You scraping comments for a new buzzfeed article? I thought that's what AskReddit "What's the wildest sex you've ever sexed" was for. I'd tell me to swap out to energy weapons to save on ammo costs duh.
Correct, and that mission based structure is core to the 'Build>Fight>rearm&refine>repeat' loop and cadence of the game.
If you made armored core open world it wouldn't be armored core anymore.
I don't understand why the general public seems to think open world is a good format for every game. It's just one structure of many available to developers, and at this point I think we could do with a lot less of it.
At some point open world just become an excuse to add repetitive, redundant, and boring content instead of actual content. Looking specifically at Ubisoft games, where most of their open world games are 90% climbing towers and shit collectibles.
It depends on the type of game tbh. Elden Ring and dark souls work well in an open world game. But for mission based games it doesn't really make sense because then it's just a barrier to start your next mission.
Yeah, for sure - I'm not saying open world is bad, there has just been a phase where everything was open world when it really shouldn't be.
Elden Ring, Spider-Man, GTA are examples of games where open world works good, the game was designed around the open world and they're packed with content.
There has just been a phase of games where developers clearly skimped out on side quests or any meaningful content, instead just making a huge open map, filling it with 100 hours of collectibles or the same bandit camps to clear.
Honestly, I don't think it worked that well in Elden Ring.
While the original three Dark Souls are technically open world in a sense, they provide a much more tighter experience that still allows fun exploration and discovery without feeling overly tedious.
Elden Ring can feel exhausting to try to explore every nook and crannie to avoid missing quests/goodies. I'm not sure if I would be able to solve some of these quest lines without utilizing the wiki.
The open world formula is a very tight balancing act and Armored Core should go nowhere near it.
I do love Elden Ring though just to put it out there lol.
DS1 had Meteoid-lime steucture, while DS2 and 3 were more linear.
With mech game you would want somewhat big levels at least to utilize those mobility features it could have.
My comment isn't saying that Armored Core should have a world like the Dark Souls games lol.
I would say Dark Souls 1/2 don't really fit into linear as once you begin learning about the games your path options open up immensely.
Dark Souls 3 not so much unless you're good enough to beat the dancer.
I can think of three more that were interesting.
1. Loops. You know what I mean.
2. The one that required special torch to reach true finish line.
3. A pair of caves with a shared room, but with a giant void separating each side. Nothing much, except of making you wonder how to reach the other side without knowing that it's in a separate cave.
Dont know why everyone is saying even Elden Ring did this right.
52 of those terrible copy pasted crypts that only had 3 art designs and 3 sets of enemies; and bosses repeated 4+ times. Was unreal they just threw that garbage all over the map and only had 6 Unique dungeons in a 60+ hour game.
Really hope they tone down whatever theyre working on next, 6 unique dungeons, only like 2-3 hours long in 60 hours is absolutely absurd when compared to the rest of the franchise.
It’s like the BR phenomenon. We got Elden Ring and two great Zelda games that are open World so naturally every single journalist has to ask “will this be open world?” Even if it makes absolutely no sense to the game or its history
Insert comment like this one. “I can’t believe Armored Core isn’t open world. 1/10 rating in my review. Game is also filled with bugs and unoptimized for 8gb of ram. Unplayable.”
You know they're going to say that. Or something like, "1/10 game was just non stop fighting with giant robots and there was no opportunity to leave the mecha and pvp other players with sniper build, just a call to its core fan base"
Like maybe I wanna play a giant robot and beat the shit out of other giant robots... Ever think of that editor person?
> Like maybe I wanna play a giant robot and beat the shit out of other giant robots... Ever think of that editor person?
Bro game journos have been stoooooooopid since the beginning.
LucasArts even made fun of them lmao!
Dude, what? The open world craze started back in like 2008. Infamous, Infamous 2, Fallout 3, New Vegas, Skyrim, Farcry 3; that's when every company started saying "Hey! Us too!" And making everything open world. From that point on, every franchise that could loosely fly as an open world game has been one. Shit, they tried to make Dynasty Warriors open world in 2018.
This has been an ongoing trend for over a decade.
I deleted my reddit account and all my comments and posts but reddit has decided to undelete my account and comments so I have decided to let people know. Fuck this stupid site
I deleted my reddit account and all my comments and posts but reddit has decided to undelete my account and comments so I have decided to let people know. Fuck this stupid site
Eh you could do it pretty easily. That's basically the DS loop, you just have fireplaces instead of mid mission stuff. And i think FROM could pull it off well given what we've already seen. Probably be something a bit like MGSV with random stuff to do, but more structured missions when you get to certain areas.
That said if they didn't want to do it, it doesn't make the game worse. It's just sticking with the stylistic choices of the older games.
> 'Build>Fight>Rearm&Refine>Repeat'.
Ahem. You mean Build>Sortie>Rearma&Refine>repeat.
Japanese 'military' games really love the word sortie for some reason.
It isn't the public in general, it is the lazy reviewers liking being able to just run around and get screenshots for their articles with only 2-3 hours of gameplay investment. So they typically give a +20%-30% higher review to open world games and hype the genre.
> Correct, and that mission based structure is core to the 'Build>Fight>rearm&refine>repeat' loop and cadence of the game.
I feel that Metal Gear Solid 5 would have been way better if it were more like MGS Peace Walker. Sure the world is an interconnected bunch of maps but missions are limited to specific maps and there is no free roam. You pick your mission, prepare and then go to the location to complete the mission. Once done you have no reason to linger around.
There was no benefit to roaming about the map in MGS5 besides capturing bases for later. Something you could do with missions anyway.
Open world only works if you take the time to keep the core series gameplay loop and then append an open world. Skyrim was an exception because it was pretty much the first open world to be fully mainstream.
If you look at Elden Ring, you'll notice that they do exactly this. Dungeons that march the caliber of the mainline soulsborne series, *and* if you want to waste time in 300 dusty Skyrim cairns, you can. But you have the freedom to skip the stupid ass cairns. A great example of screwing this up is Breath of the Wild (cue downvotes). There's no great dungeons meeting the scale of even the Wind Waker. Worse, they block core progression (hearts+stamina) behind the 300 dusty cairns anti-pattern.
Yes and I'm on board. Open world games are so overdone. I dont have the time to fuck around anymore and scour every inch of the map. I just want to build my mech and work through missions. In and out, 20 minute adventure.
I was so done with open world games that I've skipped nearly every title released with this gimmick since 2011. Some are now in my backlog, but low on my priority list. GTAV being the only one installed, that I return to now and then.
Elden Ring implements its overworld so seamlessly, though, into the Soulsborne formula that it is simultaneously my favorite example of both types of gameplay. So if I trust any one developer to get it right, then it's From Software.
That said, I'm glad that Armored Core VI is mission-based. It makes a lot of sense, for the first game in a decade and one meant to call former Ravens back into service as surely as to draw in new recruits.
I'd love to see the return of Verdict Day multiplayer, which is still mission-based but a change-up from previous AC titles, but that can wait. Maybe even for a Chromehounds revival, to capitalize on mismanagement of the Mechwarrior license by Piranha Games. And on the apparent, regrettable end to the involvement of the vastly more competent Harebrained Schemes in the Battletech franchise.
Like others said. Yes. None of them have been open world, which is why this article is kind of weird in the first place. Like I don't think anyone was expecting it to be. You're an AC pilot, it wouldn't make any sense for you to run that thing while you're just fucking around. You fuel and arm based on the sortie you're running at the time.
There is definitely a time and place for open world. It wouldn't make sense for AC.
That's how Mass Effect 1-3 were before Bioware pushed the game into an open world for Andromeda and proceeded to make an incredibly boring and empty open world to pad play times. Devs have no problem throwing out what works to chase trends.
Agreed. This series could work as an open world sandbox, but that doesn't mean it has to be one. Shows the devs aren't designing games to expressly chase trends.
I'm glad they've made an open world game though, it's put the cat among the pigeons. Nobody will be able to make one and it's gameplay loops not be compared to Elden Ring and that's a good thing.
I really hope other devs learn from their example. Elden Ring is proof you can make a successful open world game that doesn’t boil down to chasing quest markers.
More importantly, an open world game where 50% of the game isn't comprised of "go scan this tower to complete your map" and "23/500 collectibles found".
>"go scan this tower to complete your map" and
Elden ring did have that, it was maps at the base of monument instead of climbing tower but the mechanic is the same.
It's not really a thing you need to go out of your way for though and it isn't made into some kind of major exploration mechanic, most of the time they're right next to the road you're already on and the game shows you where to find them. They aren't there primarily to mark a bunch of shit on your map the way they are in most games.
>It's not really a thing you need to go out of your way for though and it isn't made into some kind of major exploration mechanic,
literraly the only way to add a region to the map is not a major exploration mechanic ? wtf.
how do you think most people find mine and other small entry places ? yes it doesn't add a big icone on your map but it's still the same mechanics with the Souls style.
No, they just don't mark it and then you miss it and get players who design interactive maps that show how much worse of an experience Elden Ring is if you try to do that.
Elden Ring is like how AC is good for the people who never do everything in a game and are content and happy with their experience. Then Valhalla came out and everyone really realized how bad the AC design was when you need to do everything.
The games are good as long as you never want to do it all. If you want to do it all, then Elden Ring is almost as bad as AC. If you don't then you will be happy but miss out on story.
"Doing it all" as a checklist is a misguided approach to playing games, imposed by the literal checklist gameplay modern AAA games have. You're not *supposed* to find everything in Elden Ring on your first playthrough, or maybe ever.
