Open-world games finally have an important lesson to learn

Open world games are getting bigger every year. But that’s completely idiotic, isn’t it? I think games like Assassin’s Creed & Co. finally have to learn an important lesson.

A commentary by Robert Kohlick.

Hitman 3 shows how it’s done: A good open world doesn’t have to be big

For years there has been a trend in open-world games that causes concern: They have to keep getting bigger and bigger. Developers and publishers proudly brag about how huge their game world is and sometimes boast about the exact number of square kilometers – and again and again we players fall for this cheap sleight of hand. “Game X is five times bigger than its predecessor!” sounds really cool on paper!

But let’s be honest: Who of us has really explored the entire 1,024 km² of Just Cause 4? And would Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey be a worse game if the world was half the size? For me the answer is clear: No!

What makes an open world really interesting for me, I only understood after playing Hitman 3. The stealth game from IO Interactive has a completely different focus. In contrast to the competition, the separate open-world levels in Hitman 3 are almost tiny – and yet after dozens of hours there is still no feeling of boredom. But why is that?

Hitman 3 gives me exactly what I want from a good open-world game: Interesting stories and choices in continuous fire. Add to that a living game world that feels organic, diverse and responsive to my actions, and the sense that there’s always something new to discover somewhere. I keep finding another hidden secret passage, uncovering a new story mission, or almost by accident finding an additional detail of the story while exploring that has remained hidden from me so far. The density of exciting events, observations and discoveries is simply incredible.

A role model for every open world game! Hitman 3 shows what really matters:

Game worlds have to get smaller again!

But it is precisely these aspects that many open-world games lack. Instead of being presented with unique stories at manageable intervals, I’m presented with filler material in the form of repeatable quests that add several hours to the game time. And instead of going straight from one cool location to the next, I have to ride my horse for what feels like three hours beforehand. Things like that just end up watering down my gaming experience unnecessarily. According to the principle: quantity instead of quality. In my opinion, the whole stuff away!

Dear open world developers, my advice to you: Finally make your game worlds smaller again and focus on the fact that there is something interesting for us players to discover around every corner. This shortens our playing time, no question! But if one highlight chases the other, we will remember your game much better – I can promise you that.

And while we’re about to express our wishes: We can also do without these old game features in the future:

Of course there are exceptions like The Crew, where opening up the huge game world is part of the gameplay, or Shadow of the Colossus, where the omnipresent emptiness contributes to the storytelling – but that applies to huge role-playing games and many other genre representatives in particular for me : If the game world seems largely like an interchangeable scenery that rarely offers memorable adventures – yes, then you did something wrong, dear developers!

It remains to be seen whether my wish will come true in the end. I’m probably biting the granite with my suggestions. We will probably continue to be served cheap “all you can eat” buffets instead of round three-course menus in the future. But one can still dream…