How do you tackle open-worlds?

[DXCHASE]

If you play games with these, do you just run through and unlock the areas to come back to? Do you 100% an area right away before moving on? Do you only do certain things in each area first then the rest later?

Me, personally, if the world is big enough, i 100 percent an area first (or as much as i can) and move on, i dont like leaving an area unfinished because i feel i wont come back. This also depends on the game, if the open world is too bland with little ways of traveling fast or im not totally invested in the game itself, then ill just push through the game but im most def. in the 100% an area in terms of how much i would actually do it.

 

[mahammadsutar81]

Yeah, I'm the same! I try to 100% an area (or as much as I can) before moving on. I don't like leaving things unfinished.

 

[Alm]

I normally do a lot of exploring but mainly stick to the main storyline quests, then when I've beaten that questline, look to 100%ing.

 

[DXCHASE]

I normally do a lot of exploring but mainly stick to the main storyline quests, then when I've beaten that questline, look to 100%ing.

I did this with Ghost Recon Wildlands because certain areas had certain weapons that would unlock in those areas so i would push through the story to unlock the region that had said gun and go there, get the gun, then head back to earlier missions/side quests.

 

[neogunhero]

It kind of depends on the flavor of open-world game, as each will reward you to complete quests or explore in different ways. Typically, I'll stick with the main story for a bit until I unlock more abilities/level up some. At that point I'll tackle the main POIs that I want to go to, such as towers that reveal more of the map, or places I know I can find good loot. After that, I tend to start exploring on my own, going towards whatever interests me.

If it's a game I've played a bunch like Stalker Shadow of Chernobyl or Fallout 4, I will run somewhere random and try to find places I've never been to before. Games like Far Cry 6 and Dying Light 2, I tend to focus on the story a bit before running off to explore the world. Sometimes I will find an interesting POI listed on the map, or there is just a strange looking place on the map, then go explore it out of curiosity. This was extra useful in RDR2 as the map looks hand drawn but there are weird symbols and such if you zoom in enough, usually you can find some really unique POI's or random loot in these places.

 

[Pifanjr]

I typically 100% each area as soon as I unlock/visit it, meaning I typically do all of the side quests before starting the main quest in an area. Though sometimes I prioritise unlocking fast travel points first, depending on the game, then go back later to do the side quests.

 

[Kaamos_Llama]

This has evolved for me over time.

My old method was to try do everything before moving on because that what Id always done in more linear single player games. As games got bigger over time and the content felt more stretched out I found myself burning out long before the end and moving on to something else after 30 or 40 hours without getting near the end.

Because of that I'm still put off by open worlds, I dont like being so overpowered in a game you can just walk through encounters on autopilot and I dont like enemies scaling only on the amount of HP and damage they do.

Recently I prefer games that let you progress the story when youre ready without having to grind repeated content, or games where the world and or content is compelling enough in some way that it doesnt feel like a grind. Elden Ring, Dying Light 2 or Cyberpunk 2077 all worked pretty well for me.

 

[neogunhero]

Recently I prefer games that let you progress the story when youre ready without having to grind repeated content

I like when these kinds of games clearly specify which missions are the main story missions, and let you tackle them whenever you want. Most open world games are like this, but there are some exceptions, like Far Cry 5 where it literally freezes you in your tracks if you build up a progress meter too much in a region so they can kidnap you and force you into a story mission. I especially like when games tell you that a mission is a sort of "point of no return" and allow you to back out if you're not ready.

 

[BeardyHat]

This has evolved for me over time.

My old method was to try do everything before moving on because that what Id always done in more linear single player games. As games got bigger over time and the content felt more stretched out I found myself burning out long before the end and moving on to something else after 30 or 40 hours without getting near the end.

Because of that I'm still put off by open worlds, I dont like being so overpowered in a game you can just walk through encounters on autopilot and I dont like enemies scaling only on the amount of HP and damage they do.

Recently I prefer games that let you progress the story when youre ready without having to grind repeated content, or games where the world and or content is compelling enough in some way that it doesnt feel like a grind. Elden Ring, Dying Light 2 or Cyberpunk 2077 all worked pretty well for me.

This is where I'm at. I don't usually play Ubi open worlds, so 100% an area and moving on isn't something I've ever really thought about.

But in your listed examples, those are exactly the kind of games where I generally just wander. I see something interesting and I'm like a moth to flame, wandering that direction to see what it is.

Open worlds with icons tend to just make me bored. It ends up feeling like screen clearing, rather than exploration; Witcher 3 had this effect on me, where I really didn't care for exploration and the game never really hit with with me.