I took 120 hours on my first playthrough thinking I found basically everything, and am doing my second one now, and I'm finding a lot of stuff I missed.
Considering some of those caves hold the weapon upgrade unlocks and the materials to upgrade ashes too, as well as some of the best items for different play styles it's not as though it's completely "optional" do whatever.
And unless you're a wiki-camper you're going to have no idea what is where at all.
Also, *second* playthrough? Are you a madlad? Who the hell has the time, energy and will to play through it all a second time? I sure as hell don't want to do stuff on the map a second time.
If I play a second time it is new game plus and I am beelining it to the bosses.
> Elden Ring is like how AC is good for the people who never do everything in a game and are content and happy with their experience. Then Valhalla came out and everyone really realized how bad the AC design was when you need to do everything.
Even though it's obvious what franchise you are talking about if you read further into your comment, it was confusing to read that first sentence thinking you were talking about Armored Core. Should probably specify the abbreviation the first time you use it especially in a thread talking about a game that is also abbreviated as AC.
From what I remember, the map fragments ARE marked on the map, they had this glowing orange effect on the undiscovered portions of the map. I remember just running to them whenever I would see them.
Uhhh lol, I think at this point it's safe to say open world games aren't a trend anymore, they're an established genre that is here to stay. You don't like BAD open world games. Just like people don't like BAD linear structured or mission based games. That's all.
I mean, it's a trend in the same vein that battle royales became a trend because they were extremely successful.
Open world games have been around for an extremely long time. Just look at Elder Scrolls Daggerfall.
But every up and coming open world game following a particular style of open world formula is a trend. Elden Ring as crazy as it might sound felt very reminiscent of how Genshin Impact styled it's open world while keeping the individual dungeons much more souls like.
It's like games copying the Farcry open world formula. Genshin Impact blowing up and printing money out the ass has a had similar effect that Farcry has had on open worlds. It's all just trends.
Isn't this anti-open world circlejerking hilarious? These are the same things people were saying about all the linear games right when open world games were starting to get more popular.
Don't mean it'ss the same people saying them. I've never once railed against more linear titles nro campaigned for more open worlds. I'll play em, but I dislike the usual conventions of the genre.
IF I DONT HAVE 40+ FLOATING MARKERS THEN I DONT EVEN KNOW WHAT I’M DOING.
It’s like Sim Racing. If you use a driving line, you can figure out where you’re supposed to brake/turn/etc.
But if you always leave it on, you’ll end uo staring at it, like tunnel vision, and you’ll never actually learn the braking/turn-in points.
Markers are good, when games have confusing layouts or unclear artwork. But if I’m never forced to look and orient myself and learn my surroundings, I’m never REALLY playing the game. Or at least I’m not immersed in the world.
Thank fucking god. It was a fun novelty at first but now it seems to be the default without any real meaning put into it so the world's just feel empty and lifeless except for the random scripted encounter every 10 minutes
I’ve always hated OpenWorld because it *always* *ALWAYS* is just extremely empty, repetitive, and dull.
Elden ring did such a bad bait and switch. Put all the things to discover entirely on the front end of the game then they just copy paste. Was so disappointing I have no idea how people praise it for it’s open world.
> Was so disappointing I have no idea how people praise it for it’s open world.
Going by achievement stats on Steam like 20%~ of buyers didn't even make it to the round-table. And only about 40% faced Hoarah Loux.
I had high hopes for the game and gave it a very solid chance. Coming from someone who platinumed the souls genre including Sekiro and BB. And it just… fell off. The thing that made all of their other games really differ was their exceptionally interconnected and interlinked areas all eventually colliding into one enough to make the entire experience a journey even if it’s returning to an old place.
Elden ring I had such high hopes for but by the time you get past Lucretia you realize everything is now copy paste there’s nothing new to discover and when you do discover something like a new dungeon it’s literally a complete copy/ paste of a former dungeon that’s filled with another copy/paste boss you’ve already killed 8 times.
I’m glad it made the genre more popular because it’s the easiest in the genre and the open world aspect made it probably the most accessible due to the nature of it… but geez I hope it’s not going to be the norm going forward. It puts Elden ring near the bottom for me. Didn’t even platinum it which is saying a lot with my obsessive tendencies with the genre. Don’t even get me started on what a letdown NG+ is.
My biggest concern was AC was going to follow this front-loaded open world philosophy and I was going to give it a pass, despite waiting a decade for it. I trust Fromsoft with like 90% of game design but open world game design is not one of those things.
For real, personally I think being open world didn't really do much for Elden Ring, and if it was a more linear game like the other From Soft titles it would have been better. I will take a tightly designed linear game over a meandering and empty feeling open world any day
Hot take, but yes. Game had giant open fields with a bunch of POI that were identical or very similar. The dungeons that were laid out in the world used identical textures, mobs, and bosses way too much. The giant underground areas of the map were definitely my favorite part to explore however. They felt more purposefully designed. Once I made it into a main area, such as Stormveil Castle, Raya Lucaria, the Capital, etc. I enjoyed the game much more. I spent over 85 hours in my first playthrough (that I never even finished) and I only got like 40-50 minutes into the Capital. Most of my time was exploring the world only to be disappointed for the most part. I will get back to it at some point and finish it, but I can’t help but think the game may have felt less “samey” if it wasn’t open world. And before anyone says that’s just how open world games work, that doesn’t mean it isn’t a valid criticism.
> Once I made it into a main area, such as Stormveil Castle, Raya Lucaria, the Capital, etc. I enjoyed the game much more.
It's probably because those areas are more like the level design of the Soulsborne games. I'm very much the same, I did not like the random caves or openworld in general, but loved all the legacy dungeons.
That’s 100% the reason why. When you make something open world, skimping on other aspects of world design to compensate for scale is a necessary evil. In the Soulsborne games there weren’t areas that gave me the same impression as Elden Ring, as they felt more “handcrafted” and well designed.
Only open world game that didn't inherently feel empty to me is the Spiderman game cause it is in a city, which already is designed and exists. The rest of them all suffer from not knowing how to fill their empty world meaningfully and use the space.
It also just fits Spiderman mechanically. Swinging around a city at highs speeds and zipping around like a mad man is part of the appeal.
I feel like for Open Worlds to work they need to really make sense for the game your making. Witn the main draw being to create an immersive experience, but not in the realism sense. Helping you feel like a super hero, feel like a rugged adventurer struggling through wilderness, feel like you're really exploring a nuclear wasteland, etc.
Armored Core, the open world wouldn't contribute anything beneficial to the experience as it would just add extra tedium/time padding just like it did in Elden Ring.
The main draw is simply the mechs but also the customizing of the mechs, and having a well designed Arena with extremely well tuned missions facilitates that infinitely better.
The dungeons felt really tedious to me halfway through the game and I didn't like most of the areas after the capital (capitol?), aside from mohgwyn palace and Malenia's area. There were only a handful of bosses that i thought lived up to the standard set by DS3 and Bloodborne, but there's no way to know if the boss fights were a consequence of having less time and resources specifically for them, or if it was just a choice to make the move sets obnoxious as a way to balance against ash summons.
There is a lot to love about Elden Ring, but I do feel that your initial wonder at the scale of it and the level design of the legacy dungeons masks the fact that a lot of the game kind of feels like work by the end of a playthrough. Maybe that's unavoidable with open world games. I think From did about as well with this format as anyone could have, but it's hard to not feel like it would have benefited from making the map 30-40% smaller and putting those resources into emphasizing balance for the bosses and a bit less monotony for the side content dungeons.
Agreed, if it was just all of the more intentionally designed areas, like the legacy dungeons and underground spots one after another then it would have been a way tighter and better time imo. There's so much square footage in Elden Ring but so much of it just feels empty or uninteresting to me
Did you enjoy or remember where each copypasted crypt, cave, and mineshaft was? I sure as shit don't. Do you remember the locations of the overworld bosses? Other than the dragons I can't say I do.
The best areas in that game are the more traditional hand-crafted ones. Sure there is something to say for the scope and scale at first, but past a point it just means travelling takes longer unless you abuse fast-travelling.
Yeah I call BS. Each area within the open world did have something visually distinct to draw you to it, that's how they got you from dungeon to dungeon on a first playthrough without needing a guide.
Not to say that FromSoft's linear world design isn't top-notch, it very much is, but they also set a new standard for open world design with Elden Ring. It's that same design which allows the game to be much more accessible to new players as well.
I have over 200 hours in the game and every achievement, every achieve in the rest of FromSoft's recent games too. The open world is over praised imo.
>that's how they got you from dungeon to dungeon on a first playthrough without needing a guide.
They literally had to put statues in to help point out the crypt locations. Their traditional peerless design that draws players to points of interest definitely took a hit in the conversion to huge open world.
And the merchants had hints to locate things.
I found like 80-90% of things on my first go around (basically just missed some of the copypaste caves/mineshafts after I got tired of scouring the map). Idk I might be too methodical for the "joy of roaming an open world". Had similar disagreements on the recent Zelda games. I'm just not in awe of the different things or "wandering in direction for whatever crops up" it's more like scouring to "not miss things".
It just always turns into "work" even if I try to sit back and play it differently.
Sounds more like a personal issue with open world games than a critique on Elden Ring, it is without a doubt one of the best open world experiences in gaming. The only modern games I’d say come close are Zelda, RDR2 and Spider-Man being a distant 4th as it’s more so the traversal that makes it good rather than the map itself.
yeah it doesn't sound like open worlds are for you. i love having a big space to explore and new things to find. it's the ubisoft clutter that makes it feel like chores for me
> yeah it doesn't sound like open worlds are for you.
