You've just loaded up your brand new open world game and you're busy breathing in the air of a new alien world to explore. You look upon this great vast mystery and begin to mourn, mourn for the time when this land has no more secrets, when you know every hill before you approach, and you've delved into every cave. Soon you'll plunge the land of all it's stories and begin to make your own, but until then you have the work of an adventurer to do. There is only one problem. This isn't the kind of world that you will come to know intimately, is it. And that's because it's not just an open world; it's a checklist open world.
The term 'checklist open world' was coined to describe the type of open world experience that is lacking that innate desire to see and be part of everything. I'm talking about the kinds of worlds were you don't feel the careful thought that went behind every rock placement, wherein there isn't a story in every environment and in which you'll likely put down the game long before you start memorizing road names. These are kinds of 'open worlds' that flooded the AAA gaming market back in the early 2010's when the 'open world' trend started to hit it's zenith. Everyone wanted to copy the kind of numbers that games like 'Fallout: New Vegas' and GTA V were pulling in, but most completely underestimated the amount of work and care that the developers need to devote to bring such worlds to life.
I have mentioned my disdain for this kind of practice before, albeit in passing. This is the main reason why I find myself initially repulsed whenever I hear of a new Ubisoft game, because they have been the biggest distributors of Checklist open worlds. And yet, despite my obvious hatred, I still find myself playing through these games from time to time and occasionally enjoying the experience. (Othertimes I end up disgusted in myself for having wasted the hours of my life to play through that junk. Assassin's Creed Rogue owes me at least 8 hours.) So in comes the question; just exactly what is it that distinguishes a bad checklist open world from a good one?
One could see this topic as attempting to distinguish between a dump and a turd, but this series is called 'In defence of' and not 'In condemnation of' (Although working on this blog has seriously made me consider creating the latter) so I'll try to wring out as many positives as possible. Maybe that makes me a hypocrite, but I have no self respect so that's hardly a concern for me. Oh, and do note, this still doesn't mean I like it when game's companies excrete these sorry excuses for games. Nothing could endear me to the development team less, in fact. (That being said there are some of these open worlds the excel in certain areas that are certainly worth mentioning.)
Firstly when addressing a topic like this, it is practically my fiduciary duty to bring up the folk at Ubisoft. When the 'Open world' fad began to hit Ubisoft weren't just early adopters, they were practically the estranged parents of the movement. Before there were even whiffs of the industry heading this direction, Ubisoft made the decision to scrap their linear action adventure series, Prince of Persia, and turn it into a more profitable and creatively freeing game; Assassin's Creed. Most at the time found the game to be a revolution to 3rd person action games and were completely enamoured by the 'free form' story style. In the years to come there has been an Assassin's Creed release almost every year and the series' trends have become industry cliches, so this series is really the place to start when considering the topic at hand.
I must precede my oncoming ribbing by asserting one immutable fact, the world designers for Ubisoft are, in my opinion, second to none. When tasked with realizing an ancient city from another culture, these folk spare no expense in their digital reconstructions and manage to capture the glory and majesty of cultural architecture with undeniable flair. The things they manage to accomplish are frankly amazing and certainly praise worthy. However, I suspect, the plain fact that this team is separate from those that populate the world is perhaps Ubisoft's first misstep.
Activities are one of the most important aspects of creating an open world that feels immersive. It is a way for the player to interact with the world in a way that doesn't break from the flow of gameplay and can even be fun. Early Ubisoft games kinda half understood this dynamic as they implemented what could be charitably called 'activites' but are actually more akin to 'tasks'. (This is where the 'checklist' part of the name comes in.) Whenever you look at the map for a Ubisoft world, you'll often immediately notice how it is cluttered with little icons shoved into every single corner of the world. Initially, this might make you think there is a lot to do, but in reality that just means there is a lot of filler to wade through.