 

[Kaamos_Llama]

I like when these kinds of games clearly specify which missions are the main story missions, and let you tackle them whenever you want. Most open world games are like this, but there are some exceptions, like Far Cry 5 where it literally freezes you in your tracks if you build up a progress meter too much in a region so they can kidnap you and force you into a story mission. I especially like when games tell you that a mission is a sort of "point of no return" and allow you to back out if you're not ready.

I havent played as many open world games as some, but that approach worked for me in Dying Light 2 and Cyberpunk 2077.

In Elden Ring, they had the path of Grace which kind of pointed vaguely towards the critical path with a shimmer in the air, but that didnt mean most stuff off of critical path wasnt going to feel unique, and it really helped to level up a lot for the bosses especially the first time through. So theres a combination of the extra content being necessary to progress, but also mostly feeling like it wasnt just an afterthought to add hours into the game. Not many open world games have really worked like that for me. It has the added bonus of making a lot of the extra content ignorable on subsequent playthroughs when youre maybe better at the game and dont need to be quite as high a level to progress.

This is where I'm at. I don't usually play Ubi open worlds, so 100% an area and moving on isn't something I've ever really thought about.

But in your listed examples, those are exactly the kind of games where I generally just wander. I see something interesting and I'm like a moth to flame, wandering that direction to see what it is.

Open worlds with icons tend to just make me bored. It ends up feeling like screen clearing, rather than exploration; Witcher 3 had this effect on me, where I really didn't care for exploration and the game never really hit with with me.

I definitely think its better to keep people engaged in the real in game world rather than focusing on points on a map or minimap. Again Elden Ring had amazing world design that drew me towards things naturally. I remember you didnt gel with it, but it really worked for me in that way.

I didnt love Witcher 3 either for some of those reasons. I think they drew a little too much from UBI style and I wasnt interested enough in the characters and fiction for it to compensate for the checklist feel of the maps.

 

[neogunhero]

Open worlds with icons tend to just make me bored. It ends up feeling like screen clearing, rather than exploration; Witcher 3 had this effect on me, where I really didn't care for exploration and the game never really hit with with me.

RDR2 did this very well also. The only icons on the map were things like main missions, "main" side missions, fast travel points, and shops. Besides these, you have to explore and find everything else. Most side missions and activities don't show up on the map until you get very close to the person you need to talk to, plants and animals have hand drawn icons on their general areas on maps, and there is so much to find that the game will never tell you about. I have found tons of hidden clothing items like a Viking helmet and a skull mask that were hidden in areas that aren't clearly marked on the map.

 

[GSarge]

I finish the main story/questline then do side quests, unless I see some side quest with great looking rewards in which case I do that then go back to finishing main quests. I leave any other things like collectibles, towers, camps to clear...etc until last and only do them when or if I feel like it, most of the time just completing the main and side quests is good enough for me

 

[BeardyHat]

I definitely think its better to keep people engaged in the real in game world rather than focusing on points on a map or minimap. Again Elden Ring had amazing world design that drew me towards things naturally. I remember you didnt gel with it, but it really worked for me in that way.

I didnt love for Witcher 3 either for some of those reasons. I think they drew a little too much from UBI style and I wasnt interested enough in the characters and fiction for it to compensate for the checklist feel of the maps.

I like Elden Ring ok, I just prefer the Dark Souls series. I still have 50-hours in ER and do intend to go back to it at some point...

But yeah, it definitely has a more engaging open world than Witcher 3 or even Cyberpunk. It is nice that the Sites of Grace point you in the right direction, but you're still at liberty to pretty much go wherever you want, tough MOBs not withstanding...

RDR2 did this very well also. The only icons on the map were things like main missions, "main" side missions, fast travel points, and shops. Besides these, you have to explore and find everything else. Most side missions and activities don't show up on the map until you get very close to the person you need to talk to, plants and animals have hand drawn icons on their general areas on maps, and there is so much to find that the game will never tell you about. I have found tons of hidden clothing items like a Viking helmet and a skull mask that were hidden in areas that aren't clearly marked on the map.

Another one I need to go back to. I haven't found it quite as engaging as I'd hoped, but that might just be because I'm not terribly into Cowboys and the Wild West.

 

[Frag Maniac]

It really depends on the game, and also how well you know it. For instance, I wasted far too much time looking for a decent suit in STALKER 2. I ending up taking a fair bit of damage via several tries in an anomaly field to get to a SEVA suit. Then I found you can very early in the game go up to Yaniv, and with a little trick pushing a box in a container about 100m to jump up on a structure, and get a MUCH better suit called the Diamond Exoskeleton.

