How do you play open-world games?

[pilouuuu]

I hardly find the motivation to play big open-world games anymore. I simply feel overwhelmed by them and I prefer to play quick games like Binding of Isaac or Hearthstone.

That's quite sad because I loved games like Fallout 3, FarCry 3, GTA and Mass Effect, but there's something really putting me off those kind of games lately. Maybe it all could change whenever we get Fallout 4, but for the time being I'd like to know how you play open-world games and which ones do you prefer.

Do you focus on the main quest or do you try to look or every little secret and side quest? Personally I try to focus on the main quest, but I get easily distracted and in games like Skyrim I sometimes simply wander around and maybe that's one of the reasons I feel overwhelmed by these big, amazing games.

Also do you have any suggestions to make me play open-world games again?

 

[Evonisia]

I tend to go for the main questline, using the sandbox aspect of it to act as a nice terrain and landscape to navigate across along the way. It's why I don't begrudge the likes of Thief for having a fairly pointless sandbox because it's not like I noticed it.

Sometimes I'll do some of the extra activities, but I always find extra activities to just be fluff to get in the way. Though I did force myself through the remaining side quests of Silent Hill Downpour recently and found some of the quests very interesting, but Downpour is in the minority compared to the typical sandbox of the same activities repeated five times a piece.

 

[Tuesday Night Fever]

I abandon the main story at the first opportunity given, then I spend my time exploring until there's nothing left to explore, then I get around to solving everyone's (apparently not too time-sensitive) problems.

If I love the universe, this works out great (like with Fallout). If I find the universe to be overwhelmingly boring, I rarely get around to the 'solving everyone's problems' stage (like with anything Elder Scrolls).

 

[Scarim Coral]

I tend to do the side quests first to prolong the game (suck when the game end too soon) and make my character more than ready when it time to do the main quest/ story. Granted if the side quest are too hard then I put it on hold.

 

[Elfgore]

Wander and do side quest. It's my first instinct. I think for Skyrim it took me three characters and about a hundred hours of gameplay to beat the main story. I had already beaten the Companions, Dark Brotherhood, Wizards, and a lot of side quest.

 

[The Wykydtron]

It really depends on how good the sandbox is, I cut most of Far Cry 3 because the appeal is in the story and the story missions are usually pretty interesting as a whole. I guess some people like the hunting thing and it does help bring across Jason's character arc as a college boy into bloodthirsty badass but the game is unplayable until you have all four weapon slots and some ammo capacity upgrades. That's like two hours of nothing interesting right there.

Saints Row 4 is an exception, I will run around collecting stuff forever because the movement is so much fun in that game.

I did all of Borderlands 2's side quests but only to keep up in levels since I was soloing the entire game. Mechromancer OP. To be honest I was pretty bored the whole game through, I see the appeal but the loot system kills it. I ended up having to use some weapon for hours that must have been spawned from the depths of gun hell cuz it was a full auto rifle with like 15 shots per clip and an overlong reload animation that didn't have the damage to make up for it.

This is why I liked Fallout: New Vegas so much, it's the best open world game by miles. Most of the side quests actually mean something instead of just being a way of getting money. The side missions are also the "main" missions depending on which ending you're going for. You can be working on some stuff for Mr House then betray him whenever you feel like or just not and roll with him the whole game or decide against his better judgement and kill everyone in the NCR base "oops sorry sir I thought it was a good idea XD" type of thing. It can really feel like a game of subterfuge with imminent backstabbing and lies. Maybe you eliminated the NCR base for your own master plan in the works and are just lying...

It's really good for roleplaying since there's many choices to make too.

 

[Islandbuffilo]

Gather and do side quest, and if the game has it, marvel at mysterious sites that aren't immediately explained, a lot of open world games don't have this though.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I'm inclined to wander around and do side stuff, while revisiting the plot now and then (usually to unlock more ground to explore/abilities to use). I try to perform the story missions in bundles, usually pausing at the end of what I consider to be a full sequence of events. Like in Far Cry 3, every time I rescued a friend I would take a holiday before beginning the next sequence of events. FC3 is a pretty tightly written game and if you leave the plot at the wrong time it kinda loses its impact. Happened to me with the final mission. Didn't know it was the final mission. I took this huge pause before doing it, and when I did it I felt an awful sense of anticlimax.

