Is it fair to say that most open world games lack a good combat loop?

A lot of open world games have had weak or average combat loops. One of the worst of the good games is Witcher 3. The Elder Scrolls game tend to be a little clunky. Red Dead Redemption the same. GTA the same.

I think Elden Ring could be huge. Supposed Dark Souls combat brought to an expansive open world sandbox.

I've always felt that, if you could extrapolate Halo's combat loop to an open world, it'd be GOAT. We've seen that to some degree with Halo Infinite. It's got the best FPS combat loop ATM. I think they should go even further into this in the future.

I think its safe to say that the massive majority (at least 90%) of open world games lack everything that can make an open world game so fun to explore and have that sense of discovery you rarely get from other genres. But instead of that, we're getting a shitload of open world games with tasks/chores that nobody wants to do their first way around, let alone the 300 that are on your map.

All the games you mentioned didn't have a gameplay focus; Witcher 3 was all about sidequests and narrative, TES was all about the wanderlust of exploration, GTA (before IV) was a cathartic sandbox romp, RDR2 was about horse poop. Don't think it's fair to pin them on gameplay when they were never their priority.

Oh yes, my favourite bits in the Halo games that I played were certainly when the game opened up and let me do things my way. An open world Halo game always seemed like the natural evolution for the series. Maybe we'll someday get that BOTW-style world 343 originally wanted to make for Infinite.

That said, I think the real challenge of open world gameplay is not the gameplay loop, but pacing. It's very hard to pace an open world game.

Ghost of Tsushima has a great combat loop.

Halo Infinite comes to mind too as a game that doesn't overstay its welcome.

It was a bit weird though getting zero new powers in the game's final third.

There are some exceptions that had really fun combat and controlled well. Some of the superhero games and some of Sony's open world games come to mind.

Horizon Forbidden West will have the fun combat and great controls for sure. Then you'll get everything else on top of that - exploration , discovery , traversal , stealth , sidequests, side content , hunting , characters/story/lore , graphics , art direction , sound design , music , destruction , animations , A.I. , weather , physics , effects , etc.

Fans of great playing open world games aren't going to want to miss out on that one! It's going to be fun.

And this is why most open world games suck and this is why Far cry 2 is still best open world game ever made

In most of open world games, be it witcher 3, RDR2, GTA5, Cyperbunk etc. you are literally doing nothing 99% of time.

That is not true. If you feel you are doing nothing then it's a feel, and those types of games might not be fine for you, or perhaps were actually bad games. But TW3? what the hell?, there is even more quality vs density than in any of those new TR games for instance.

@fpsgod: I agree that the Witcher 3 was horrible. I tried on 5 separate occasions based on other's claims of how great the game was. But in the end I just couldn't. The gameplay was just too trash and I was not a fan of the story beats. (maybe I'll try again if it gets a next gen update)

Ironically, as much a people on this board hate Sony games, every open world 1st party Sony title has great combat, every one!

Horizon Zero Dawn

Days Gone

Ghosts of Tsushima

Every one of these open world titles had gameplay/combat that fun, refreshing and engaging didn't get old (I also think the story lines helped).

Sony just has a high standard for gameplay quality control because before playing these games, I also assumed I simply hated open world games (having played TW3 and hating it after all it's praise) only to realize, I just needed to play better games.

EDIT: and I can't believe I forgot Spiderman. But it's the outlier for me. I did not like Spiderman 2018.

But Insomniac made some intelligent cuts & adjustments with Spiderman Miles Morales because it was a much better "playing" game and I had a blast with that version.

True that, satisfying as all hell.

----------

STALKER has an incredibly satisfying combat loop once you get decent kit. The combat is typically fought at very long ranges, hundreds of meters apart, one hit can be lethal, and the AI is more than capable. Due to the A-Life system, you often stumble into encounters and firefights that have nothing to do with you, other factions fighting, where in every other game everything is player-centric.

Due to this, STALKER has the best open world combat I've ever seen. It's constantly unpredictable and emergent.

Horizon Zero Dawn had really good combat and fantastic enemies to boot (I'm a sucker for robots and dinosaurs).

Shadow of Mordor doesn't get enough credit, I thought it's combat felt great, enjoyed those lotor games alot more than assassins creed.

