Against “open worlds” in games.
The benefit of stronger limitations in game design.
Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim have it,GTA V has it and the Witcher 3 is going to have it as well: an open world in which the gamer can go wherever she desires, take whatever she wants and do whatever she has in mind. To put it in two words: unlimited freedom. And a gameplay time in the hundreds. But is it really all what its cracked up to be?
In reality it sounds more like this: Long journeys from one place to another, many “discoverable” locations which all seem alike, strangers with repetitive stories and even more repetitive quests. Find A, kill B, talk to C. The problem is that game studios have bosses, budgets and deadlines which means pressure to get stuff done.
How about instead of paying $30-$50 for 100+ hours of dull repetition I pay the same money for 30-50 hours of really exciting adventures? But what does that mean? What is an exciting adventure and what are the costs of making a game exciting?
Limiting the world
The main drawback is that you have to limit everything. Instead of an open world, where you can go wherever you want, whenever you want, we need a limited world with separate “chapters” much like in Diablo II. Once you “unlocked” a new “chapter” you can go there via transportation and you can always go back. There might still be stuff to do once you go back, maybe traveling back and forth between ”chapters” is part of the story (which it wasn’t in Diablo). However, the game developers, story writers, etc. know much more about your character when you are at a certain chapter for the first time. This means dialogs can be more specific (no generic repeating “arrow to my knee” stuff), quests can be timed so you can not do them whenever but only when certain events have happened or are happening. Additionally separate “chapters” mean that there is a loading interval between them, so a “chapter” can easily be stuffed with more people and things, as well as houses that are “in” the game world (no loading screens when you enter a building). Overall I suggest sacrificing limitlessness for a more realistic, more interesting and exciting story which is possible due to more knowledge about the players state within the game at a certain location.
Limiting the possibilities
In todays games you can choose everything at anytime. Which weapons to use, which weapons you are proficient with, how your character looks, what gender and race your character is, etc. Many people argue that this is good, because, like in D&D, creating a character to your liking means you identify yourself strongly with this character. In theory this is true, but there are downsides to this approach. The biggest one is that the character cannot talk. From a budget point of view it is impossible to create voiceovers for 6 races and two genders per race. So how about limiting it to just one, or maybe two a male and female version for one race. By defining the race the voice actors can use an expected tone and differentiate your characters voice from the rest of the characters. By defining a general look (which may be customized a little bit in parts) other characters can mention details, like the color of your hair, your size, etc. thus making it seem more like they are really talking to you. In short, limiting options creates room for elements like character voice overs, specific dialogs and reactions and thus draws you deeper into the game.
Reducing the hours of gameplay
WTF? The more you can play the better, right? Maybe not, for two reasons. Firstly most games that offer endless hours of gameplay have computer generated quest, which are plain dull. I never encountered an interesting, generated quest. Secondly, if story writers and game designers can spend more time on less quests, chances are, they have better ideas and make more exciting and interesting quests. I never finished any modern game and I am sure many gamers are just like me. If we only play the main story, why not make it extremely awesome and skip most of the boring side quests (some good side quests are very welcome though).
Summary
In essence I think we should focus more on quest & story quality and atmosphere in the world, instead of focussing on sheer size of a game, number of quests, character customization options and high end graphics. If the game industry goes back to telling great stories, we will soon have awesome games again.
