Note: I should mention that I wrote this blog without taking Metal Gear Solid V into consideration. I have not played MGS V yet, but if Brad’s review is to be trusted, it sounds like it does some good things for the open-world genre. I only hope that doesn’t invalidate everything I’ve said in this blog.

I recently decided to start a new game of Saints Row IV on a whim and I quickly came to a conclusion I never thought I’d come to: I’m getting tired of open world games. This is strange because I’m usually a sucker for this genre. Traversing a sprawling landscape is still a novel concept to me, and I can usually tolerate the grind of playing through tons of ancillary content. Heck, on my first playthrough of Saints Row IV over a year ago, I remember thinking to myself, “Man, there’s so much fun stuff to do in this game!” Now, after looking at all the activity icons and collectibles scattered throughout Steelport, that thought has changed to “Man, there’s way too much stuff to do in this game.”

Don’t get me wrong, most of those side activities are actually pretty enjoyable, but it all just feels like filler that’s getting in the way of the ridiculous main story beats, which is what I really want from a Saints Row experience. The game itself even refers to this extra stuff as “diversions.” I just wish those diversions weren’t so prominent and integral to progressing through the game.

Maybe Saints Row isn’t the best example with which to express fatigue for the open world genre, considering how the open world itself is probably the least exciting aspect of those games (especially the last two). But this is definitely not just Saints Row fatigue: I’ve also thought about playing through Far Cry 4, The Witcher III, one of the Batman Arkham games, or Shadow of Mordor, or possibly starting a new character in Skyrim, but I never follow through, as the chore of sifting through all the additional quests and whatnot to get to the real meat and potatoes is a major deterrent.

It seems I’m not alone in this sentiment. With Mad Max having garnered tons of middling reviews, it looks like many others are also feeling that open world fatigue. This isn’t just a trend among professional critics either. This recent thread on the forums asked users what features they would like to see from a Grand Theft Auto 6, and several people expressed an interest in seeing Rockstar ditch the open world formula in favor of a more straightforward, story-driven experience.

What a strange phenomenon. Grand Theft Auto was one of the major players in popularizing the open world gimmick with GTA III in 2001, having spawned countless copycats over the next decade and a half. Now, the house that Rockstar helped build (among many other developers) is starting to crumble due to oversaturation, and it’s reaching a point where players want to see traditionally open world games shed their free roaming foundations. Developers have too often stuck with the tried-and-true formula of filling a big map with tons of quests and busywork to create the illusion of progress. Players are starting to see through that illusion, and the novelty of that formula is wearing thin.

Despite my own waning interest in the open world genre, I still think it has potential to serve as the basis for a compelling game. We really just need to retire the grindy formula(s) that have been so frequently used by Ubisoft, EA, 2K, Bethesda, and Warner Bros. among others. Here are a few suggestions...

First: Open world games should focus less on character progression and lite RPG elements and more on the progression of the world itself. The aforementioned “illusion of progress” issue is exacerbated by needless upgrade systems that usually don’t offer any significant changes to the gameplay beyond just making the game easier or removing arbitrary annoyances. Perhaps a system that focuses on changing the world around you would be more convincing. Red Faction Guerilla at least comes close to achieving this concept. Beyond the obvious destruction physics, Guerilla also featured an interesting control and morale system to represent changes in the world: as you completed missions and “guerilla actions” in each sector of mars, the EDF’s control on that sector would decrease and the morale of the Mars civilians would increase. Granted, this system mostly just amounted to progress bars going up/down and not much else, but I think it was an ambitious system whose illusion felt more compelling and satisfying than others.

Second: If neither upgrade systems nor world progression play a significant role in the game, make side content completely optional and just focus on the main story. I think Rockstar had success with this in Grand Theft Auto V. Sure, the three characters each have their own attributes that can be improved with practice, and there are plenty of sporting, property management, and stock market activities that you can partake in for extra money, but you can safely ignore that extra RPG stuff and play through all the main missions at your own pace. The only necessary deviation from the main quest (that I can think of at least) is a trip to Ammu-nation every once in awhile, and that’s maybe even a little overkill because you end up with so much ammo throughout the missions anyway. This works because the story, the dialogue, and the character interactions are the real incentive, and Rockstar clearly doesn’t want any needless filler interrupting their storytelling.

Third: Just make the open world a little smaller. Perhaps developers should stop touting the massive square footage of their sandboxes and be less afraid to bring the size down a bit. Grand Theft Auto V is arguably less successful in this regard. I appreciate the large size of Los Santos and the unparalleled attention to detail therein, but I’m never going to see everything that world has to offer, nor do I care to. The first examples of smaller worlds that come to mind are the early Legend of Zelda games. I recently started playing A Link to the Past (I know, I’m REALLY late to that party) and I’ve found the game’s relatively small representation of Hyrule to be more manageable and motivating than most larger open worlds. I know using a Zelda game as an example of a sandbox game is a bit of a stretch, but I think it’s still applicable because of its open, non-linear nature. I just think the series serves as a good example of smaller worlds that are more densely packed with meaningful quests and challenges that serve the gameplay well.

My suggestions and examples probably need a little work, but maybe YOU have some better ideas. What sort of things would you like to see open world games do to mix up the formula? Or do you think the industry should give the whole genre a break?