This is why SO many people get tons of views on guides of how to find/get things in such games. It can get very tedious and time consuming to search endlessly. That said, as good of specs the Diamond Exo has, it's very expensive to repair, even with durability upgrades.

Bottom line, there are some games where exploring and completing one area at a time suits you well, and there are others where it's all about knowing what part of the map to go to early on to get really good stuff.

Starfield is a bit like STALKER 2 in the sense that it is a game that if you know where to go early and what tricks to use, you can get really good stuff free. If you go to Hope city for instance, you can go in the gun shop, pick up a trash can, use the can to rake a Magshear rifle off the shelf onto the floor, then drag it along the floor with the can into the backroom (after opening the backroom door). Then you can pick it up without being caught. As long as no one sees you actually touch it, it's yours.

In some open world games, you can miss certain missions if you don't do them in a particular order. I missed out on one in Mass Effect 3 because I did not do both side missions first in one of the story mission areas.

 

[neogunhero]

Starfield is a bit like STALKER 2 in the sense that it is a game that if you know where to go early and what tricks to use, you can get really good stuff free.

When I was playing it, it helped to memorize how to quickly use the maps and teleport. I had a routine for clearing settlements, looting everything I could carry before getting over encumbered, fast traveling to Neon City, selling everything, and repeating the whole process over and over. I made a ton of credits doing this, and I seem to have very similar routines in other Bethesda games for making money fast.

 

[DXCHASE]

It really depends on the game, and also how well you know it. For instance, I wasted far too much time looking for a decent suit in STALKER 2. I ending up taking a fair bit of damage via several tries in an anomaly field to get to a SEVA suit. Then I found you can very early in the game go up to Yaniv, and with a little trick pushing a box in a container about 100m to jump up on a structure, and get a MUCH better suit called the Diamond Exoskeleton.

This is why SO many people get tons of views on guides of how to find/get things in such games. It can get very tedious and time consuming to search endlessly. That said, as good of specs the Diamond Exo has, it's very expensive to repair, even with durability upgrades.

Yea the open world in STALKER 2 was too brutal to spend a lot of time running around esp. at max difficulty with the one monster (cant remember the name) that were just literal bullet sponges. Theyve balanced stuff since release but havent gone back in a bit.

Def. used a guide to find good gear/guns so i can just get there and get back, but i do like that, with some ingenuity not modding, you can find better gear without going to far off the main path.

 

[Frag Maniac]

When I was playing it, it helped to memorize how to quickly use the maps and teleport. I had a routine for clearing settlements, looting everything I could carry before getting over encumbered, fast traveling to Neon City, selling everything, and repeating the whole process over and over. I made a ton of credits doing this, and I seem to have very similar routines in other Bethesda games for making money fast.

At first I was really put off by the being easily over encumbered thing, and the quirks of ship building. Once I learned a few tricks with ship building and where to find a good suit fairly early though, it went a lot smoother. It's a good game, but I still feel they botched the NG+ and didn't have enough missions, especially for the length of time it took them to make it.

 

[Johnway]

methodically mostly. i go from one region after another ideally and once i've cleaned everything up i move on.

of course it really depends if i have any knowledge as to where about's to where everything is. In Assassins creed, i can easily identify where everything is and i can follow procedure completing areas as i go along.

That said, if i get a bit bored or i know i will visit areas without going out of my way, i simply play the story missions and go back and mop up anywhere i haven't been.

Asscreed Valhalla isn't packed with loads of cookie cutter bases dotted all over the place, and most areas are POI that i'll visit in the story. So instead i focus on the side missions and collectibles as i go along. i sometimes lay ground work, hopping over the border to a nearby point to make travelling there faster.

In Skyrim i was even more methodical, i would go around in a circular direction like a railway track picking off bits and pieces as i went around making detours or visiting an area i haven;t been along the way.

 

[Frag Maniac]

Asscreed Valhalla isn't packed with loads of cookie cutter bases dotted all over the place, and most areas are POI that i'll visit in the story. So instead i focus on the side missions and collectibles as i go along. i sometimes lay ground work, hopping over the border to a nearby point to make travelling there faster.

Did you at least not search for where to find the best spear you can early on though? I found the game to be horribly unbalanced at the beginning, especially when facing enemies with spears. It wasn't until I got up enough upgrades to handle fighting for the Fafnir's Fang spear from the Draugr in a Norway cave before I could make any kind of headway in battles.