Arkam City was one of the best

Sonys Spider-Man has the best out of all the 3rd person open world games sony makes imo.

Rockstar and CDPR both kinda suck butt at combat imo. But I like their games. It's more about the atmosphere and story with those games, but I do think GTA is a fun sandbox to go rouge more than most open world games. But the combat is bad

Open world dark souls does not interest me, I find it slow and repetitive.

Eh. It's all the same - dodge and attack. I don't know why anyone complains. It's not like it can actually be improved.

Yeah I agree the loop is very hard to get right. Most of the time dev focus more on the loot, world building or exploration aspect than the actual combat mechanics itself. Witcher 3 and Zelda BoTW combat is just servicable while fallout is very underwhelming shooter. All of them focuses on their other strength like Witcher on its strong world building, Zelda on exploration and Fallout with its roleplay.

The best game for me that nailed combat in open world is Dragon's Dogma. Combat really shines as it borrows Monster Hunter combat and also the template for MHW and MHR. Hope Elden Ring learns from both souls and DD in terms of combat gameplay loop.

*oh shoutout to MGSV as well. Great gameplay loop.

@vfighter: yes I agree! Horizon Zero Dawn emphasize on well executed planning of traps and exploiting enemy/robot pattern is really satisfying. Makes hard mode such a joy to play as its always so satisying to see your plan goes well. The thing that brings Horizon down a bit is the close combat just terrible. Hope Forbidden West fix that.

@ghosts4ever: Far Cry 2 is a garbage game that failed because it is garbage. Gamers have spoken.

@sakaixx: Yeah the close combat stuff definitely needs improved, although after learning the machines movements and what they could do I got pretty good taking them down with my spear.

I consider STALKER SoC more of semi open world actually. but yes if its count then its definitely best open world game ever made follow by FC2.

Call of pripyat on other hand is fully fledge open world.

Of course open world games can have good gameplay.

Ghost of Tsushima is open world and had phenomenal combat.

Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain was an open world game that not only had the best combat/gameplay of any Metal Gear game, it's the blueprint of open world third person shooter / action gameplay and has the best combat/gunplay of any game. its the shooting equivalent of Sekiro.

Then there's ELDEN RING, which looks to be better than DS3's combat, which is second only to Sekiro (swordplay based combat king)

TES V: Skyrim, Monster Hunter World, Witcher 3, are examples of clunky bullshit combat that sucks.

Some good points made in this thread.

Sleeping Dogs has one of the best combat loops ever in a open world game.

@warmblur: nope. Gameplay aged terrible personally.

I'm not sure quite it's the lack of a good combat loop.

It probably has more to do with the fact that you're not doing much *most* of the time in open world games.

I think one of the reasons why GoT excels is how it tries to remove the monotony found in many open world games. Going from point A to point B general sucks but, GoT at the very least doesn't try to take too much of your time, keeps you intrigued in the world and then makes it incredibly satisfying when you get into the core of the gameplay mechanics.

good shout. very tight and well paced combat mechanics from what i remember. need to go back and play it again to see if it's stood the test of time. would definitely be up as one of the strongest open world combat loops based off my memories with it.

yep. for open world stealth espionage gameplay mgsv is the pinnacle. not sure what you meant by the shooting equivalent of sekiro

@Nonstop-Madness: I hope you are not talking about Ghost Of Tsushima because it literally plays like every other open world except every interaction cutscene, dialogue and story cutscenes is unskippable. So, not only is it using the same Ubisoft formula, it wastes the player's time with making the same repeated side and main mission non interactive elements unskippable. So, don't falsely claim that it doesn't take up too much time when it literally does.

It's fair to say. Most open world games last up to or over 100 hours. After about 20 hours, combat gets very repetitive. One exception is Ghost of Sushi. I"m 60 hours in and loving the combat. I think its almost perfect.

Yeah, been playing Ghost of Sushi and its combat is pretty good. Also I should metion Cyberpunk 2077. I thought the gunplay was pretty great. Too bad the A.I. was sh*t but the feeling of the guns was spot on imo

I wouldn't call a storyline cutscene a waste of time and, it's not like they're making you sit through hours of cutscenes. The longest cutscene in the game is probably the intro and it's like 5m max.