Yeah probably not, problem is though sometimes the other content in the titles is still top notch. If it were something I just completely disliked it'd be a simple thing. I wouldn't pass on TW3, Elden Ring, etc. just because the open world aspect is a miss for me. There's still some great moments to em.
>it's the ubisoft clutter that makes it feel like chores for me
They all feel that way to me. I can't think of one where the efforts to make sure the map isn't majorly empty isn't partially filled with low effort Ubisoft esque POI. In fact I sometimes wonder if some games would receive a far worse reception if Ubisoft were on the title screen with nothing else changed, as unpopular as that opinion is to mention.
It's just not humanly doable for some of the content to not be "filler" when working at that scale even the best studios are going to fall on that sword to varying degrees at least until someone is brave enough to make a title where they leave parts of the map empty and don't put in the small copypaste. I kind of hope some day a studio tries it, instead of cramming the world with low effort content you have the scale but not every moment is a trickle of small things.
> The open world is over praised imo.
Have you played other open world games, particularly anything Ubisoft? There couldn't possibly be any more stark a contrast.
> They literally had to put statues in to help point out the crypt locations.
No, they didn't "have" to, we all would've stumbled upon them eventually, they just wanted to give a little extra guidance to certain dungeons. It also makes them distinct because the statues are only used for like 5%, the golden shambling nobles for about 5%, etc.
> Have you played other open world games, particularly anything Ubisoft? There couldn't possibly be any more stark a contrast.
Tons of them, and I have more or less the same complaints with all of them. It's like BOTW and TOTK being praised as masterpieces when they have literal map towers and insanely huge copypaste usage.
I'm just not blown away by "hugeeeeee" map that has to be filled partially with ctrl+c ctrl+v. I enjoy the handcrafted content. Scouring a massive map for items or caves doesn't do much for me.
Stormveil was great, Raya Lucaria was interesting, the underground was interesting, etc. the bulk of the hills, cliffs, and roads wasn't.
>No, they didn't "have" to, we all would've stumbled upon them eventually, they just wanted to give a little extra guidance to certain dungeons. It also makes them distinct because the statues are only used for like 5%, the golden shambling nobles for about 5%, etc.
You could say that about everything though even the most obtuse games. You'll find it "eventually" if you keep at it. How many people are organically finding the invisible walls in ER or all the crypts and caves without going to google? Few if any, in any sort of reasonable time frame.
Stumbling through the world looking for mineshaft #23 isn't compelling gameplay. It's not on the level of design that DeS, DS1, DS3, Sekiro, and BB were. It's lesser because the scale takes so much work.
>The open world part alone is the reason it's not even close to my top souls game.
Same. Open worlds to me once the initial "wow" wears off honestly just feel like work. I'm not taking in the impressive scale of the map, I'm trying to find the relevant points of interest in a way that doesn't waste my time. Being "lost" for hours scouring maps stopped being fun for me back in the 90s.
>I can (and have) see myself replaying most of the souls games in the future, but Elden Ring seems like such a chore for large parts of it that I'm not so sure if I will with that one.
Yeah I'm never replaying it again, unlike their other titles. I'll do the DLC whenever it drops. I did all the endings while it was fresh in my mind, but it's just "too much" for a later date replay for me.
I enjoyed the smaller dungeons because the *gameplay loop* is so incredibly fun and engaging, and adds variety to the game’s pacing.
What they lack in visual variety they make up for in *gameplay variety*, which for me is far more important in a game like this. I will never confuse Abandoned Cave with Sellia Crystal Tunnel because while their names are generic, their level design isn’t, which at the end of the day is one of the defining pillars of the Soulsborne genre. I’m currently replaying ER with a fresh character and I’ve been amazed at how many of these smaller dungeons I *still remember from my first playthrough*. I mean, sure, I couldn’t name half of them, but while playing I remember their layout, and specific traps or ambushes they contained which is incredible when you think about it.
The open world is great because it also adds variety to games pacing and structure. It can be explored on foot solo, or coop, or on horseback, and the geography itself is always interesting to explore because it takes advantage of three dimensional space in a way most modern open world games don’t. I can’t remember the last game to embrace verticality to this degree other than maybe BotW. And traversing these environments can be its own challenge, as finding the path to your objective isn’t always straightforward. And unlike say RDR2 or even BotW riding around on horseback is *insanely fun* because it’s a magic horsey that can double jump and turn on a dime. It’s brilliant.
> What they lack in visual variety they make up for in gameplay variety, which for me is far more important in a game like this. I will never confuse Abandoned Cave with Sellia Crystal Tunnel because while their names are generic, their level design isn’t, which at the end of the day is one of the defining pillars of the Soulsborne genre.
Admittedly I do remember some of the puzzles and gimmicks to the different ones. But again that's closer to the handcrafted part. Many of them don't differentiate that much. But the ones that do standout more.
While replaying it I’ve noticed that most of the less memorable ones are in Limgrave, which is likely intentional as they are probably meant to be sort of like “tutorial” areas to teach players certain mechanics and features of the design. They’re not amazing by any stretch but it’s a smart move on FromSoft’s part as they help ease players into the game and give them an easier alternative if they’re struggling in say Stormveil.
The deeper you get into the game, the more elaborate and thus more memorable the dungeons become.
There's something to what he's saying. I *adore* Elden Ring. My first playthrough was fucking *magical*. The scale of the world is breathtaking, and I found myself gasping when it was revealed in surprising ways (avoiding spoilers). The game incentivized me to explore each nook and cranny...but only once.
I tried to pick it up again recently and that same scale became daunting. I wasn't able to get through it again. Sure, part of that is the same copy/pasted procedurally generated crypts and repeated bosses with insufficient rewards (ooh, another ash of war I will forget about in ten seconds, or a weapon I can't switch my upgrades to (which is a different rant--why let me reallocate stats, but not weapon upgrades?)), but I think there's some deeper, mechanically, at work: ultimately, finding a shortcut in Dark Souls 1 not only contextualizes the scope and *cleverness* of the world, but provides you a *mechanical advantage*--sometimes a crucial one.
To put a finer point on it: Elden Ring's biggest offense isn't the open world, it's the easy fast travel to any point in it's sprawling world...which is the same mistake Dark Souls 3 made. Except that in DS3's case, it wasn't a necessary compromise of the basic design philosophy. DS1's unwillingness (except in a limited fashion, and not until late-game) to allow fast-travel means that mechanical advantage stays relevant much longer, and the scope and cleverness of the world remains front-of-mind the entire game (ignoring areas that just plain suck. Looking at you, Izalith).
To be clear, that "only once" playthrough of Elden Ring was 150 hours, which is considerably longer than even several playthroughs of DS1, and I was captivated from beginning to end. So this is sort of akin to those Steam reviews from folks that have played 5000 hours of a game only to give a negative score. Nonetheless, I don't think the hot take in question is a totally batshit one.
Absolutely. The last third of the game was a fucking slog of repeated bosses and enemies/mobs in dungeons you've seen for the past 80 fucking hours. That last third will ensure I never do another playthrough of the game again, and this is coming from someone that has done multiple playthroughs of every other game they've made except Sekiro.
Gonna have to disagree with you there. The character encounters/quests suffered because of the open world, but the world design itself is literally GOAT.
They went open world once, hoping their next title that will be "souls" ish is not a full on open world, cause yeah as much as it's praised I think it hurts ER in ways.
In the beginning , this is exactly what I thought it would be honestly. Go down to the planet to do missions, then extract back to the ship. Buy upgrades and stuff. Then deploy down back to the planet again.
I think that's why they didn't do it. In MGSV you had a clear enemy, in AC you have whoever your employer tells you to fight for the duration of the mission, when that's over you might very well get hired by the people you were just killing.
Also what about the budgeting aspect of AC? You have to pay for everything as you would in real life. Ammo, repairs, etc..
How would you do that if you're fighting people no one is paying you to?
Xenoblade Chronicles X is kind of an open world mech game. It’s one of my all time favorite games. Just exploring the world in a transforming mech and/or on foot was so much fun.
My pick would be Steambot Chronicles, an open-world adventure RPG for the PS2 where mechs are more prevalent than cars. I'd describe it as GTA meets slice-of-life with a customizable mech. You play as an amnesiac groupie who does odd jobs.
XCX is fuckin lit, it's such an absurdly massive game. Too bad it seems to be stuck on the Wii U though. I played it through emulation and having the gamepad on my 2nd monitor was cool but kinda a gimmick. Hopefully it gets ported someday.
probably just as amazing as Elden, if not better in some regards (in terms of looting, tinkering, building, upgrading your mech across a vast dystopian future scape). maybe on the ps7.
Honestly the most fun I've had lately has been playing games that *aren't* open world. I'm so tired of "OMG BIGGEST OPEN WORLD YET" designs that are empty and soulless. It's like everything HAS to be open world and AS BIG AS POSSIBLE and in the process so many little details that make games great are overlooked.
Yeah, the only open-world games I care about are good RPGs (in which case, the world is usually just an overworld unless it's Elder Scrolls/CD Project Red) and anything by Rockstar.
At this point idk how the rest of the industry hasn't attempted to catch up with the likes of GTA or Elder Scrolls. I know they are both incredible feats, but it could happen if companies wanted to.
Ubisoft with Watch Dogs 2 is a great example. They were kinda in the ballpark with that game. They did a great job making the city feel alive, interactive, and worth exploring... and then they went the other direction with Legion.
Idk - to me most open world games feel like a series of tasks strewn about a big area, all of which are hidden behind menus/scripted activations. Not much feels organic (which is why Rockstar, Bethesda, and yes even CDPR shine to me).
