-
Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.
"This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.
best/ favorite style of exploration (liner-sandbox spectrum)
- Thread starter eli
- Start date
Gregz
Arcane
Huge sandboxes are the most fun to explore
i.e. Daggerfall, Kenshi, Warband, Pirates!
i.e. Daggerfall, Kenshi, Warband, Pirates!
Free roaming/open world with no level scaling and no markers/compass.
Exploration does not exist when there constantly are markers on your screen telling you where to go. You're not exploring, you're following an icon. You're not discovering anything in Skyrim because the little icons on your compass show you where all the locations are. It's not a discovery when you have the in-game version of Google Maps spoiling everything for you.
When I replayed Morrowind for the first time in years in 2017, I was pleasantly surprised when I managed to get lost in the wilderness. No markers showed me where to go, all I had was a rough direction. Then I stumbled upon a ruin I didn't know would be there. That's exploration.
Level scaling also destroys exploration. You're not discovering new things when the game scales everything to your level. You know exactly what is waiting for you: enemies and items that are neither stronger nor weaker than you, but exactly fitting to your current level range. There are no surprises. You'll never stumble upon a goblin cave at level 10 and easily roflstomp its population, nor stumble upon a lich's crypt at level 2 and barely manage to escape with your life, swearing to return later. You always find the same average difficulty everywhere, as well as average-for-your-level rewards.
Exploration does not exist when there constantly are markers on your screen telling you where to go. You're not exploring, you're following an icon. You're not discovering anything in Skyrim because the little icons on your compass show you where all the locations are. It's not a discovery when you have the in-game version of Google Maps spoiling everything for you.
When I replayed Morrowind for the first time in years in 2017, I was pleasantly surprised when I managed to get lost in the wilderness. No markers showed me where to go, all I had was a rough direction. Then I stumbled upon a ruin I didn't know would be there. That's exploration.
Level scaling also destroys exploration. You're not discovering new things when the game scales everything to your level. You know exactly what is waiting for you: enemies and items that are neither stronger nor weaker than you, but exactly fitting to your current level range. There are no surprises. You'll never stumble upon a goblin cave at level 10 and easily roflstomp its population, nor stumble upon a lich's crypt at level 2 and barely manage to escape with your life, swearing to return later. You always find the same average difficulty everywhere, as well as average-for-your-level rewards.
Artyoan
Arbiter
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2017
- Messages
- 653
Whatever strokes my latent imagination off. Its too dependent on multiple other factors.
-Linear usually doesn't do much more for me.
-Open World depends heavily on the sense of atmosphere, tone, and difficulty. These games are almost always let down by mediocre combat. Elder Scrolls games usually fit well here. Love the music, love the ambiance, love the world, combat is a huge drag on it, itemization drags it even further. A front loaded style of game that brims with possibility for a dozen hours before deflating.
-'Free-roaming' in the style of Dark Souls has a lot of potential if the balance is right. Each stage area can be constrained and balanced better than just having an open world, as if you're roaming through interconnected dungeons of an open world. But there needs to be a lot of interconnectivity and too much fast travel can detract.
I guess what I'm saying is, exploration really needs a good tone, combat system, and interesting itemization rewards and it doesn't matter that much. If I want to take my time and clean out each area while noting things here and there that I'll have to return to later, I'm probably having a good time. If I'm icon hunting, I'm probably only absorbing the tone but my heart isn't in it.
Also, avoid the Fallout 4 situations of a narrative clashing heavily. I don't want to search for my missing infant while the game itself is telling me to take my time and explore to my heart's content. Some low level degree of role playing my character is a good thing.
-Linear usually doesn't do much more for me.
-Open World depends heavily on the sense of atmosphere, tone, and difficulty. These games are almost always let down by mediocre combat. Elder Scrolls games usually fit well here. Love the music, love the ambiance, love the world, combat is a huge drag on it, itemization drags it even further. A front loaded style of game that brims with possibility for a dozen hours before deflating.
-'Free-roaming' in the style of Dark Souls has a lot of potential if the balance is right. Each stage area can be constrained and balanced better than just having an open world, as if you're roaming through interconnected dungeons of an open world. But there needs to be a lot of interconnectivity and too much fast travel can detract.
I guess what I'm saying is, exploration really needs a good tone, combat system, and interesting itemization rewards and it doesn't matter that much. If I want to take my time and clean out each area while noting things here and there that I'll have to return to later, I'm probably having a good time. If I'm icon hunting, I'm probably only absorbing the tone but my heart isn't in it.