Ghost Of Tsushima is one of the few open world games that doesn't try to take up too much time (i.e. respects your time) and that's a fact.

You can get a lot done in 30m in Ghost Of Tsushima vs lets say Death Stranding, RDR2, GTA5 etc.

Ex.

- The guiding wind and, traveler's attire. You don't have to spend too much time or, effort to collecting things.

- You can fast travel, start a side mission and complete most of them in 5-10m.

- You don't have to go out of your way for much; heck, the Mythic Tales are totally optional.

---

Name me one open world game that doesn't play like other open world games and, has zero repeat missions? They don't exist. The only ones that come close are ones that would be considered semi open world games. So yeah, GoT doesn't try to take up too much time in the context of open world games.

It's one of the few games I platinum'd because it didn't waste my damn time.

GoT is far and away from the mundane, unimaginative, chore-laden checklist that makes up Ubi's formulaic, tedious garbage they call games.

I'll not argue that GoT doesn't follow a similar pattern, it's nothing revolutionary, but it does a much better job of masquerading such a formula behind effective storytelling, pacing, and a satisfying combat loop that keeps the player engaged. I could only come to understand your position as one taken as a cursory glance and not one based on any real investment.

Evidenced further by the fact you (falsely) claim the cutscenes unskippable when they are in fact skippable in New Game+. Not sure why you'd wish to skip them on the first playthrough anyway as the narrative is a bit essential to the initial impression and experience.

@MirkoS77: I have played and finished the game. I have completed all of the usual mundane stuff found on the first island (first portion of the island)and did not see a need to continue 100% for the rest of the island. The cutscenes and every interaction is unskippable. Saying it is in New Game+ does not change the fact that they are unskippable. If I want to skip dialogue and cutscenes it should be my prerogative, especially when reading is significantly faster than listening. making excuses or validating this nonsense is mind boggling.

It is false to claim that it strays from the Ubisoft formula when it follows it to near perfection. Seems to me that you were more entranced with the story and the setting to ignore how much of the game is a Ubisoft clone. I found it hilarious that people hate on Ubisoft open world formula but praise games like these to no end.

I don't like games which forces the play to sit through long and unskippable cutscenes in any form. This game is laced with this. So, saying it is a game that respect your time while making everything unskippable shows a severe disconnect on your part. So, it is not a fact that it doesn't take up your time.

Your example is not unique to this game. Many open world games have many small task that the player can accomplish. Why you believe this is unique to this game?🤷🏽‍♂️

I never made a claim that there is an open world that doesn't play like any other. That is what you are trying to claim with Ghost of Tsushima, which is blatantly false. The game is Assassin's Creed in Japan because it so identical to the formula of those games. I have no desire to platinum this game because, the cutscenes are unskippable and the rest of the game is traditional open world busy work.

I didn't claim it strays from the Ubisoft formula; I specifically said I'll not argue it doesn't follow a similar pattern in structure (meaning I admit it's not straying, nor is it revolutionary in this respect), but to perfection? No.

Ubi's "games" are manufactured-line, farted out, obligatory, soulless, uninspired trash...…gutted and filled to the brim with mindless chores, designed specifically to make players grind to incentivize them into engaging in the worst of the exploitative, capitalistic tendencies Ubi's come to infuse their products with. As much as GoT adheres to some open-world design tenets they've normalized in the genre, sorry, it does not do this to "perfection". Far from it, as the exploitative nature of Ubi's games holds direct bearing on its overall design to its detriment, something GoT doesn't concern itself with.

Tsushima is very obviously a project of passion towards the source material, despite similarities it appears to share. So if people are praising GoT while hating on Ubi's games, it is you who is missing this crucial distinction that brings such sentiment.

LOL.

combat copy from Batman arkham asylum (and Batman did so much better) is best combat loop. come on.

Depends how you define "open world"... Does something like Dark Souls count as "open world"? It seems like the definition of "open world" changes every generation, as game worlds get larger over time.

@MirkoS77: You stated

"GoT is far and away from the mundane, unimaginative, chore-laden checklist that makes up Ubi's formulaic, tedious garbage they call games."

