Open worlds have become a popular stage for many gaming experiences in recent years, winning over fans with the allure of a diverse open space to fuel exploration. In practise, few of these spaces will work out in the way the fans and developers very much want them to, they will be oversized and under worked spaces that exist merely to inflate the length of the game. That is the reality of video game openworlds. Recently, I met a fellow gamer who told me that he just couldn't stand openworld games, when he said that I was expecting to hear the same thing that I've heard before about how 'overwhelming' those kind of games can be; instead he seemed incensed by a trait of these games exclusive to those low effort attempts I just described: Busywork.
When I use that term, I am referring to the way in which these 'openworld lite' experiences try to make the exploration of their space a meaningful endeavour. Busywork is what I call it when the game wants to send you to all those boring rooftops in search of another bloody collectible. Busywork is when you look at the worldmap and sigh when you release that you can't make out the streets for all of the icons plastered over it. Busywork is when your video game feels less like a fun way to kill some time and more like your second job. And it bothers me that people are starting to see Busywork as an integral part of openworlds.
One of the first time I ever personally experienced the soul crushing effects of being swamped with busywork was back when I used to buy Ubisoft games. I still enjoy the odd Assassin's Creed now and then, but I am no where near the level of obsessed that I used to be. Recently I shared the fact that, whenever a new Assassin Creed would release, I would play through every single installment up until then. I would call it my 'omnibus'. This tradition carried on until the release of Unity, partially because of how that game disappointed me both in gameplay and narrative but mostly because of what I did during the previous year's omnibus. For some inane reason, whilst anticipating the release of Black Flag, I decided to finally 100% the original Assassins Creed.
Let me try to explain how stupid of a decision this was. Assassins Creed was one of Ubisoft's first attempts to craft a viable open world and it really does show. Some of the worst game design tendencies that have endured in this franchise were spawned from the original; choices in combat design, narrative structure and open world design. Assassins Creed's Kingdom is big. Too big. So big that the developers clearly had no idea what to do with it. Most of Assassins Creed's plot takes place within the three ingame cities, leaving a huge expanse between them devoid of anything to do. This made someone come up with a damnable idea for filling up that space with the implementation of collectibles.
First let me say, I have nothing against collectibles in games, I actually think that they can be rather cool. Grand Theft Auto 5 has a huge 'scavenger hunt' collectible that tasked players with finding spaceship parts all other the midriff of the map. Those that partook got a rewarding cut scene and a commemorative UFO. These sorts of collectibles are great because they encourage exploration without forcing it. Sure, completionists will have to spend their hours combing the world space, but a casual player could easily pass this by without feeling as though they are missing out or being pressured in. That is because these collectibles are not the only reason the player would ever visit this part of the gameworld. Rockstar are great at making use of their worldspace and ensuring that it all feels relevant and meaningful, there are no huge tracts of lands placed without thought or purpose behind them.
Rockstar also excel at making these collectibles feel worthwhile. They tie in the scavenger hunt with an actual story in order to provide some context for the things you do and make their collection worthwhile. Bethesda does the same with the relics and hidden items you can find in their games. That little bit of context turns this tacked on addition into something resembling a worthwhile use of your time. Suddenly, I'm not chasing glowing cubes in order to add another percentage onto my completion, I'm steadily unravelling a mystery and closing in on the treasure beneath. Just a cursory bit of effort on the implementation can make a world of difference for the player.
Ubisoft did not put in that effort when it came to Assassin Creed. The first game had more pointless collectibles than anyone could reasonably be expected to find during their time with the game. You would have to be some sort of fool or masochist in order to waste your time on something like that. (I'll let you figure out which one I was.) First you have to find the flags. These are just floating, glowing flags that are placed any and everywhere without rhyme or reason. That's 100 Acre flags, 100 Damascus Flags, 100 Jerusalem flags, 100 King Richard flags and 20 Masyaf flags. There are also 60 Templars scattered about the gameworld. That is 480 collectible items in one game. Needless to say, after going through the hell of collecting them the first time, I have never played Assassins Creed again.
But that is merely one game, right? Surely Ubisoft will have learnt their lesson for the next game? Well, the much superior Assassins Creed 2 also, somehow, drops the ball in this department. Now you have to find feathers, treasure chests and glyphs. At least the 'glyph' collectibles have significant story ties and an in-game indicator to tell you when you are close, but the other two are as inane as they sound. Treasure chests grant you gold, (big whoop. Ezio owns an entire town, money isn't really an issue.) and the feathers are tied with some stupid plot about getting Ezio's mother to talk again after the death of most of her children. This might make players care if Maria actually bothered to show up in the rest of the game, I forgot she even existed by the time I got the last one.
I know that I am singling out Assassin's Creed but I truly do believe that Ubisoft are the instigators for this trend of pointless and/or empty openworlds we see today. Sniper Ghost Warrior 3's open world almost felt like a carbon copy of the kind of world spaces one would expect in a Far Cry game; Saints Row's openworlds are more designed to ape GTA, but the later games end up devolving into Watch_Dogs style collect-athons; and 2015's Mad Max completely buckled under the weight of it's open world forcing players to jump through hoops just to implement a sense of progression to the play space. I won't blame Ubisoft for creating all of these 'openworld lite' trends, however I will point out that they certainly did popularize a lot them.
Today, going 'Open World' is actually pretty groan-worthy to gamers. We aren't a stupid bunch, and we recognize a lazy marketing gimmick from a mile away. But, when publishers look at the runaway success of games like GTA V ($6 Billion), they lose all sense of reason and mandate their developers to ride these game's coattails. Making an openworld is no small undertaking, and if the entire team aren't 100% in the right frame of mind to make it, it immediately shows in the results. But despite that, developers are still being forced to create something they lack the resources or inspiration to strive towards, all due to some mad pursuit for success
I think that a lot of this fervour stems from the vilification of the term 'linear'. (I'll talk more about that later.) People seems to think that an openworld automatically means that the game isn't linear and therefore worth their time, or at least that is what the publishers assume we think. Personally, I love a good openworld game, so it makes my skin crawl when I see these shameless cash grabs muddy the genre with their attempts. Although, I suppose someone must be buying them because these people keep making them. Things have started to slow down in the past year as the in-thing has shifted towards battle royales, but there are still the old holdouts perpetuating bad world design. (I see you, Ubisoft.) Will the industry see a shift for the better with the impending release of great openworld role models like 'the Outer Worlds' and 'Cyperpunk 2077'? Heck no. But at least us openworld fans will get a couple great games to take our minds off the cash grabs.
No comments:
Post a Comment