Has there ever been a BIG open world RPG that was also QUALITY?

[Sigourn]

Originally I wanted to write yet another big rant on why Morrowind is one of the most overrated RPGs of all time. And at the end of the day, the conclusion I reached was this: every single flaw I can think of Morrowind, from how boring its NPCs are, to how boring most of its quests are, to how boring most of its dungeons are, to how boring the moment to moment gameplay is, have to do with one thing. And that thing is its ridiculously huge size.

Morrowind is a 2002 game that is much bigger than that of Fallout: New Vegas (2010), the other "good" open world RPG I've played (for the purpose of this discussion, Gothic won't be mentioned as it is rather small and simply doesn't compare to the freedom offered by these games).

Playing Morrowind, I see my quest log marks around 150 quests completed. That's a lot, but as it is, I'm not even 1/3 through the game's total quests. However, something that constantly lets me down is how boring many of these quests are. How similar and therefore boring most of its caves, ancestral tombs, and Daedric ruins are, all with the same kind of enemies, the same kind of loot that scales with your level (no matter what people claim, Morrowind's loot is hardly "hand placed" any more than Skyrim's leveled loot is "hand placed" just because a developer had to actually place a chest in a dungeon), the same visuals and boring layouts.

Then I thought, "well Fallout: New Vegas' dungeons were somewhat shitty too, but at least they served a specific purpose most of the time, as opposed to serving the general purpose of "this is Vvardenfell and so we need a hundred shitty egg mines, a hundred shitty ancestral tombs, and a hundred shitty bandit caves". And the quests were simply far better as a whole, with more depth, replayability, and simply better written NPCs than Morrowind's. Or, at the very least, NPCs that talked like human beings. But like I said earlier, New Vegas pales in comparison to the scale of Morrowind. New Vegas appears bigger than it is because of its seamless open world: it could be easily translated into the classic Fallout engine and little would be lost (and ironically, much would be gained).

I know many may be thinking "just what is "big" to you?". My answer: anything that comes close to the scale of Morrowind. Has there ever been a BIG open world RPG, similar in size to Morrowind, that was just a quality game all around, and didn't leave you thinking "I've been to this fucking dungeon already, I've done this fucking quest already, I've talked to this fucking NPC already"?

 

[urmom]

Arcanum is large but it is mostly empty space.

Underrail has lots of stuff to discover. It feels really large, too, because of the slow walking speed.

 

[Semiurge]

Witcher 3 or GTA V.

 

[V_K]

Wizardry 7, naturally.

 

[alyvain]

Hm, I don't know. I think Morrowins is a good type of autistic hiking mushroom-eating experience I expect from TES game, and it's probably my favourite open-world game.

 

[Krivol]

Where is Roxorovski when you need him?

ELEX!

 

[Bah]

Gothic 3?

 

[JarlFrank]

I love Morrowind, but I generally agree with you. I noticed this while playing through Fallout 4 recently. It's decent enough as a shooter with RPG elements, as some of the dungeons have excellent level design.

But at some point you get worn out because everything feels samey after a while.

And I noticed this pattern in pretty much all open world games, be they RPGs or not.

The main reason for this is that due to the quantity, the devs can't make sure everything is of high quality. You got a couple of standout locations, but everything else is recycled. Even worse: elements from the standout locations are recycled elsewhere, which makes special things feel less special.

Fallout 4 is a great example because it has several elements that appear regularly in dungeons, but they would be a lot more interesting if they appeared only a few times. Like inactive protectrons you can activate by hacking a nearby console. If this happens once or twice, it's a super cool detail you will remember. If it happens in every second dungeon, it becomes routine and boring.

And since development time and budget aren't infinite, if you go for quantity you have to recycle ideas like that. A large team can make 20 to 50 unique dungeons maybe. But 100? 200? A lot of open world games go for bigger and bigger sizes, with dungeons numbering in the hundreds. At some point you just have to recycle elements from previous dungeons you've built, cause you don't have the time to make another dozen that are all unique (and you don't have the creativity left to put a unique spin on all of those).

That's why huge quantity is always going to be to a game's detriment.

 

[Stormcrowfleet]

Depends on what you mean by Open World, but I guess outside of Fallout you could say Betrayal at Krondor ? I'm not a huge fan of open world, they pretty much all blow because they mostly have filler.

 

[octavius]

Originally I wanted to write yet another big rant on why Morrowind is one of the most overrated RPGs of all time.

Ah, that game one likes less the more one plays it and thinks about it...

As for you question, there are several big open world games that have better game mechanics than MW, but I can't really think of any which is clearly superior when it comes to content and variation.