But it is not. It doesn't matter if it is project of passion, the game straight up copies the the soulless ubisoft formula. I understand the theme can be more engaging and potentially add greater experience for some gamers but I am looking at the game for what it is. You can enjoy a game that has all the features of the soulless Ubisoft formula but the story and theme can soften the effects of the said formula.

Then I suppose we will agree to disagree.

When I play Ubi’s games I see a vast difference even if the structure superficially shares some things in common. GoT is a well-paced narrative where nothing feels superfluous or overstays its welcome past what the story needs. Are there side activities in the interim that are copying some things Ubi has established, like clearing bases that reveal more of the map or doing redundant activities (bamboo strikes, birds, foxes, etc)? Yeah, but I’d argue those are 1) not even required, and 2) are present to give excuse for the player to engage in the game’s central gameplay loop, its combat, and its greatest strength.

But I stand by what I said: it is far away from a soulless checklist that comprises Ubi’s shit. Their games are full of superfluous filler placed there for nothing but to, again, encourage players to exploitative, capitalistic tendency. You could literally cut out 75% of the content and their games would be no worse for wear. In fact, it would be better, the only thing missing would be activities for the player to grind so they‘d need to run to their wallet to progress, and it would rob Ubi’s ability to hide behind their predictable, pathetic excuse to claim, “See, you don’t have to pay….it’soptional!”. Do the same with GoT? You’d gut the experience.

GoT is anything but soulless comparatively, because it hasn’t whored its design out to the almighty $$$.

@Pedro: Youre really reaching, it's kinda sad to be honest.

Of course Batman did it better but Sleeping Dogs is no slouch also Far Cry 2 combat loop sucks ass it's a bland open world with enemies just respawning at checkpoints..

Nope. game was ahead of its time. shoot someone in leg and they walk slowly,

tons of things to do. plus the weather system.

It was Ubiosft STALKER.

@ghosts4ever You mean stuff Perfect Dark on the N64 did (can't remember if Goldeneye did it as well)? You could even shoot someone's hand and they would drop their gun. A game that came out nearly a decade prior. Nah, it wasn't ahead of its time.

I remember Ocarina of Time being considered open world back then as well.

You are free to agree that we are in disagreement. However, there seems to be a disconnect; at least from what I am observing, between the Ubisoft open world design and Ubisoft as a company. Ubisoft open world design is the core of Ghost of Tsushima. It is so carbon copy that it is baffling to me that anyone would try to deny this. All of your claims to differences are about the Ubisoft practices, which is clear that you don't like and are always free to dislike. But let us not confuse game design to that of company practices even when the two intermingled. I guess this is more an issue of crediting a company that you despise for the core gameplay of a game you apparently love. That should be viewed as a plus and not a minus because you can get a game without the baggage and business philosophy that you don't like.

@Maroxad: The Houser brothers who made GTA3 described it as "Zelda meets Goodfellas" when they were making the game. Ocarina of Time was a foundation for 3D open-world action-adventures, although it might not be considered open world anymore by today's standards.

What's baffling to me is to see someone attempt to argue two games are similar in design by marginalizing and attempting to separate company practices and philosophies from the games that are designed around them in order to appeal to superficial similarities. You cannot separate the two when it comes to Ubisoft; if there is a disconnect here, that is it. Their company philosophy is in their game design, and their game design exemplifies that philosophy blatantly, nigh insultingly.

As such, GoT isn't a "carbon copy", and if it is, you've still to explain how. GoT is narrative-centric, Ubi's games are capitalistic endeavors masquerading as games to exploit the consumer to the last dime. Same as Activision, same as EA. Worthless, soulless trash these companies are. What they vomit up are only are classified as games due to the medium they inhabit, but mine as well be slot machines.

This business philosophy directly affects game design, a design that you are attempting to compare to GoT, and which GoT is nowhere even near. If you want to debate the design and structure similarities, I'm open to that.

I honestly don't understand what people find so obtuse about TW3 combat. I did change it to their "update" scheme when they released that, but haven't looked back. It's challenging on high difficulty while being mostly fair - when I die it is almost always because I got greedy instead of circling and playing it more souls-like in approach. I suppose if you are a greedy button-masher or want DMC or something then yeah...