How do you play open-world games?

[go-10]

depends on the game really, Far Cry 3/4 being my favorite of the open world style games. I always play them without using the map so the game becomes a "that looks interesting" type of game. If I want to take a camp I look up and follow the smoke, if I see a tower I'll walk towards it. I turn the game into a rely on what I can see style of game instead of the usual mark on the map go to there move on

but in games like GTA I just stick to the main missions, I dunno I guess I get bored easily

 

[duwenbasden]

Get distracted by everything between me and the main quest, that's how I play sandboxes. Still have not finished New Vegas, after 700 hours.

 

[Odbarc]

I like to see how many crimes I can commit in a town without getting caught or accused. Stealing everything of value and killing all the NPCs.
I generally chase the main story line until something worth while distracts me like a shop I dump my useless valuables in which the stealing intensifies until I can find a more reliable sniper rifle (or similar weapon) to execute NPCs without getting caught more easily. Then pretty much flip flop between the two goals and accidentally acquire more and more side quests and complete almost none of them.

 

[mrdeclandeadly]

I'm much more of an explorer than a story based player, I do tend to ignore the main storyline for the most part and see what kind of odd things that can be done or found, doing as many side quests as I can, and trying to get as powerful as possible.

I remember the first time I played Morrowind; the freedom was overwhelming, and that's the feeling that I crave for now in a game. I spent over a year playing, before I ended up completing it. Even then I just started a new game with a few mods and a couple of cheats, jumping from one side of the map to another was fun or sprinting across the map in 10 seconds; which is something I missed in Oblivion and Skyrim.

In GTA it's generally just the weird shit you can do, like driving on top of the bridges and seeing how long I can survive for with police after me, performing stunts in planes or helicopters and trying to do stunt jumps with the parachute. In the older games one of my favourite stunts was jumping out of planes/choppers and trying to land in peoples swimming pools without a chute. I really do love playing with the physics in that series.

 

[happyninja42]

It depends on the theme of my current playthrough. I will use Skyrim as an example of some of the various ways I've focused on the game, depending on what character type I played.

1. Skyrim Garrett - Master Thief. Deviated from main story mission right away, and intentionally never triggered the dragons so I didn't have to worry about random dragon attacks. I killed noone, and simply did the Thieve's Guild quest line, as well as simply running around doing burglary on anyone that pissed me off, or was in a position of authority in a city. I left a calling card at every house I robbed, dropping a quill feather at the doorstep inside the house, as I was leaving.

2. The Son of Talos! - This was my "FUS RO DAH *****!" character, big beefy Norse guy, two handed hammer, focused on Shouts and smashing things in the head. I ignored the main quest to focus on the Civil War storyline, because he was a "True son of Skyrim". I lead the charge of every city battle, using Shouts to bolster my allies, and lay waste to my foes in front of me. He did dungeon crawls in a fraction of the time of my other playthroughs, because I would intentionally use my Shout to alert the enemy to my presence, calling them out and drawing them to me for big burly fights. Once Skyrim had been freed from the Imperials, I then focused on freeing it from Alduin. This unfortunately created an annoying, game breaking bug with trying to capture that one dragon, but I got around it eventually.

3. The pacifist Greybeard/Priest of Akatosh (I think that's the god's name. The god of Life and Death). -- He focused on the Dawnguard DLC, as he was dedicated to irradicating the undead. He didn't bother with the civil war, because he felt such violence was foolish, as it contrasted with the pacifist tenants of his god.

4. The Wolfchild -- The blood of the pack was in his heart, and it pulsed with every breath. He would roam the wilderness, day and night, in wolf form, preying upon the bandits and Imperials he saw. He did not feed upon the peasants and Stormcloaks, and was a furious defender of the land of Skyrim, from man and beast. He saw the dragons as a threat to his territory, and he would feast on their hearts while he took their souls. He did the main story eventually, after gaining utter dominance as a wolf (maxing his wolf traits), to remove that threat to his territory.

5. The Dragonborn of Dragonborn - An Argonian warrior, heavy plate, sword and shield. He was the living embodiment of the Dragonspirit, as evident by his reptilian blood. He focused on the Dragonborn DLC, to establish is supremacy over all the Dragons, and to reach his final level of power and evolution. He cared not for the problems of Skyrim and her people, as they were merely minions to serve his Draconic majesty.

So yeah, as you can see, different ways of playing, for different characters. In a game as wonderfully open as Skyrim, or the Fallout games, it's perfectly ok to go create your own story as you go along, however you wish. That's kind of the point.