 

[Mutant1988]

Excruciatingly methodically. Side quests? Always do them before progressing far in the story line. Everything to be done, I do in order, check it off, move on.

I think I might be missing the point but I don't care. The free form gameplay of many sandbox games is pretty bad anyway and just the same uninteresting mayhem over and over again. GTA V would have been great, with it's magnificent physics engine and procedural animations. That is, i the cops didn't kill you instantly whenever you tried to start some mayhem.

Watch Dogs had a stone dead sand box. But the diversions were decent. Spider Tank and Convoy Intercept was great, Cyborg and Zombie Car thing were good too. But then I got put off by the fact that 1: My save game got corrupted and wasn't fix until more than a month later. 2: The same patch that fixed the save screwed up the performance to nearly unplayable levels and 3: The mouse acceleration that couldn't be turned off and that was actually inverted (How the serious fucking hell) if you tried to turn it off put me over the edge. Done with Ubisoft for the perceivable future. /end rant.

Saints Row 4 was okay, but I didn't really like fighting the aliens much. Miss the gangs from 3, but I really didn't like 3 itself. It failed to hit the balance in terms of absurdity and seriousness like the second game and lacked the extreme over the top that made 4 work so much better.

I don't know, I just don't like the sandbox genre all that much any more. The lack of structure extents to the game design and it just ends up as the same thing over and over again in different places. Visually different, not really different in terms of gameplay.

Honestly, I find that free form gameplay and breaking things is more fun and interesting in games not made for it. Because the ones that are just fall into the same old re-used gameplay conventions.

 

[aozgolo]

Basically it depends on the type of sandbox. Some open world games like The Elder Scrolls or Fallout you are not meant to experience everything in a single playthrough and are encouraged to experiment roleplaying as different characters. In other games like Grand Theft Auto or Just Cause you are encouraged to "get 100%" by doing all the side missions and extra content in one playthrough.

For the first, I tend to blow through the story campaign first, usually with little distraction in terms of side-quests, but I will do the occasional free-form exploration. I like to beat the main story to experience it and then usually I will create new characters and just play how I like and enjoy the game at whatever pace I feel, sometimes totally ignoring the main story, other times just nursing it to the point I like (In Skyrim I like to get far enough to unlock all of the words for the Force Push shout then leave it alone).

For the second type I will generally proceed with the story up until I have unlocked a large majority of the sandbox features (assuming it is gated behind story checkpoints which it usually is, especially in GTA games) then I will just enjoy the sandbox and explore as much as possible, doing whatever side activities or quests I feel like and usually only advancing the plot when I become bored of my current free-roam.

 

[Zhukov]

With reluctance.

Open world games tend to be just like linear games, except I have to take a long and boring hike/drive to get to anything remotely interesting. Then upon arrival I am often disappointed, since the need to generate lots of content to fill the needlessly big map results in most of that content being modular and mass produced, with few if any standout moments.

As for how I play them, I select a particular objective with a fixed location, then move toward it clearing out any other objectives that I come across on the way. Then select a new objective and do the same thing. Continue until game is completed or, more likely, until game has become too boring to play.

 

[SoreWristed]

I'll power through the Main questline as soon as, and when i notice there is a definite Point-of-No-Return, i'll back out and go and explore stuff. The ratchet and clank games did this quite effectively with a simple text prompt saying that there is no return once i fight this boss.

If i'm already passed that, or still riding the immersion high and want to finish it no matter what, i'll either do all the exploring after that or play again now that i know what's waiting at the end.

Games with a 'new game plus' mode always get bonus points in my book.

 

[RedDeadFred]

I just wander off and do whatever sounds interesting. Usually I'll do the main story for a bit, but chances are, something is going to pull me away.

My first playthrough of SKyrim had me do the first couple of main quests, then I decided to go and explore the other major cities besides Whiterun. My first stop was Markarth and I ended up getting caught up in my first Daedric Prince quest.

I think it's important with open world games to simply explore the world and play the way you want. It'll be way more fun, and getting yourself into the mindset of just experiencing the world alleviates a lot of the feeling of being overwhelmed. Though, to be honest, I think that's the sign of a great game world if it can be overwhelming at first. It's like visiting another country. You wouldn't expect to no where everything is and how everything is done right off the bat. It takes time experience that place and its culture.

