Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

PunishedKeano t1_jeeaqce wrote

2

Autumn1881 t1_jeeqyk0 wrote

I mean, yeah, I don’t play games I don’t want to. I can still say I don’t like the repetitive nature open world games have to fall back on. I don’t even dislike the idea of an open world, it’s just that filling a 8x8 grid with content is 8 times more work than filling a 1x8 corridor with content. And as we are unwilling to spend 300$ on games the content on the grid is usually less developed than content on the corridor.

3

PunishedKeano t1_jeevx23 wrote

Not arguing in favor of paint by numbers open world games, I just found the statement "I don't want to spend 100 extra hours in every game" hilarious, as if they're being forced at gunpoint to collect every widget on the map.

2

cubobob t1_jeed0nz wrote

But im a completionist and trophy hunter and since the last decade or so games are getting longer and longer. Just because its open world doesnt mean that the world is good, its mostly empty aside from 1 npc for stupid fetch quests. There are not many open world games which use open world in a good way.

−1

cahir11 t1_jefjoyh wrote

If you're a completionist, then playing any open-world RPG is just torturing yourself unless it's like a "best game of the decade" type of thing (Skyrim, Witcher 3, etc.).

2

JohnTheUnjust t1_jeer3hu wrote

Most people I've seen that rag on open world games are almost always of the opinion that they all suck u less there is an activity such as a dungeon every 20 ft.

1