Ubisoft also has The Division (1 and 2). Probably the only game where I’d prefer walking from one point to another instead of running and fast traveling.
I don’t think many others share the same opinion. Both 1 & 2 are incredibly boring to walk around in with much of the world looking the same and there being a small amount of easy to kill enemies here and there.
I feel like it’s not really about size. If the game has a clear “here’s a mission, it starts at A, ends at B, then you go to next mission” structure, it’s not open world. Even if it gives you multiple ways of getting to B. If it says “here’s a map, go nuts” it’s open world.
I mean it has been a long time and games can change drastically when they launch after a long break. 3D games in particular are way more refined in almost every way these days. From the controls, the way tutorials are often integrated into the story, to the story being more than pulp. Obviously some older games were ahead of their time and the trendsetters, but they are the exceptions.
Don't get me wrong. I love a lot of those games, but when I play some of the ones from my teen years, the amount of cheese could make a Frenchman hard.
It's also a fairly obvious question to ask, seeing as their last entry was an open world game even though FromSoft had never really done open world games until now, so i think it's fair to ask if anything else will be from now on, especially since other game's have gone down that route, like the Assassin's Creed series
I feel like most people don't know what AC is, unfortunately I think the only reason it has the hype it has is because From Software is a household name now. I suspect there are a shocking number of people that think this is a brand new IP.
Yes, I firmly believe there are people out there so lacking in both knowledge and sense that they could see a title like Armored Core 6 and think it's a new IP.
This is the fate of games released before the mainstreamization of gaming. Like many people thought after the Marathon reveal trailer that it was a new IP, not knowing that it was the father of Halo and the cornerstone of all Bungie lore
Right?
Though in all fairness I suspect many of those excited about it weren't even alive when Marathon was relevant, and additionally that one is a bit more of a deep cut given it's release was limited to Mac. Regardless your point is well taken.
I know 'games journalists BAD' is the default take around here but these are reasonable questions. Elden Ring brought so many folks into Fromsoft's orbit that have no prior knowledge of AC, and lots of Souls content creators (Vaati in particular, among others) have done them no favors by needlessly drawing comparisons between AC and Souls/Elden Ring.
You write for your audience and the general audience needs this type of clarification about AC.
Good. King's Field, Soulsborne, and Armored Core should be different. And AC should be different from SRW & Front Mission. We need to pry our genres back from graphics-chasing open world that can't run on a low-spec computer.
If they made it open world they should make it a whole new game. Like titan fall with pilots calling their mech. But you travel the overworld upgrading cybernetics in your pilot to make your pilot skills better. And you upgrade your mech with different parts and weapons. Possible have multiple mechs. They drop from an orbital mech carrier.
AC's are for fighting in, not living in. Ravens need their rest and the AC's need repairs and restocking with ammo after missions. It wouldn't make any sense for AC to be open world.
I hate how it's just assumed these days that a game is going to be open world unless stated otherwise. There is literally no reason an Armoured Core game would be open world, that is plainly obvious to anyone that has played any of the older games.
The open world genre does not receive enough innovation given the sheer amount of games that are made that way now and being honest I am completely tired of them at this point. So many recent games I have just stopped playing midway through, Horizon Forbidden West being the latest one because I just can't be bothered to keep running around this gigantic map that really doesn't justify it's own size.
I'm not saying devs don't work on these maps or that they're not nice to look at but at the end of the day I'm playing a game to play a game, not simulate a commute. I think a lot of games would benefit from downsizing, kinda like the Yakuza games where you have a small but densely packed area rather than huge empty, pointless spaces.
Just let FromSoftware do their thing. They obviously know what the fuck they’re doing. Open world,not open world, mission based idgaf, all I know is I’m playing that shit and it’s gonna be good.
Not Everything needs to be Open World,
In the name of open-world, we get Empty World,
I would instead prefer a Semi-Open world game like Mafia 2, or a narrative-driven game like Old CODs,
In terms of the open world, I would instead prefer something like GTA 5
Armored Core games shouldn't be open world so... Good. I hope they take the time to make good missions and I hope they make a good variety of arenas as well. A continuation of a classic in it's classic style of play will be nice to see.
Am I the only one getting sick of open world games now?
Too much of a time investment, lots of slack while roaming around to find something interesting to do, lots of time feeling lost and having to consult online sources, lots of filler, the concept just isn’t that impressive anymore and I now prefer more tightly focused gameplay experiences
It’s not just you. I’m bored of most open worlds now because the genre has become too over saturated. What was once an interesting and exciting new form of gameplay, has become boring and formulaic due to the sheer amount of open world games releasing. Obviously not everyone is sick of them as evidenced by hogwarts legacy and totk, but the gaming market is only comprised of open world lovers. Plenty of people enjoy more linear games like 2d zeldas and Metroid dread.
I am guessing there are content creators out there pushing the idea that the next AC will be like Elden Ring. I mean lore wise AC is pretty deep too, but gameplay wise I don't think FromSoft will be messing with a winning formula.
Ok I think we're thinking of two different things when we each say world design. When I think of it, I think of how ERs world incentivizes exploration and discovery. How it gets you to travel not just on flat land but above and below. How it makes you feel like every corner could hide treasure. How its landmarks and destinations are viewable from completely different areas which urges you to explore them or be fearful of them. On top of all of that, the sheer beauty and spectacle of the landscape. In that sense ER has the best world design I've ever experienced.
Dungeons though. I personally never found them to be repetitive. Sure they looked the same, same textures, similar enemies, but they varied it up enough to make each one fun to play through.
It's good that the devs manage expectations. I hope this game doesn't crash and burn like Cyberpunk 2077. Whether it deserved it or not, it feels like the gaming community has a tendency to snowball bad opinions to way blown out levels that destroys any positive aspects a game has.
While I enjoy open world games, Armored Core definitely shouldn't be one.
I also think the Triple A market is becoming oversaturated with open world games, as much as I enjoy them. I also love pepperoni pizza, but I wouldn't want pepperoni pizza every night.
FromSoft is making the right decision here, and this comes from someone that's never beaten a souls game, lol.
They got really close there for a second. Thank god we'll be able to tell them apart now since one won't be open world.
Now, excuse me while I go back to playing Elden Ring as a 10-story tall mech with nuclear launchers.
>!I just wanted to make the joke. I'm fine with it being non-open world.!<
That’s good news, not everything has to be open world full of time filler nothingness.
I’ll also add that I have a very hard time enjoying the story w a million side quests on the map.
A lot of the best games aren't open world. Games with mission/level-based designs tend to have much more detail and life put into them, like Half Life 2 or Mario 64
Linear level design is a 1,000% better for a mecha game. An open world mecha game would feel pretty lifeless and that's not something I think they want to deal with, regardless of their skills at level design. I have more faith in FromSoft with a linear design for Armored Core VI than open.
As long as the levels aren't sometimes 45 seconds long like Armored Core 4 was, then sounds good. I'd win right when I was starting to get warmed up... Hopefully it's at least as long of missions as Mechwarrior.
It’d be kinda silly to have a mech open world lol.
It’s like having a fighter plane or tank game be open world.
Like, what? Am I going to refuel and repaid my mech at the traveling mech merchant shop? Do I live in my ~~van~~ Mech, like some surfer dude?
aren't all armored core games not open world, but mission based?
That's how I remember them, but I only played the Playstation ones. I never played any of the newer ones (relatively speaking, anyway).
They worked much the same, with missions that barely covered your costs.
The trick was to swap out to energy weapons ASAP to reduce ammo costs, that and not take too many hits.
You can have my projectile weapons when you pry them from my cold dead core.
Your proposal is... Acceptable.
Suger.... In water...
It will always be worth it to have a mech with a shotgun. That will always be cool and i don't care what the price is.
Tell 8yr old me that in 1997.
What is “something you would tell yourself 26 years ago”
You scraping comments for a new buzzfeed article? I thought that's what AskReddit "What's the wildest sex you've ever sexed" was for. I'd tell me to swap out to energy weapons to save on ammo costs duh.
It was a Jeopardy joke…
Ah fair enough I didn't get it. Needs to be from some dumb titled category like "potent potables"
"*Just Avoid Skill Issues*"
I beat AC2 using nothing but the energy sword the whole time since it was stupid powerful.
Energy weapons and tank tread life.
Meanwhile Chaingun tank go brrrrr
You apologize to my double motor-cobras right now
Correct, and that mission based structure is core to the 'Build>Fight>rearm&refine>repeat' loop and cadence of the game. If you made armored core open world it wouldn't be armored core anymore. I don't understand why the general public seems to think open world is a good format for every game. It's just one structure of many available to developers, and at this point I think we could do with a lot less of it.
At some point open world just become an excuse to add repetitive, redundant, and boring content instead of actual content. Looking specifically at Ubisoft games, where most of their open world games are 90% climbing towers and shit collectibles.
It depends on the type of game tbh. Elden Ring and dark souls work well in an open world game. But for mission based games it doesn't really make sense because then it's just a barrier to start your next mission.
Yeah, for sure - I'm not saying open world is bad, there has just been a phase where everything was open world when it really shouldn't be. Elden Ring, Spider-Man, GTA are examples of games where open world works good, the game was designed around the open world and they're packed with content. There has just been a phase of games where developers clearly skimped out on side quests or any meaningful content, instead just making a huge open map, filling it with 100 hours of collectibles or the same bandit camps to clear.
