anonagon
Literate
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2024
- Messages
- 9
But they didn't actually have to have the world be that big in the first place. The game is much longer than it needs to be, so they could have afforded to scale it down a bit. Older action games knew that the way you milk content out of an action game is through higher difficulties or alternate modes. GoT even has the Legend mode for this purpose, but it chose to also fill up its world with repetitive filler.I kindda agree but again, it's a traditional open-world trope. I'd like the devs handle it differently, in a less repetitive way in the sequel, but I didn't mind it that much in GoT1. You have a huge open world and you have to fill it up somehow.
Plus most of the activities are far from pointless, unless you play on Normal or Easy. On harder diffs you absolutely want all the level ups and improvements you get from the activities, especially the foxes.
This is very different from shit like, say, RDR2. The side activities in that game (hunting, camp upgrading robbing etc.) are truly pointless because they don't benefit your character at all. I mean why rob trains and coaches when you don't need a single extra cent to finish the game? It's not like this in GoT.
The fact that the collection activities are the way you get your basic upgrades is actually something of a bad thing imo, because it means you can't really ignore them once you get bored of them, especially if you are playing on the higher difficulties. I haven't played RDR2 and don't think I'd like it, but at least if I was bored of open-world-ing in that game I could theoretically just blitz the story and not be worse for wear. Alas, the open-world format, especially the modern console version of it, likely just isn't for me. If GoT was made for the PS2 I'd probably be telling you it was amazing.