Oddly enough though, if you take your time and are careful, you can take on some enemies several times your power, even if out of weapons, just staying back and continuously throwing a torch. Really bad game design. LOL

 

[Colif]

I don't have a set method, it really depends on the game type.

In Just cause 2 I used to just run around randomly causing destruction, but I really didn't play the game properly, I was treating it as a sandbox. I didn't really care about the story. Shame after a while the game would thrust story onto you...

Test Drive Unlimited 2 - I explored the maps and made sure to drive down all the roads on both islands, mainly as there were hidden vehicles you could find parts of and it was an easy way to get free cars.

Sacred 2 - it depends on the difficulty. In the first 2 it didn't really pay to explore that much in each region as the drops weren't amazing and you better off getting into the later difficulties. once in the last 3 difficulties, exploring every region in full and doing all 660 quests was worth it. (I wish the owners of the Titan Quest franchise would remake Sacred 2 or just modernise its graphics)
You could use the same character in all 5 difficulties, just need to finish normal to access next. I can't recall if game lets you start in the 3rd difficulty - its been 13 years since I last played it. You could at least start in normal, easy was way too easy and you would out level enemies too fast - I only ever played it to do one quest, to sell all the items, to get some money... then restart in normal.

Fallout NV - I didn't really go everywhere but I explored enough to have fun. I never finished it, I didn't really want to.

 

[Johnway]

Did you at least not search for where to find the best spear you can early on though? I found the game to be horribly unbalanced at the beginning, especially when facing enemies with spears. It wasn't until I got up enough upgrades to handle fighting for the Fafnir's Fang spear from the Draugr in a Norway cave before I could make any kind of headway in battles.

Oddly enough though, if you take your time and are careful, you can take on some enemies several times your power, even if out of weapons, just staying back and continuously throwing a torch. Really bad game design. LOL

Not at all. truth is that i was perfectly happy with the starting beard axe, shield and raven armor. hell i'm level 400+ and i only switch out the bow/weapon if i find for challenge requirements etc. I'm a bit boring like that.

Not going to lie, start of Valhalla is extremely difficult as everything could kill you very quickly. The first boss may perform a counter and kill you. The fight outside of the lodge was frustrating because the AI refused to step out to help or keep enemies busy and kept getting screwed over. I mostly just obeyed the recommendations as to where to go and visit areas at my level and avoided encounters where the bosses were over powered. Sod trying to fight bosses level 90 when you're like 30 something. You barely do any damage to them.

But once i got the various dodge skills (slow mo when you dodge, more damage from hits from behind) it became a cake walk. Currently at lvl 400 its a piss easy. its got to the point that i rarely worry that i forget to add 10+ upgrade points that i earned.

 

[Pifanjr]

I can't imagine looking up a guide to get some early powerful gear. One of the best things about open world games for me is that feeling of going from a weak nobody struggling to survive to a force of nature blasting apart anything you encounter.

 

[Colif]

I can't imagine looking up a guide to get some early powerful gear.

That reminds me, I did that when I played Oblivion. But from memory the item wasn't a weapon or anything. I probably missed some instructions and never really knew what I was meant to do in that game... perhaps if they release a remaster I might know now.

 

[UnfilteredMedic]

I prefer the open-word games where the player starts off with little to nothing and knowing the same.
Skyrim. Fallout. Planet Crafter.
Most recently I started Forever Skies. Your airship is your home and your base. It goes where you go. Not open-world as others but more limited.
With Fallout and Skyrim I don't have to pursue any questline if I want.
In Fallout, I keep what I know is useful and for that character build. I sell or scrap everything else.
I can't list others from memory but IMO these are one of the best kinds of games.
Space ones have the PC crash onto a planet or is on a ship that crashes or has to land somewhere for reasons. In these, people LOVE to learn new things and go from "Nothing to something." by their own accomplishments.

 

[Frag Maniac]

hell i'm level 400+ and i only switch out the bow/weapon if i find for challenge requirements etc. I'm a bit boring like that.

Not going to lie, start of Valhalla is extremely difficult as everything could kill you very quickly. Currently at lvl 400 its a piss easy. its got to the point that i rarely worry that i forget to add 10+ upgrade points that i earned.

Except getting to that high a level requires a ton of time and a tedious grind. I opted for taking my chances with enemies well above my level. Sometimes it's easier than expected, sometimes it takes a while and you lose your allies and weapons, but it's definitely not as time consuming and tedious as the leveling up grind.

That said, I know I'll likely have to take the end game more seriously and prepare for it better.