New York City for this crime.

#35 Posted by Willin (1280 posts) -

Continents are just big giant islands.

#36 Posted by Moncole (636 posts) -

Ocarina of Time, the map isn't surrounded by water.

#37 Posted by RVonE (4623 posts) -

Skyrim?

#38 Posted by Dixavd (1344 posts) -

Assassin's Creed doesn't do this, and its use of contextualising barriers works. It is just having to put in barriers in games without an overt fantasy reason can be pretty jarring, so sea makes sense. Also it allows you to set up semi-realistic different reasons and block out areas in the world with things like whirlpools or hurricanes (i.e. Wind Waker).

#39 Posted by david3cm (635 posts) -

Maybe have it set in a regular city, surrounded by rural area that stretches on for an infinite distance. But when your character leaves the city and starts to drive away he gets homesick and turns around automatically. Problem solved.

#40 Posted by GreggD (4487 posts) -

The original GTA III Liberty City had more land connected to it. Not sure if it disqualifies the notion of an archipelago, but it's something to think about.

#41 Posted by believer258 (11785 posts) -

@Branthog said:

Unfortunately, we're a long time away from consoles having the resources to produce a world large enough that it could justify being spherical, like a globe (because it's unlikely you'd have a whole planet the size of a small city). Instead, it's easier to confine everything and implement silly "end of world" limitations, like "this bridge out of the city is always under construction".

There will be games/worlds that evolve to that point, eventually. The resources just dont' exist, yet. And even when they do, they'll almost certainly only apply to MMOs, because anything that is meant to tell a story or convey a particular experience will require a much smaller set of information and a smaller world. You don't need an entire planet/country/continent/etc to tell the story of Alan Wake, for example.

Before you go wanting an entire planet to walk around, remember two things:

1) Skyrim is huge, and took three years, lots of money, and tons of man-hours to build. And yet there are still issues with the game. My point with this is that even if we get enough system resources to make an entire planet, such a thing won't be feasible in a business sense of the word.

2) Say it does become feasible in every sense and it does happen, and the game itself is good. Think about it for a minute. Just Cause 2's open world is quite possibly the largest (excepting Arena and Daggerfall) open world ever made, and it's almost too big.

I'm not condemning such a project. I'd buy it if it were good. But I would never expect to actually complete all or even a third of something so massive. I just don't, personally, think it's worth making something so huge.

OP: I'm actually fine with putting invisible walls outside the edges of a city. Water, rolling plains, endless deserts - those three would serve the same purpose and they are essentially invisible walls. It's when they block off sections of city with invisible walls that I get annoyed.

Online
#42 Posted by Rowr (5531 posts) -

@SomeDeliCook said:

There's not really anything you could do to battle this besides doing invisible walls, and those fucking suck.

#43 Posted by Black_Rose (7785 posts) -

@Video_Game_King said:

OK, now I just want a Waterworld-based open world game.

It's called Wind Waker, it's pretty cool.

#44 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

@Black_Rose said:

@Video_Game_King said:

OK, now I just want a Waterworld-based open world game.

It's called Wind Waker, it's pretty cool.

Wind Waker was good; that means it had nothing to do with Waterworld.

#45 Posted by Fobwashed (1984 posts) -

@Video_Game_King said:

@Ubersmake said:

A solution might be to implement some sort of food/fuel mechanic, so that you'd eventually have to turn back toward civilization after trying to find the edge of the world. But whether that would be fun or not is another question.

When has that ever worked? Also, I'm certain somebody could find a way around that.

TrackMania 2 has the answer in this case. Just go. Forever if you want. Just know there's nothing out there. Ever.

Online
#46 Posted by Jay444111 (2441 posts) -

@Video_Game_King said:

OK, now I just want a Waterworld-based open world game.

Fuck yes to this!

I actually really liked that movie... however, let us ignore the virtual boy game at all costs.

#47 Posted by Demoskinos (14757 posts) -

@Jay444111: Wait what? In the short ass time Virtual Boy was around there was seriously a water world game?

#48 Posted by Jay444111 (2441 posts) -

@Demoskinos said:

@Jay444111: Wait what? In the short ass time Virtual Boy was around there was seriously a water world game?

Yes there was, and it was also gonna be a multiplayer game somehow... however it was crappy anyways.

#49 Posted by Demoskinos (14757 posts) -

@Jay444111 said:

@Demoskinos said:

@Jay444111: Wait what? In the short ass time Virtual Boy was around there was seriously a water world game?

Yes there was, and it was also gonna be a multiplayer game somehow... however it was crappy anyways.

Oh god. My world is forever changed with this knowledge. And not for the better.

#50 Posted by evilrazer (481 posts) -

@gladspooky said:

Red Dead Redemption

Skate 1/2/3

Burnout: Paradise

etc. etc.

Skyrim