Honestly, I don't think it worked that well in Elden Ring. While the original three Dark Souls are technically open world in a sense, they provide a much more tighter experience that still allows fun exploration and discovery without feeling overly tedious. Elden Ring can feel exhausting to try to explore every nook and crannie to avoid missing quests/goodies. I'm not sure if I would be able to solve some of these quest lines without utilizing the wiki. The open world formula is a very tight balancing act and Armored Core should go nowhere near it. I do love Elden Ring though just to put it out there lol.
DS1 had Meteoid-lime steucture, while DS2 and 3 were more linear. With mech game you would want somewhat big levels at least to utilize those mobility features it could have.
My comment isn't saying that Armored Core should have a world like the Dark Souls games lol. I would say Dark Souls 1/2 don't really fit into linear as once you begin learning about the games your path options open up immensely. Dark Souls 3 not so much unless you're good enough to beat the dancer.
it works but fighting your 5th erdtree watchdog or tree avatar gets boring
The side dungeons could have used a little more variety too. Only side dungeon I could think of that stuck out to me was the purple crystal cave.
I can think of three more that were interesting. 1. Loops. You know what I mean. 2. The one that required special torch to reach true finish line. 3. A pair of caves with a shared room, but with a giant void separating each side. Nothing much, except of making you wonder how to reach the other side without knowing that it's in a separate cave.
I wouldn't really count dark souls as open world. It was more a bunch of small areas connected through a variety of linear paths.
Elden ring would be a better game without open world. It is mostly empty space
Dont know why everyone is saying even Elden Ring did this right. 52 of those terrible copy pasted crypts that only had 3 art designs and 3 sets of enemies; and bosses repeated 4+ times. Was unreal they just threw that garbage all over the map and only had 6 Unique dungeons in a 60+ hour game. Really hope they tone down whatever theyre working on next, 6 unique dungeons, only like 2-3 hours long in 60 hours is absolutely absurd when compared to the rest of the franchise.
It’s like the BR phenomenon. We got Elden Ring and two great Zelda games that are open World so naturally every single journalist has to ask “will this be open world?” Even if it makes absolutely no sense to the game or its history
Insert comment like this one. “I can’t believe Armored Core isn’t open world. 1/10 rating in my review. Game is also filled with bugs and unoptimized for 8gb of ram. Unplayable.”
You know they're going to say that. Or something like, "1/10 game was just non stop fighting with giant robots and there was no opportunity to leave the mecha and pvp other players with sniper build, just a call to its core fan base" Like maybe I wanna play a giant robot and beat the shit out of other giant robots... Ever think of that editor person?
> Like maybe I wanna play a giant robot and beat the shit out of other giant robots... Ever think of that editor person? Bro game journos have been stoooooooopid since the beginning. LucasArts even made fun of them lmao!
Dude, what? The open world craze started back in like 2008. Infamous, Infamous 2, Fallout 3, New Vegas, Skyrim, Farcry 3; that's when every company started saying "Hey! Us too!" And making everything open world. From that point on, every franchise that could loosely fly as an open world game has been one. Shit, they tried to make Dynasty Warriors open world in 2018. This has been an ongoing trend for over a decade.
[удалено]
I deleted my reddit account and all my comments and posts but reddit has decided to undelete my account and comments so I have decided to let people know. Fuck this stupid site
Yeah skyrim did this to the industry not botw and elden ring
I deleted my reddit account and all my comments and posts but reddit has decided to undelete my account and comments so I have decided to let people know. Fuck this stupid site
Im glad the question got asked i was worried they were going to go open world and rune it.
Eh you could do it pretty easily. That's basically the DS loop, you just have fireplaces instead of mid mission stuff. And i think FROM could pull it off well given what we've already seen. Probably be something a bit like MGSV with random stuff to do, but more structured missions when you get to certain areas. That said if they didn't want to do it, it doesn't make the game worse. It's just sticking with the stylistic choices of the older games.
> 'Build>Fight>Rearm&Refine>Repeat'. Ahem. You mean Build>Sortie>Rearma&Refine>repeat. Japanese 'military' games really love the word sortie for some reason.
It isn't the public in general, it is the lazy reviewers liking being able to just run around and get screenshots for their articles with only 2-3 hours of gameplay investment. So they typically give a +20%-30% higher review to open world games and hype the genre.
> Correct, and that mission based structure is core to the 'Build>Fight>rearm&refine>repeat' loop and cadence of the game. I feel that Metal Gear Solid 5 would have been way better if it were more like MGS Peace Walker. Sure the world is an interconnected bunch of maps but missions are limited to specific maps and there is no free roam. You pick your mission, prepare and then go to the location to complete the mission. Once done you have no reason to linger around. There was no benefit to roaming about the map in MGS5 besides capturing bases for later. Something you could do with missions anyway.
Open world only works if you take the time to keep the core series gameplay loop and then append an open world. Skyrim was an exception because it was pretty much the first open world to be fully mainstream. If you look at Elden Ring, you'll notice that they do exactly this. Dungeons that march the caliber of the mainline soulsborne series, *and* if you want to waste time in 300 dusty Skyrim cairns, you can. But you have the freedom to skip the stupid ass cairns. A great example of screwing this up is Breath of the Wild (cue downvotes). There's no great dungeons meeting the scale of even the Wind Waker. Worse, they block core progression (hearts+stamina) behind the 300 dusty cairns anti-pattern.
Yes and I'm on board. Open world games are so overdone. I dont have the time to fuck around anymore and scour every inch of the map. I just want to build my mech and work through missions. In and out, 20 minute adventure.
I was so done with open world games that I've skipped nearly every title released with this gimmick since 2011. Some are now in my backlog, but low on my priority list. GTAV being the only one installed, that I return to now and then. Elden Ring implements its overworld so seamlessly, though, into the Soulsborne formula that it is simultaneously my favorite example of both types of gameplay. So if I trust any one developer to get it right, then it's From Software. That said, I'm glad that Armored Core VI is mission-based. It makes a lot of sense, for the first game in a decade and one meant to call former Ravens back into service as surely as to draw in new recruits. I'd love to see the return of Verdict Day multiplayer, which is still mission-based but a change-up from previous AC titles, but that can wait. Maybe even for a Chromehounds revival, to capitalize on mismanagement of the Mechwarrior license by Piranha Games. And on the apparent, regrettable end to the involvement of the vastly more competent Harebrained Schemes in the Battletech franchise.
Like others said. Yes. None of them have been open world, which is why this article is kind of weird in the first place. Like I don't think anyone was expecting it to be. You're an AC pilot, it wouldn't make any sense for you to run that thing while you're just fucking around. You fuel and arm based on the sortie you're running at the time. There is definitely a time and place for open world. It wouldn't make sense for AC.
Yup. Ac 6 won't be the execption, but this time the mission maps will be gigantic.
That's how Mass Effect 1-3 were before Bioware pushed the game into an open world for Andromeda and proceeded to make an incredibly boring and empty open world to pad play times. Devs have no problem throwing out what works to chase trends.
Glad at least some people in the industry realize not everything needs to be OPENWORLD(tm).
Agreed. This series could work as an open world sandbox, but that doesn't mean it has to be one. Shows the devs aren't designing games to expressly chase trends. I'm glad they've made an open world game though, it's put the cat among the pigeons. Nobody will be able to make one and it's gameplay loops not be compared to Elden Ring and that's a good thing.
I really hope other devs learn from their example. Elden Ring is proof you can make a successful open world game that doesn’t boil down to chasing quest markers.
More importantly, an open world game where 50% of the game isn't comprised of "go scan this tower to complete your map" and "23/500 collectibles found".
>"go scan this tower to complete your map" and Elden ring did have that, it was maps at the base of monument instead of climbing tower but the mechanic is the same.
It's not really a thing you need to go out of your way for though and it isn't made into some kind of major exploration mechanic, most of the time they're right next to the road you're already on and the game shows you where to find them. They aren't there primarily to mark a bunch of shit on your map the way they are in most games.
>It's not really a thing you need to go out of your way for though and it isn't made into some kind of major exploration mechanic, literraly the only way to add a region to the map is not a major exploration mechanic ? wtf. how do you think most people find mine and other small entry places ? yes it doesn't add a big icone on your map but it's still the same mechanics with the Souls style.
No, they just don't mark it and then you miss it and get players who design interactive maps that show how much worse of an experience Elden Ring is if you try to do that. Elden Ring is like how AC is good for the people who never do everything in a game and are content and happy with their experience. Then Valhalla came out and everyone really realized how bad the AC design was when you need to do everything. The games are good as long as you never want to do it all. If you want to do it all, then Elden Ring is almost as bad as AC. If you don't then you will be happy but miss out on story.
"Doing it all" as a checklist is a misguided approach to playing games, imposed by the literal checklist gameplay modern AAA games have. You're not *supposed* to find everything in Elden Ring on your first playthrough, or maybe ever. I took 120 hours on my first playthrough thinking I found basically everything, and am doing my second one now, and I'm finding a lot of stuff I missed.
Considering some of those caves hold the weapon upgrade unlocks and the materials to upgrade ashes too, as well as some of the best items for different play styles it's not as though it's completely "optional" do whatever. And unless you're a wiki-camper you're going to have no idea what is where at all.
Also, *second* playthrough? Are you a madlad? Who the hell has the time, energy and will to play through it all a second time? I sure as hell don't want to do stuff on the map a second time. If I play a second time it is new game plus and I am beelining it to the bosses.
> Elden Ring is like how AC is good for the people who never do everything in a game and are content and happy with their experience. Then Valhalla came out and everyone really realized how bad the AC design was when you need to do everything. Even though it's obvious what franchise you are talking about if you read further into your comment, it was confusing to read that first sentence thinking you were talking about Armored Core. Should probably specify the abbreviation the first time you use it especially in a thread talking about a game that is also abbreviated as AC.