Personally, I love that, but it's not for everyone.

 

[Squilookle]

Funnily enough, I'm in the exact same boat. For a while, sandboxes were my gametype of choice, and yet for reasons I can't explain, I have Just Cause 2 and Far Cry 3 -some of the best in the business, sitting on my PC unfinished with nearly no motivation to play them anymore. What the hell happened to me?

 

[Mutant1988]

Funnily enough, I'm in the exact same boat. For a while, sandboxes were my gametype of choice, and yet for reasons I can't explain, I have Just Cause 2 and Far Cry 3 -some of the best in the business, sitting on my PC unfinished with nearly no motivation to play them anymore. What the hell happened to me?

Usually just the wrong mood. And moods in game tastes can last years. You just want to play something else, and really, that's what you should do.

Those games you're not playing aren't going to disappear. They will still be there when the right mood strikes you.

Just Cause 2 is a game that lends itself to casually playing anyway. That game has an incredible "flow" to it where things just happen. Grappling hook, parachute, shoot, blow stuff up, grapple to a vehicle, blow up even more stuff, jump out at the last second as the vehicle explodes and parachute to the next base and do equally awesome stuff, repeat until death or achieving Nirvana.

It's not a game you really need to get massively invested in.

But yeah, play something else. Or do something unusual in games you're already playing. Breaking games is fun. As is finding new details and things to appreciate and play with in old personal classics.

 

[laggyteabag]

I feel like I have to do everything that I come across before doing the main story, otherwise I might miss something. That means every side quest, every collectible, every material. I just feel like I have to do everything.

For that very reason, my playthroughs tend to be very long indeed.

 

[Guffe]

I tend to follow the main quest and then sometimes I just happen to get lost and I go over into an hour or so of exploration mode.
I haven't played too many OpenWorld games either to be honest. Now though with Nintendo making the new Zelda game the way they are... I am going to be confused as fuck -.-, I mean OpenWorld, THAT SIZE OF THE MAP!!!, and no "specific order" in which to complete the 6+ dungeons??? I am so screwed >_<, I NEED GUIDELINES!!!

 

[Danbo Jambo]

I hardly find the motivation to play big open-world games anymore. I simply feel overwhelmed by them and I prefer to play quick games like Binding of Isaac or Hearthstone.

That's quite sad because I loved games like Fallout 3, FarCry 3, GTA and Mass Effect, but there's something really putting me off those kind of games lately. Maybe it all could change whenever we get Fallout 4, but for the time being I'd like to know how you play open-world games and which ones do you prefer.

Do you focus on the main quest or do you try to look or every little secret and side quest? Personally I try to focus on the main quest, but I get easily distracted and in games like Skyrim I sometimes simply wander around and maybe that's one of the reasons I feel overwhelmed by these big, amazing games.

Also do you have any suggestions to make me play open-world games again?

The point you touch on is, IMO, a bit deeper than the question you actually ask.

Lovingly crafted, an open world game is a joy to immerse yourself in, with the feeling of natural evolution to where your journey takes you, and a sense of real exploration and adventure. E.g. Morrowind, Fallout 3.

However, the half-arsed, cut/paste efforts like Oblivion are a tedious chore, with no real sense of adventure, immersion, or excitement.

Then you've games like Skyrim and Kingdoms of Amalur which you need to pick and choose the right quests to enjoy.

So overall it depends on how well the games been made. For me an open world game should really make the player feel like they're exploring an unknown world, with events happening naturally as things evolve. Sadly, they've now lost their way somewhat, and have become about doing "cool" things such as riding on dragons.

 

[Akjosch]

Wander around for a while, then grab the modding tools and start moulding the world to my liking.

The "main quest" is whatever I feel like doing, not what the game creators intended it to be. This is now my story.

 

[Bob_McMillan]

I do maybe half of the main storyline, then finish all the sidequests and unlock everything, then kick ass in the finale.

Then I leave the game and never play it again.

I think the only open-world games I played after I finished the main storyline are Skyrim, Just Cause 2, and sort of Saints Row 4.