For other games that are more linear, while still being sandboxey, like inFamous 1 and 2, it's a lot easier to just stay on the main story line. There are sidequests sure, but they are single pop things, that simply give you more XP. The main focus on the game is the main story, even though it is a sandbox game.


So yeah, that ramble aside, there is no specific way to play them, so play it how you want. Don't feel overwhelmed by taking the less beaten path. Embrace it, and see what awaits you at the other side.

I find having a character "concept" when you play them helps. If you actually imbue some human traits into your character, and ask yourself things like "What would this character actually give a shit about in this situation" it will help you direct your gameplay in a realistic way, that can be quite enjoyable and surprising.

One example. My Garrett character. He was in a random tavern, and this dark elf gave him some lip. Some really arrogant, condescending shit talk. This insulted my guy, who had never met this man before. So I waited in the tavern until he left, and I followed him as he walked home. When I learned where he lived, I waited until he went to sleep, and stole everything he owned that had market value, everything. I then found that he had a safe! *gasp* Those exist in Skyrim??! Well hell yes, I'll just pick this thing open and steal his most valu..able.....um...why does this guy have a Dark Brotherhood robe?! Hehehehe, yeah, you big nasty assassin you. Have fun being totally broke now that I stole all your shit! Teach you to be randomly insulting to people in a bar! *drop feather on his doorstep and slip out into the night to sell my goods*.

 

[MysticSlayer]

Depends on the game. In a game like Skyrim, I'll probably play a character to familiarize myself with the world by doing the main quest and a bunch of side quests if I'm interested, which I generally am. After being reasonably familiar with the world, I stop playing the ignorant player and start role playing as someone who actually has some understanding of the world they are in and a clear place in it. This can be anything from a sneaky thief to an honor-seeking warrior to a simple hunter. It really doesn't matter so long as it is a role I enjoy.

For games like Saints Row, yeah, I just do whatever I feel like. I'll probably touch on the main story here and there, but I rarely do that seriously. I just want to mess around with whatever they give me.

Some games are also in a weird middle-ground, like Fallout. I never feel like just role-playing, but I never really feel like just doing whatever I want. In that case, I just ask myself, "What would your average person do in this world given the scenario my character is in." By then, though, the answers vary too much for me to go into.

 

[G00N3R7883]

I primarily focus on the main quest, because I want to follow the story. But I will usually look at the map, plan my route to the next part of the main quest, and see if I can deal with any secondary stuff on the way. Many of these open world games will have some kind of XP or economy systems so its worth the effort to make sure I'm strong enough to actually do the main quest. And then after I've finished the main quest, I'll spend a few more hours tackling the left over side quests that I found enjoyable. I rarely bother trying to get 100% completion.

 

[Shoggoth2588]

I guess it depends on the game. GTA style sandboxes are overwhelming and I don't even attempt 100% completion. The closest I've come has been my 95% in Just Cause 2 because a lot of the completion there is "blow shit up" and the other was Saint's Row 2 because it has awesome side quests. When it comes to Bethesda games and large RPGs, I just do what I can and am satisfied if I get all of the trophies/achievements in the game which is almost never anywhere near 100% completion.

Anyway, I generally go for quest missions first unless the side quests look like fun. In Watch_Dogs for example, I was more entertained finding QR codes than doing the story missions. Then there are the racing missions which I avoid like plague...

 

[FPLOON]

It varies, but it can be broken down to doing the main quest first while trying out all of the side quests the moment they become readily available to me... Then, only finish the side quests that give me some sweat-ass bonuses before continuing with the main quest in question...

Other than that, sometimes I go nuts until I feel like getting back to the main story or something like that...

 

[SlumlordThanatos]

Step 1: Save.

Step 2: Go on a murderous rampage.

Step 3: Get killed.

Step 4: Respawn.

Step 5: Repeat.

 

[CannibalCorpses]

I do all the side quests first and then reluctantly finish the main quest when i run out of other things to do. I kinda have to do this because otherwise i would finish games in less than 2 days and that is the point where i stop paying for games and find something challenging and stimulating to do with my spare time again

 

[Ambitiousmould]

I tend to go Main Quest until either A) I come across some side quests or B) I see something like a town that looks interesting. Especially in TES where the main story is always a load of shite, but there are some truly great side quests/quest lines.