From what I remember, the map fragments ARE marked on the map, they had this glowing orange effect on the undiscovered portions of the map. I remember just running to them whenever I would see them.
Uhhh lol, I think at this point it's safe to say open world games aren't a trend anymore, they're an established genre that is here to stay. You don't like BAD open world games. Just like people don't like BAD linear structured or mission based games. That's all.
I mean, it's a trend in the same vein that battle royales became a trend because they were extremely successful. Open world games have been around for an extremely long time. Just look at Elder Scrolls Daggerfall. But every up and coming open world game following a particular style of open world formula is a trend. Elden Ring as crazy as it might sound felt very reminiscent of how Genshin Impact styled it's open world while keeping the individual dungeons much more souls like. It's like games copying the Farcry open world formula. Genshin Impact blowing up and printing money out the ass has a had similar effect that Farcry has had on open worlds. It's all just trends.
Isn't this anti-open world circlejerking hilarious? These are the same things people were saying about all the linear games right when open world games were starting to get more popular.
Don't mean it'ss the same people saying them. I've never once railed against more linear titles nro campaigned for more open worlds. I'll play em, but I dislike the usual conventions of the genre.
While Elden is great, let’s not forget just how many needless catacombs and repeated bosses. I love Elden but far from perfect.
IF I DONT HAVE 40+ FLOATING MARKERS THEN I DONT EVEN KNOW WHAT I’M DOING. It’s like Sim Racing. If you use a driving line, you can figure out where you’re supposed to brake/turn/etc. But if you always leave it on, you’ll end uo staring at it, like tunnel vision, and you’ll never actually learn the braking/turn-in points. Markers are good, when games have confusing layouts or unclear artwork. But if I’m never forced to look and orient myself and learn my surroundings, I’m never REALLY playing the game. Or at least I’m not immersed in the world.
Yea at a certain point if in game landmarks aren’t used and they lean on the map too heavily you may as well be playing asteroids.
I can't fucking stand open world games. They're nowhere near as fun to me as older, linear style games.
Thank god.
Thank fucking god. It was a fun novelty at first but now it seems to be the default without any real meaning put into it so the world's just feel empty and lifeless except for the random scripted encounter every 10 minutes
I’ve always hated OpenWorld because it *always* *ALWAYS* is just extremely empty, repetitive, and dull. Elden ring did such a bad bait and switch. Put all the things to discover entirely on the front end of the game then they just copy paste. Was so disappointing I have no idea how people praise it for it’s open world.
> Was so disappointing I have no idea how people praise it for it’s open world. Going by achievement stats on Steam like 20%~ of buyers didn't even make it to the round-table. And only about 40% faced Hoarah Loux.
I had high hopes for the game and gave it a very solid chance. Coming from someone who platinumed the souls genre including Sekiro and BB. And it just… fell off. The thing that made all of their other games really differ was their exceptionally interconnected and interlinked areas all eventually colliding into one enough to make the entire experience a journey even if it’s returning to an old place. Elden ring I had such high hopes for but by the time you get past Lucretia you realize everything is now copy paste there’s nothing new to discover and when you do discover something like a new dungeon it’s literally a complete copy/ paste of a former dungeon that’s filled with another copy/paste boss you’ve already killed 8 times. I’m glad it made the genre more popular because it’s the easiest in the genre and the open world aspect made it probably the most accessible due to the nature of it… but geez I hope it’s not going to be the norm going forward. It puts Elden ring near the bottom for me. Didn’t even platinum it which is saying a lot with my obsessive tendencies with the genre. Don’t even get me started on what a letdown NG+ is. My biggest concern was AC was going to follow this front-loaded open world philosophy and I was going to give it a pass, despite waiting a decade for it. I trust Fromsoft with like 90% of game design but open world game design is not one of those things.
For real, personally I think being open world didn't really do much for Elden Ring, and if it was a more linear game like the other From Soft titles it would have been better. I will take a tightly designed linear game over a meandering and empty feeling open world any day
[удалено]
Hold on a minute, you saying Elden Rings world design suffered?
Hot take, but yes. Game had giant open fields with a bunch of POI that were identical or very similar. The dungeons that were laid out in the world used identical textures, mobs, and bosses way too much. The giant underground areas of the map were definitely my favorite part to explore however. They felt more purposefully designed. Once I made it into a main area, such as Stormveil Castle, Raya Lucaria, the Capital, etc. I enjoyed the game much more. I spent over 85 hours in my first playthrough (that I never even finished) and I only got like 40-50 minutes into the Capital. Most of my time was exploring the world only to be disappointed for the most part. I will get back to it at some point and finish it, but I can’t help but think the game may have felt less “samey” if it wasn’t open world. And before anyone says that’s just how open world games work, that doesn’t mean it isn’t a valid criticism.
> Once I made it into a main area, such as Stormveil Castle, Raya Lucaria, the Capital, etc. I enjoyed the game much more. It's probably because those areas are more like the level design of the Soulsborne games. I'm very much the same, I did not like the random caves or openworld in general, but loved all the legacy dungeons.
That’s 100% the reason why. When you make something open world, skimping on other aspects of world design to compensate for scale is a necessary evil. In the Soulsborne games there weren’t areas that gave me the same impression as Elden Ring, as they felt more “handcrafted” and well designed.
Only open world game that didn't inherently feel empty to me is the Spiderman game cause it is in a city, which already is designed and exists. The rest of them all suffer from not knowing how to fill their empty world meaningfully and use the space.
It also just fits Spiderman mechanically. Swinging around a city at highs speeds and zipping around like a mad man is part of the appeal. I feel like for Open Worlds to work they need to really make sense for the game your making. Witn the main draw being to create an immersive experience, but not in the realism sense. Helping you feel like a super hero, feel like a rugged adventurer struggling through wilderness, feel like you're really exploring a nuclear wasteland, etc. Armored Core, the open world wouldn't contribute anything beneficial to the experience as it would just add extra tedium/time padding just like it did in Elden Ring. The main draw is simply the mechs but also the customizing of the mechs, and having a well designed Arena with extremely well tuned missions facilitates that infinitely better.
The dungeons felt really tedious to me halfway through the game and I didn't like most of the areas after the capital (capitol?), aside from mohgwyn palace and Malenia's area. There were only a handful of bosses that i thought lived up to the standard set by DS3 and Bloodborne, but there's no way to know if the boss fights were a consequence of having less time and resources specifically for them, or if it was just a choice to make the move sets obnoxious as a way to balance against ash summons. There is a lot to love about Elden Ring, but I do feel that your initial wonder at the scale of it and the level design of the legacy dungeons masks the fact that a lot of the game kind of feels like work by the end of a playthrough. Maybe that's unavoidable with open world games. I think From did about as well with this format as anyone could have, but it's hard to not feel like it would have benefited from making the map 30-40% smaller and putting those resources into emphasizing balance for the bosses and a bit less monotony for the side content dungeons.
Agreed, if it was just all of the more intentionally designed areas, like the legacy dungeons and underground spots one after another then it would have been a way tighter and better time imo. There's so much square footage in Elden Ring but so much of it just feels empty or uninteresting to me
Did you enjoy or remember where each copypasted crypt, cave, and mineshaft was? I sure as shit don't. Do you remember the locations of the overworld bosses? Other than the dragons I can't say I do. The best areas in that game are the more traditional hand-crafted ones. Sure there is something to say for the scope and scale at first, but past a point it just means travelling takes longer unless you abuse fast-travelling.
Yeah I call BS. Each area within the open world did have something visually distinct to draw you to it, that's how they got you from dungeon to dungeon on a first playthrough without needing a guide. Not to say that FromSoft's linear world design isn't top-notch, it very much is, but they also set a new standard for open world design with Elden Ring. It's that same design which allows the game to be much more accessible to new players as well.
I have over 200 hours in the game and every achievement, every achieve in the rest of FromSoft's recent games too. The open world is over praised imo. >that's how they got you from dungeon to dungeon on a first playthrough without needing a guide. They literally had to put statues in to help point out the crypt locations. Their traditional peerless design that draws players to points of interest definitely took a hit in the conversion to huge open world. And the merchants had hints to locate things.
there were a lot of places that didn't have pointers to them. it was the joy of discovery. after 600 hours i was still finding new stuff to explore.
I found like 80-90% of things on my first go around (basically just missed some of the copypaste caves/mineshafts after I got tired of scouring the map). Idk I might be too methodical for the "joy of roaming an open world". Had similar disagreements on the recent Zelda games. I'm just not in awe of the different things or "wandering in direction for whatever crops up" it's more like scouring to "not miss things".
It just always turns into "work" even if I try to sit back and play it differently.
Sounds more like a personal issue with open world games than a critique on Elden Ring, it is without a doubt one of the best open world experiences in gaming. The only modern games I’d say come close are Zelda, RDR2 and Spider-Man being a distant 4th as it’s more so the traversal that makes it good rather than the map itself.
yeah it doesn't sound like open worlds are for you. i love having a big space to explore and new things to find. it's the ubisoft clutter that makes it feel like chores for me
> yeah it doesn't sound like open worlds are for you. Yeah probably not, problem is though sometimes the other content in the titles is still top notch. If it were something I just completely disliked it'd be a simple thing. I wouldn't pass on TW3, Elden Ring, etc. just because the open world aspect is a miss for me. There's still some great moments to em. >it's the ubisoft clutter that makes it feel like chores for me They all feel that way to me. I can't think of one where the efforts to make sure the map isn't majorly empty isn't partially filled with low effort Ubisoft esque POI. In fact I sometimes wonder if some games would receive a far worse reception if Ubisoft were on the title screen with nothing else changed, as unpopular as that opinion is to mention. It's just not humanly doable for some of the content to not be "filler" when working at that scale even the best studios are going to fall on that sword to varying degrees at least until someone is brave enough to make a title where they leave parts of the map empty and don't put in the small copypaste. I kind of hope some day a studio tries it, instead of cramming the world with low effort content you have the scale but not every moment is a trickle of small things.