For an example, I'll take a gander at that 'Assassin's Creed: Rogue' game that I mentioned. This is a game that boasts the Pacific Ocean as it's playground with plenty of uncharted islands to see, small eastern colonies to visit and even the budding city of New York to set down in. Once you go to these locations however, you'll notice that there is only a handful of things to do. Either you go around and loot all the map's chests, pick up the floating 'Animus fragments' or, if you're lucky, chase around a floating page with a sea shanty printed on the side. (As if you're crew can read...) There is no intrinsic value attributed to any of these activities and you'll quickly realize that the only reason you are partaking is to complete the collectible tally at the bottom of the screen. (An act which becomes pretty mind numbing by hour 5.)
Games like The Witcher 3 handle such locations in a completely different, and more enjoyable, way. Those games contextualize the character as a Witcher and thus all of his activities are attributed the value of 'Witcher work'. This is a game that'll have you delving ruins in search of treasures but they'll be locations haunted by ghosts and ghouls, hence places where a Witcher is meant to be. Plus, the things you find in these troves are actually valuable, making the journey feel more worthwhile. Now, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone call the Witcher games 'checklist open worlds', but that doesn't mean that game can't teach some things to games like Assassin's Creed.
I will admit, however, that there does come a certain comfort from these kinds of open worlds that focus less on making each area meaningful and instead ensuring they have a practical purpose to exist. I'm sure that I'm not the only person in the world who enjoys multitasking whilst gaming, which is something that can difficult to do in narrative driven games. Sometimes I have other tasks to do and find myself unable to keep up with my favourite narrative driven adventure the way I want to. (That's part of the reason why I've had trouble picking up Xenoblade Chronicles 2.) Games like these can make for suitable background fodder whilst I do other things.
That sounds like a backhanded compliment, but I'm being genuine about my applause here. The more busy we make ourselves the less time we have to do the things that we love to do, and people like me need to keep busy for the sake of our own mental health. Although to pursue that at the cost of my favourite hobby would feel like losing a part of myself that I'll never recover from. (Maybe that's my childishness speaking, but it tends to speak louder then my dissent so I'll listen.) Having a mindless game to keep my hands busy whilst I 'work' (Or whatever it is that I do when I'm not writing these) helps just enough to keep me happy.
Additionally, the ludicrous amount of pointless collectibles in these game offers another interesting bump to the old endorphins. Everyone loves collecting things. It's the sole reason why the Crackdown series was ever popular. (Those little green orbs might as well be full of crack.) Therefore a game in which you endless pursue a seemingly endless stream of collectibles can be fulfilling to the mind on a base level. (If not an intellectual one.) I can speak from experience in how content I've been in spending hours hunting chests around Egypt in Assassin's Creed Origins. I can go through the process of killing time whilst fooling myself into thinking I'm actually achieving something. (That's a positive, I think.)
There is also one of the big problems of these types of games to consider. Their tendency to be too large. That isn't to say that the map is too large for the player to traverse, most developers have the good sense to stay away from Day-Z size maps, but rather that it is too big to fill with worthwhile and intelligent content. However, there is a hidden benefit in this, for maps of these sizes do wonders for feeding the inner adventurous spirit within some gamers. There are those who love uncovering what lay behind the next hill, even when the answer isn't that interesting, and oversized 'checklist open worlds' can provide to that sensation in spades.
Games like Mad Max and Days Gone shaped themselves around the premise of a 'road trip' with having the character cover great distances in pursuit of their ultimate goal. That can be hard to represent for developers who are concerned with creating a fully immersive and believable world, but when they are merely creating chunks of playspace or a pretty facade, it's easier to ramp up these huge distances and have the player truly experience that elongated journey. Perhaps that's enough to establish some emotional resonance with the plight of the protagonist if handled correctly.
Ultimately, there isn't much to love about 'Checklist open worlds', but that doesn't mean I think the practise is worthless and should be eradicated from the industry. It is an unfortunate fact that some Devs are straddled with making an Open world when they honestly don't have the resources or know how to pull it off, but the 'checklist formula' allows for such games to be formed into something that isn't a total mess. It may not be particularly inspired, but it sure is functional.
No comments:
Post a Comment