Also, avoid the Fallout 4 situations of a narrative clashing heavily. I don't want to search for my missing infant while the game itself is telling me to take my time and explore to my heart's content. Some low level degree of role playing my character is a good thing.
Kingcomrade.
1 FO/Arcanum - overworld travel with locations
2 UR - 2d big map
3 Breath of the wild - 3d big map
4 AoD - pick locations
1 FO/Arcanum - overworld travel with locations
2 UR - 2d big map
3 Breath of the wild - 3d big map
4 AoD - pick locations
luj1
You're all shills
Bad poll is bad. Literally three out of four options are overlapping.
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2015
- Messages
- 11,921
Yes, Open World hiking simulators, whether 2D or 3D, are my second-favorite type of exploration:
Faery Tale Adventure (1986), Morrowind (2002), Outward (2019)
luj1
You're all shills
The original Wasteland too.
SymbolicFrank
Magister
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2010
- Messages
- 1,668
Morrowind is most likely the best. Why? Scale, power and options. It's big. There's always stuff you can do. Start it up, go do something, and before you know it, you have to check your journal to find out what it was you wanted to do. And it's the only Elder Scrolls game you can play unmodded, or with only cosmetic mods.
Then again, it depends on what you want to do. While there is no fast-travel or quest compasses, you can run or jump like a rocket, or levitate. At the start, you're a total whimp, but after a while you can really feel all-powerful. And while that might make linear games boring, there is just so much to do and explore, that it never does. And who wants to spend minutes fighting wildlife or bandits?
If there's too much level scaling, or you and the enemies always stay equally bad, it is a drag from the get-go. On the other hand, boss fights suck.
IRL, fights end fast. Hit or get hit, the end. Weapons are designed to kill. Making games "challenging", by having every fight take minutes, is stupid and boring. If you hit someone, they should go down. And if you want fighting to be the main game play, you have to be nearly immortal or use your "load save game" superpower to survive.
"Challenging" only works for multiplayer anyway, because that requires a level playing field and the other players can be God-like as well. And while a really smart AI sounds great for single-player games, the percentage of people who want that is a single digit.
Which leaves: exploring, see the sights, do the quests (as long as they require some thinking and are not simple fetch quests or go there and kill). Multiple solutions, simulation, emergent game play. But for the last 15+ years, the focus has been on graphics and voice acting. More quests and more possible solutions mean an exponentially larger budget for voice recording and graphics. And it means, that nobody experiences all the possibilities, which is nowadays translated to wasted investment money. And thinking like that, things have to be either lineair, or completely procedurally generated, including the voices. Or, in other words: on rails, or not making much sense.
Then again, it depends on what you want to do. While there is no fast-travel or quest compasses, you can run or jump like a rocket, or levitate. At the start, you're a total whimp, but after a while you can really feel all-powerful. And while that might make linear games boring, there is just so much to do and explore, that it never does. And who wants to spend minutes fighting wildlife or bandits?
If there's too much level scaling, or you and the enemies always stay equally bad, it is a drag from the get-go. On the other hand, boss fights suck.
IRL, fights end fast. Hit or get hit, the end. Weapons are designed to kill. Making games "challenging", by having every fight take minutes, is stupid and boring. If you hit someone, they should go down. And if you want fighting to be the main game play, you have to be nearly immortal or use your "load save game" superpower to survive.
"Challenging" only works for multiplayer anyway, because that requires a level playing field and the other players can be God-like as well. And while a really smart AI sounds great for single-player games, the percentage of people who want that is a single digit.
Which leaves: exploring, see the sights, do the quests (as long as they require some thinking and are not simple fetch quests or go there and kill). Multiple solutions, simulation, emergent game play. But for the last 15+ years, the focus has been on graphics and voice acting. More quests and more possible solutions mean an exponentially larger budget for voice recording and graphics. And it means, that nobody experiences all the possibilities, which is nowadays translated to wasted investment money. And thinking like that, things have to be either lineair, or completely procedurally generated, including the voices. Or, in other words: on rails, or not making much sense.
nlfortier
Esturia Games
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2020
- Messages
- 128
I feel like there is an important difference between open world games like the Elder Scrolls and games like Baldurs Gate. In Baldurs Gate there is a set of distinct self contained areas each with their own side quests to complete. It's like each area is a separate tabletop RPG module. Elder Scrolls games lack this sense of cohesion within areas and separation between areas. Personally I prefer the Baldurs Gate style.
gothic and for all its flaws outward really got great exploration and overall still a fun game.
to put it into category i guess open world, but not sandbox. a mix of plot/character progress driven that takes place in an open world
to put it into category i guess open world, but not sandbox. a mix of plot/character progress driven that takes place in an open world
As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.