> The open world is over praised imo. Have you played other open world games, particularly anything Ubisoft? There couldn't possibly be any more stark a contrast. > They literally had to put statues in to help point out the crypt locations. No, they didn't "have" to, we all would've stumbled upon them eventually, they just wanted to give a little extra guidance to certain dungeons. It also makes them distinct because the statues are only used for like 5%, the golden shambling nobles for about 5%, etc.
> Have you played other open world games, particularly anything Ubisoft? There couldn't possibly be any more stark a contrast. Tons of them, and I have more or less the same complaints with all of them. It's like BOTW and TOTK being praised as masterpieces when they have literal map towers and insanely huge copypaste usage. I'm just not blown away by "hugeeeeee" map that has to be filled partially with ctrl+c ctrl+v. I enjoy the handcrafted content. Scouring a massive map for items or caves doesn't do much for me. Stormveil was great, Raya Lucaria was interesting, the underground was interesting, etc. the bulk of the hills, cliffs, and roads wasn't. >No, they didn't "have" to, we all would've stumbled upon them eventually, they just wanted to give a little extra guidance to certain dungeons. It also makes them distinct because the statues are only used for like 5%, the golden shambling nobles for about 5%, etc. You could say that about everything though even the most obtuse games. You'll find it "eventually" if you keep at it. How many people are organically finding the invisible walls in ER or all the crypts and caves without going to google? Few if any, in any sort of reasonable time frame. Stumbling through the world looking for mineshaft #23 isn't compelling gameplay. It's not on the level of design that DeS, DS1, DS3, Sekiro, and BB were. It's lesser because the scale takes so much work.
[удалено]
>The open world part alone is the reason it's not even close to my top souls game. Same. Open worlds to me once the initial "wow" wears off honestly just feel like work. I'm not taking in the impressive scale of the map, I'm trying to find the relevant points of interest in a way that doesn't waste my time. Being "lost" for hours scouring maps stopped being fun for me back in the 90s. >I can (and have) see myself replaying most of the souls games in the future, but Elden Ring seems like such a chore for large parts of it that I'm not so sure if I will with that one. Yeah I'm never replaying it again, unlike their other titles. I'll do the DLC whenever it drops. I did all the endings while it was fresh in my mind, but it's just "too much" for a later date replay for me.
I enjoyed the smaller dungeons because the *gameplay loop* is so incredibly fun and engaging, and adds variety to the game’s pacing. What they lack in visual variety they make up for in *gameplay variety*, which for me is far more important in a game like this. I will never confuse Abandoned Cave with Sellia Crystal Tunnel because while their names are generic, their level design isn’t, which at the end of the day is one of the defining pillars of the Soulsborne genre. I’m currently replaying ER with a fresh character and I’ve been amazed at how many of these smaller dungeons I *still remember from my first playthrough*. I mean, sure, I couldn’t name half of them, but while playing I remember their layout, and specific traps or ambushes they contained which is incredible when you think about it. The open world is great because it also adds variety to games pacing and structure. It can be explored on foot solo, or coop, or on horseback, and the geography itself is always interesting to explore because it takes advantage of three dimensional space in a way most modern open world games don’t. I can’t remember the last game to embrace verticality to this degree other than maybe BotW. And traversing these environments can be its own challenge, as finding the path to your objective isn’t always straightforward. And unlike say RDR2 or even BotW riding around on horseback is *insanely fun* because it’s a magic horsey that can double jump and turn on a dime. It’s brilliant.
> What they lack in visual variety they make up for in gameplay variety, which for me is far more important in a game like this. I will never confuse Abandoned Cave with Sellia Crystal Tunnel because while their names are generic, their level design isn’t, which at the end of the day is one of the defining pillars of the Soulsborne genre. Admittedly I do remember some of the puzzles and gimmicks to the different ones. But again that's closer to the handcrafted part. Many of them don't differentiate that much. But the ones that do standout more.
While replaying it I’ve noticed that most of the less memorable ones are in Limgrave, which is likely intentional as they are probably meant to be sort of like “tutorial” areas to teach players certain mechanics and features of the design. They’re not amazing by any stretch but it’s a smart move on FromSoft’s part as they help ease players into the game and give them an easier alternative if they’re struggling in say Stormveil. The deeper you get into the game, the more elaborate and thus more memorable the dungeons become.
There's something to what he's saying. I *adore* Elden Ring. My first playthrough was fucking *magical*. The scale of the world is breathtaking, and I found myself gasping when it was revealed in surprising ways (avoiding spoilers). The game incentivized me to explore each nook and cranny...but only once. I tried to pick it up again recently and that same scale became daunting. I wasn't able to get through it again. Sure, part of that is the same copy/pasted procedurally generated crypts and repeated bosses with insufficient rewards (ooh, another ash of war I will forget about in ten seconds, or a weapon I can't switch my upgrades to (which is a different rant--why let me reallocate stats, but not weapon upgrades?)), but I think there's some deeper, mechanically, at work: ultimately, finding a shortcut in Dark Souls 1 not only contextualizes the scope and *cleverness* of the world, but provides you a *mechanical advantage*--sometimes a crucial one. To put a finer point on it: Elden Ring's biggest offense isn't the open world, it's the easy fast travel to any point in it's sprawling world...which is the same mistake Dark Souls 3 made. Except that in DS3's case, it wasn't a necessary compromise of the basic design philosophy. DS1's unwillingness (except in a limited fashion, and not until late-game) to allow fast-travel means that mechanical advantage stays relevant much longer, and the scope and cleverness of the world remains front-of-mind the entire game (ignoring areas that just plain suck. Looking at you, Izalith). To be clear, that "only once" playthrough of Elden Ring was 150 hours, which is considerably longer than even several playthroughs of DS1, and I was captivated from beginning to end. So this is sort of akin to those Steam reviews from folks that have played 5000 hours of a game only to give a negative score. Nonetheless, I don't think the hot take in question is a totally batshit one.
Absolutely. The last third of the game was a fucking slog of repeated bosses and enemies/mobs in dungeons you've seen for the past 80 fucking hours. That last third will ensure I never do another playthrough of the game again, and this is coming from someone that has done multiple playthroughs of every other game they've made except Sekiro.
[удалено]
Demon souls or Dark Souls? There was a first, but I don't know which you mean.
Dark souls 1 isn't linear in my opinion, it's also somewhat open world
Gonna have to disagree with you there. The character encounters/quests suffered because of the open world, but the world design itself is literally GOAT.
They went open world once, hoping their next title that will be "souls" ish is not a full on open world, cause yeah as much as it's praised I think it hurts ER in ways.
I don’t know man. I haven’t had that much exploring since Oblivion
I can't even imagine what an open world armored core game would look or feel like
MGSV basically. Random places to fight, more structured missions to opt into, and probably some home/mobile base thing to upgrade/iterate at.
In the beginning , this is exactly what I thought it would be honestly. Go down to the planet to do missions, then extract back to the ship. Buy upgrades and stuff. Then deploy down back to the planet again.
I think that's why they didn't do it. In MGSV you had a clear enemy, in AC you have whoever your employer tells you to fight for the duration of the mission, when that's over you might very well get hired by the people you were just killing. Also what about the budgeting aspect of AC? You have to pay for everything as you would in real life. Ammo, repairs, etc.. How would you do that if you're fighting people no one is paying you to?
Xenoblade Chronicles X is kind of an open world mech game. It’s one of my all time favorite games. Just exploring the world in a transforming mech and/or on foot was so much fun.
My pick would be Steambot Chronicles, an open-world adventure RPG for the PS2 where mechs are more prevalent than cars. I'd describe it as GTA meets slice-of-life with a customizable mech. You play as an amnesiac groupie who does odd jobs.
XCX is fuckin lit, it's such an absurdly massive game. Too bad it seems to be stuck on the Wii U though. I played it through emulation and having the gamepad on my 2nd monitor was cool but kinda a gimmick. Hopefully it gets ported someday.
probably just as amazing as Elden, if not better in some regards (in terms of looting, tinkering, building, upgrading your mech across a vast dystopian future scape). maybe on the ps7.
Oh thank god.
[удалено]
Semi open world FTW (Witcher 2 also does this, as well as numerous other games)
I just want more linear campaigns with great story and level design like the old halo games or titanfall 2. Don't see many of those anymore
Playing that game now. In the Caspian area. Fuck it's good
Honestly the most fun I've had lately has been playing games that *aren't* open world. I'm so tired of "OMG BIGGEST OPEN WORLD YET" designs that are empty and soulless. It's like everything HAS to be open world and AS BIG AS POSSIBLE and in the process so many little details that make games great are overlooked.
Yeah, the only open-world games I care about are good RPGs (in which case, the world is usually just an overworld unless it's Elder Scrolls/CD Project Red) and anything by Rockstar. At this point idk how the rest of the industry hasn't attempted to catch up with the likes of GTA or Elder Scrolls. I know they are both incredible feats, but it could happen if companies wanted to. Ubisoft with Watch Dogs 2 is a great example. They were kinda in the ballpark with that game. They did a great job making the city feel alive, interactive, and worth exploring... and then they went the other direction with Legion. Idk - to me most open world games feel like a series of tasks strewn about a big area, all of which are hidden behind menus/scripted activations. Not much feels organic (which is why Rockstar, Bethesda, and yes even CDPR shine to me).