 

[alyvain]

The main reason for this is due to quantity

Well, quantity is a problem, but this category has to be analysed further.

Big games are boring because they have inadequate mechanics for a lenghthy experience. They cease to be rewarding rather soon, even with the more-polished ones such as the Witcher 3.

I really liked the mechanics of retirement in Sid Meier's Pirates (which aren't quite open-world, of course).

I guess Sid Meier is a genius who actually knows how games work. Huh.

 

[deama]

Darklands? I thought that was decent if you want open world with memorable stuff.

 

[deuxhero]

Dragon's Dogma was fairly big, and had worthwhile quests. Though quest acceptance (but not necessarily the actual events) were mostly contained in 1 hub area and two smaller ones right next to each other. The low enemy variety hurts too (There's actually a fair number of enemies overall, but many are exclusive to certain areas).

Also: Not an RPG, but Saints Row 2 made almost every section of the city unique, visually distinct, and fun. Quests (missions) were pretty good too with nice variety.

 

[RuySan]

Definitely The Witcher 3. Sometimes having a quality world goes beyond in just having lots of quests or NPCs. It must be interesting to explore for the sake of it. And TW3 feels natural, not a theme park or checklist, and it's a joy just to ride roach through it, or visit small islands on Skellige just for the nice views.

 

[janior]

Yes, Assassin's Creed: Odyssey.

 

[Dorateen]

Might & Magic II: Gates to Another World

Grimoire: Heralds of the Winged Exemplar

World of Xeen, combing Clouds and Darkside

 

[pomenitul]

Fallout: New Vegas and The Witcher 3 are the only good open world games, and that's because they dial down 'muh freedom'.

 

[Damned Registrations]

Fallout 4 is a great example because it has several elements that appear regularly in dungeons, but they would be a lot more interesting if they appeared only a few times. Like inactive protectrons you can activate by hacking a nearby console. If this happens once or twice, it's a super cool detail you will remember.

I don't really get this logic. What you're essentially saying is the game would be better if it just ended after X hours before you had a chance to see too much of it. That's pretty much the goal of the design; to have a game actually large enough for the player to get their fill, instead of ending and leaving them wanting more for 20 years while it never gets a sequel, or milking them with 40$ 5 hour expansions (which Bethesda does anyways, to be fair.)

My measure of a game is how long it keeps me interested, not how much I wish it kept going when it ended.

That said, aside from Morrowind, Bethesda games don't really do it for me. But that's more down to a lack of interesting systems to play with. Combat is incredibly simple, and so are pretty much all the non combat skills, almost none of which get employed in quests or adventuring in any way. It's just a really bad design where things don't mesh together. Every aspect of the game is like it's own little bit of the themepark and they get stale pretty quick unless you've got flower collection autism. Morrowind mostly kept me interested for the unique items scattered everywhere and generally being pretty alien.

MMOs are pretty much where you need to look to find the budget required for a huge variety of big dungeons in an open world with lavish detail. But their systems generally don't allow for meaningful exploration so it's pretty dull to me. Might and Magic 3-5 were far more entertaining to explore.

 

[Gregz]

 

[RNGsus]

Minecraft

 

[ItsChon]

Nope, never. I wouldn't count any of the great isometric RPGs of old as open-world titles. Underrail/BG really push the limits of how big an RPG can get without the content getting stale, and I think that's the rule of thumb we should stick by.

 

[Sranchammer]

Yes, Assassin's Creed: Odyssey.

Yes!

 

[ntonystinson]

Mount and Blade Warband

 

[Tigranes]

Fallout 4 is a great example because it has several elements that appear regularly in dungeons, but they would be a lot more interesting if they appeared only a few times. Like inactive protectrons you can activate by hacking a nearby console. If this happens once or twice, it's a super cool detail you will remember.

I don't really get this logic. What you're essentially saying is the game would be better if it just ended after X hours before you had a chance to see too much of it. That's pretty much the goal of the design; to have a game actually large enough for the player to get their fill, instead of ending and leaving them wanting more for 20 years while it never gets a sequel, or milking them with 40$ 5 hour expansions (which Bethesda does anyways, to be fair.)

That's really not what he means.

Players' enjoyment of a particular feature or gameplay loop is always dependent on how many times you repeat it, in what context it arrives, what kind of progression is experienced, etc, etc. There's a difference between a single special quest where you hunt down a troll by figuring out its weaknesses or something, and a game in which that exact same gameplay loop is then repeated 800 times in endless troll hunts. The exact same quicktime sequence might be a fun diversion as a special moment in the story, but become a stinking rote chore as a regularly repeated minigame.

 

[Old One]

ELEX.