The ones that stand out most are from Oblivion, where the Thieves guild was pretty cool, but Tears of the Saviour and Lifting the Vale were completely epic, and I would have made way better main story lines if they were made a bit longer. They had what a good fantasy story needs: a root in the lore and history of the world, mystery and intrigue, a gruelling (insofar as an Elder Scrolls can be gruelling) journey, ancient places where people haven't set foot for centuries, and an ancient and powerful artifact. I felt way more in awe of the world in those quests than in both Oblivion and Skyrim's main stories put together.

Incidentally, I really loved Dawnguard because of the same reasons, except that had some good, even great, characters on top of that. It just goes to show that there are writers at Bethesda who can write good stories and characters, but they never apparently work on the main quests.

 

[MHR]

Side quests. All the sidequests. In fallout 3, New Vegas, Oblivion, And Skyrim, I've never completed the entire main story even though I've invested hundreds of hours into each of them. Why would I want to see the ends of these games without actually completing the whole game? Unsurprisingly, it's hard to do everything in these games all at once, so I haven't done it all yet.

The way I play it, I take sidequests, and those will lead you to most of the interesting things to explore on the map, so there's really no need to wander too much in any direction and get overwhelmed. Too much wandering will definitely do that. Having an inventory too full, getting low on supplies, and getting lost are things to avoid, so obviously, I've learned to space it out in chunks. Decide where you want to go first, and almost as importantly, how you want to get there. Should it be by side quest? Or with simply an empty lootsack and lots of ammunition? Am I sneaking in to grab something specific? Or clearing the entire area and taking everything that isn't nailed down?

Oftentimes I'll go to the same place multiple times because the enemies will respawn and are fun and profitable to fight, or in the case of Fallout 3/NV, all the file cabinets mysteriously spawn cratefuls of bullets, cash, and cigarettes that you somehow "missed" the first time.

 

[sageoftruth]

I give myself a personal goal, and then wander the world in the direction of that goal, completing almost every quest I encounter on the way.

 

[Toblo1]

For Saints Row/GTA-esque games, I tend to go from story mission to story mission, with some occasional wandering around accomplishing side-missions (or in Saints row 4's case, finding clusters). Also because I'm a massive goody two-shoes, I don't get fun out of going "fuck it" and just shooting the hell out of civilian NPCs.....

For games like Elder Scrolls/Fallout 3/New Vegas, I tend to prioritize optional missons/sidequests above story missions. Gotta get those unique weapons!

 

[TheVampwizimp_v1legacy]

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.

That really is the biggest problem with open worlds. Either your massive map is mostly empty with a handful of hopefully well-designed quests, or you fill that glorified parking lot with cookie cutter fetch quests a la Skyrim. What other options are there, other than hiring 800 quest designers and spending 10 years developing it. Either way that gorgeous world you poured thousands of man hours into feels lifeless. So in the end, unless you play it for the atmosphere, what's the point?

Not to say that I don't like Fallout or the Elder Scrolls. I just find myself tiring of the wasteland wandering and playing the same basic quest for the thousandth time. I can play the whole Mass Effect trilogy twice every year, but I spend less and less time on Skyrim every time I try.

 

[JennAnge]

I usually focus on the main quest, but immerse myself in the world by talking to people and poking my nose in odd places if it's not too far out of my way. I get lots of potential sidequests that way, but I only really follow the ones that prick my interest. Like that I don't feel overwhelmed or lose sight of the main quest's story.

IF the world building was well done and sidequests are engrossing, and I have a good grasp of the story and my place in it, then I'll gladly do a second run-through and take a lot more time with sidequests. It's a lot less overwhelming this way, I find, and also gives me a chance to try out a new character and approach.

Result: I played Skyrim with eight different characters - sometimes not even going near the main quest line if it was out of character for, say, an assassin to care that dragons are eating people - and they all had fairly unique playthroughs, following different sidequests and focusing on different cities. I dragged myself through Thi4f once, and though I didn't hate it as much as some people did, I feel absolutely no compunction to return to it whatsoever; the entire world feels like window dressing, with a cardboard cut-out of Batman stuck in the middle of it.

Currently playing Divinity Original Sin. A lot of the sidequests are short, or easy, or just plain fun, and thus I've done a surprising number of them. I also really dig the combat in that game, so it makes me WANT to take sidequests just to find myself surrounded by lava and and attacked by mechanical roosters and robot rats with dynamite strapped to their backs to see how I'll get out of this bind with all my limbs and party members intact(ish).