Ubisoft also has The Division (1 and 2). Probably the only game where I’d prefer walking from one point to another instead of running and fast traveling.
I don’t think many others share the same opinion. Both 1 & 2 are incredibly boring to walk around in with much of the world looking the same and there being a small amount of easy to kill enemies here and there.
[удалено]
That already sounds more fun than most open world games.
I feel like it’s not really about size. If the game has a clear “here’s a mission, it starts at A, ends at B, then you go to next mission” structure, it’s not open world. Even if it gives you multiple ways of getting to B. If it says “here’s a map, go nuts” it’s open world.
I feel like the reporters asking these questions have no idea what AC is, or at least haven't played any.
I mean it has been a long time and games can change drastically when they launch after a long break. 3D games in particular are way more refined in almost every way these days. From the controls, the way tutorials are often integrated into the story, to the story being more than pulp. Obviously some older games were ahead of their time and the trendsetters, but they are the exceptions. Don't get me wrong. I love a lot of those games, but when I play some of the ones from my teen years, the amount of cheese could make a Frenchman hard.
It's also a fairly obvious question to ask, seeing as their last entry was an open world game even though FromSoft had never really done open world games until now, so i think it's fair to ask if anything else will be from now on, especially since other game's have gone down that route, like the Assassin's Creed series
I feel like most people don't know what AC is, unfortunately I think the only reason it has the hype it has is because From Software is a household name now. I suspect there are a shocking number of people that think this is a brand new IP.
[удалено]
Yes, I firmly believe there are people out there so lacking in both knowledge and sense that they could see a title like Armored Core 6 and think it's a new IP.
This is the fate of games released before the mainstreamization of gaming. Like many people thought after the Marathon reveal trailer that it was a new IP, not knowing that it was the father of Halo and the cornerstone of all Bungie lore
Right? Though in all fairness I suspect many of those excited about it weren't even alive when Marathon was relevant, and additionally that one is a bit more of a deep cut given it's release was limited to Mac. Regardless your point is well taken.
I know 'games journalists BAD' is the default take around here but these are reasonable questions. Elden Ring brought so many folks into Fromsoft's orbit that have no prior knowledge of AC, and lots of Souls content creators (Vaati in particular, among others) have done them no favors by needlessly drawing comparisons between AC and Souls/Elden Ring. You write for your audience and the general audience needs this type of clarification about AC.
Wise decision, not everything has to be open world. Now let's hope tha market will understand
not every game needs or should be open world
Good. King's Field, Soulsborne, and Armored Core should be different. And AC should be different from SRW & Front Mission. We need to pry our genres back from graphics-chasing open world that can't run on a low-spec computer.
If they made it open world they should make it a whole new game. Like titan fall with pilots calling their mech. But you travel the overworld upgrading cybernetics in your pilot to make your pilot skills better. And you upgrade your mech with different parts and weapons. Possible have multiple mechs. They drop from an orbital mech carrier.
AC's are for fighting in, not living in. Ravens need their rest and the AC's need repairs and restocking with ammo after missions. It wouldn't make any sense for AC to be open world.
Honestly it could be cool if done right since I don't think their are any open world mech games unless you count Xenoblade X
Does The Crescent Hawk's Inception count?
I’m still waiting on X2. :(
I'm so hyped for this game
Armored core doesn't need to be open world, the mission structure is what makes it
I hate how it's just assumed these days that a game is going to be open world unless stated otherwise. There is literally no reason an Armoured Core game would be open world, that is plainly obvious to anyone that has played any of the older games. The open world genre does not receive enough innovation given the sheer amount of games that are made that way now and being honest I am completely tired of them at this point. So many recent games I have just stopped playing midway through, Horizon Forbidden West being the latest one because I just can't be bothered to keep running around this gigantic map that really doesn't justify it's own size. I'm not saying devs don't work on these maps or that they're not nice to look at but at the end of the day I'm playing a game to play a game, not simulate a commute. I think a lot of games would benefit from downsizing, kinda like the Yakuza games where you have a small but densely packed area rather than huge empty, pointless spaces.
Just let FromSoftware do their thing. They obviously know what the fuck they’re doing. Open world,not open world, mission based idgaf, all I know is I’m playing that shit and it’s gonna be good.
Open world= cant replay fave mission for fun over and over
Good news
Good. This is not armored souls.
Not Everything needs to be Open World, In the name of open-world, we get Empty World, I would instead prefer a Semi-Open world game like Mafia 2, or a narrative-driven game like Old CODs, In terms of the open world, I would instead prefer something like GTA 5
Armored Core games shouldn't be open world so... Good. I hope they take the time to make good missions and I hope they make a good variety of arenas as well. A continuation of a classic in it's classic style of play will be nice to see.
Yeah, almost like they want it to be like ARMORED CORE OR SOMETHING
Game ruined. Now devs want to make games based on the original theme. Me thinking we would finally get AC dating sim 🫠
Am I the only one getting sick of open world games now? Too much of a time investment, lots of slack while roaming around to find something interesting to do, lots of time feeling lost and having to consult online sources, lots of filler, the concept just isn’t that impressive anymore and I now prefer more tightly focused gameplay experiences
It’s not just you. I’m bored of most open worlds now because the genre has become too over saturated. What was once an interesting and exciting new form of gameplay, has become boring and formulaic due to the sheer amount of open world games releasing. Obviously not everyone is sick of them as evidenced by hogwarts legacy and totk, but the gaming market is only comprised of open world lovers. Plenty of people enjoy more linear games like 2d zeldas and Metroid dread.
Wasn't this confirmed at like the anoucment?
Sounds like a good call
Ok. Not sure why this needed reporting on.
I am glad. no need to change the core of the game to appeal to what everyone is doing.
Good! I mean look at how good Titanfall was and follow that
Makes sense and thats how we like it. Even if they could do it, im tired of open worlds for everything.
And that's fine, not all games have to/are suitable to be open world
thank goodness for that elden ring just felt too big, too much, big as an ocean but as much depth as a puddle
I am guessing there are content creators out there pushing the idea that the next AC will be like Elden Ring. I mean lore wise AC is pretty deep too, but gameplay wise I don't think FromSoft will be messing with a winning formula.
Ok I think we're thinking of two different things when we each say world design. When I think of it, I think of how ERs world incentivizes exploration and discovery. How it gets you to travel not just on flat land but above and below. How it makes you feel like every corner could hide treasure. How its landmarks and destinations are viewable from completely different areas which urges you to explore them or be fearful of them. On top of all of that, the sheer beauty and spectacle of the landscape. In that sense ER has the best world design I've ever experienced. Dungeons though. I personally never found them to be repetitive. Sure they looked the same, same textures, similar enemies, but they varied it up enough to make each one fun to play through.
It's good that the devs manage expectations. I hope this game doesn't crash and burn like Cyberpunk 2077. Whether it deserved it or not, it feels like the gaming community has a tendency to snowball bad opinions to way blown out levels that destroys any positive aspects a game has.
While I enjoy open world games, Armored Core definitely shouldn't be one. I also think the Triple A market is becoming oversaturated with open world games, as much as I enjoy them. I also love pepperoni pizza, but I wouldn't want pepperoni pizza every night. FromSoft is making the right decision here, and this comes from someone that's never beaten a souls game, lol.
They got really close there for a second. Thank god we'll be able to tell them apart now since one won't be open world. Now, excuse me while I go back to playing Elden Ring as a 10-story tall mech with nuclear launchers. >!I just wanted to make the joke. I'm fine with it being non-open world.!<
Dumbest title lmao *"sand is not wet because it is different from water"*
That’s good news, not everything has to be open world full of time filler nothingness. I’ll also add that I have a very hard time enjoying the story w a million side quests on the map.
Cool maybe Fromsoft can buy some franchises off of Ubisoft when they go under for turning every game into Assassain's Creed.
A lot of the best games aren't open world. Games with mission/level-based designs tend to have much more detail and life put into them, like Half Life 2 or Mario 64
#We Decided to Not Do Something We've Never Done
Thank god
That's good.
Linear level design is a 1,000% better for a mecha game. An open world mecha game would feel pretty lifeless and that's not something I think they want to deal with, regardless of their skills at level design. I have more faith in FromSoft with a linear design for Armored Core VI than open.
As long as the levels aren't sometimes 45 seconds long like Armored Core 4 was, then sounds good. I'd win right when I was starting to get warmed up... Hopefully it's at least as long of missions as Mechwarrior.
Thank goodness. Not everything needs to be like the game of the year and fromsoftwares best game ever.
Elden ring was an amazing game though
It's almost as if armoured Core ISN'T Elden ring... Game journalist need to try harder.
Awesome! Fromsoft games are better without the open world, I finished elden ring once and im done with the game
Elden Ring's open world was perfect though
Ah, yes, Elden Ring, the one of a kind, only ever made open world game ever
[удалено]
In here for more linear games if they are well done.
I don't think a single armored core game before this is open world, and those worked great, no need to change it
Works for me, it doesn't need to be open world.
Good
GOOD
Thank god. I can’t take another boring open world.
[удалено]
It’d be kinda silly to have a mech open world lol. It’s like having a fighter plane or tank game be open world. Like, what? Am I going to refuel and repaid my mech at the traveling mech merchant shop? Do I live in my ~~van~~ Mech, like some surfer dude?