The reason why open world gaming sucks.

[BloatedGuppy]

Not really sure why you not taking my thoughts seriously should be such a huge "in your face" issue for me. There are plenty of people whose thoughts I do not take seriously but I don't really hound them so much.

I've replied to you something on the order of 4-5 times on an internet forum, at the high cost of 3-5 minutes of typing. If that constitutes "hounding" to you I am very sorry. This is a discussion forum. If you prefer, you can amend all your posts with a disclaimer that only people who agree with you are to respond, and anything else will be characterized as "hounding".

What responsibility do I have for explaining why people don't like time limits? Not much at all really.

You're the one said you made an effort to explain your position logically. You are correct, you have no responsibility to be logical or support your arguments. This is an internet forum, not a graduate thesis.

I can empathise to a certain extent but not with the harsh absolutist position against the concept to the point of saying that it should never be used in a game because there are other challenges that can be put in games. You could use that same position for any challenge. Like, I think that anagrams should be completely removed from scrabble and replaced with maths puzzles because anagrams make me angry and I can't do them, so there is no excuse.

I would never claim they "should never be used", but I certainly do not like them, and the reason I don't like them has nothing to do with the fact they are "challenging". As I rather sarcastically pointed out earlier in the thread, there are a great many ways one could add challenge to a game that wouldn't necessarily be to that game's benefit. I don't view "challenge" as the sole, monolithic imperative of gaming, at the cost of all other considerations. Whenever I have encountered genuine time limits in the past, most particularly in RPGs, it has almost always been an irritating implementation.

A harsh absolutist position would be "Anyone who doesn't like time limits is a pussy who likes to complain". My position is "I don't generally care for them and in my experience their inclusion has harmed games more than it has helped", which is considerably less absolutist, and allows plenty of room for people to enjoy or not enjoy time limits in games without me calling them names or making sweeping assumptions about the nature of their character.

That way your time progression is based on the main quest. There's no real time limit, and you still feel the urgency on side-quests at least because if you advance the story too far, they fail.

I certainly don't have an issue with "pocket urgency", where A quest or A storyline has the pacing ratcheted up, and perhaps you're facing a time frame where there are regretful consequences to dallying. It tends to be terribly at odds with a game like, say, Skyrim, where the design of the world encourages you to poke around as thoroughly as possible before moving on, but there are plenty of other games where it would work beautifully. You just need to avoid a Fallout situation, where you play the game normally and suddenly it's "Lol out of time, GG".

 

[AnarchistFish]

I hate time limits.

Anyway, what you said isn't a reason why open world gaming sucks, it's just something you personally don't like about the way most developers approach them.

 

[scorptatious]

Sounds like you've never played Fallout 1.

Yeah, it's not exactly a modern game, but it fits what you're describing.

You have 150 in game days to find a water chip for your vault. Although I'm pretty sure the game automatically ends if you fail. I don't know, I've never let that happen.

the funny part is that a later patch removed the time limit too because it annoyed people.

I think you're thinking about the second time limit in the game which involved...

Spoiler

the super mutants finding your vault

Because that was taken out in a later patch.

 

[scorptatious]

Sounds like you've never played Fallout 1.

Yeah, it's not exactly a modern game, but it fits what you're describing.

You have 150 in game days to find a water chip for your vault. Although I'm pretty sure the game automatically ends if you fail. I don't know, I've never let that happen.

You've just tore me up inside, I was just about to post about how I hate time limits in games, forces you to do things when you want to do other things etc. etc. but then I see your post and what was I about to go do? Install Fallout collection and play Fallout 1

Oh don't let the time limit stop you. That's actually plenty of time. Plus time only goes by when you're travelling across the map. When you're actually in someplace, time kinda stops. (Of course you can pass the time using the wait option) So you'll have plenty of time to explore to an extent.

It's a great game. Plus, it's only for the first half of the game. Once you get that done, the wasteland's your oyster.

 

[shrekfan246]

Honestly, I think an open-world game with a sense of passing time could be really good, if done properly. One thing that always just seems a bit odd to me is that everything always feels like it's just happening on the same day (or night if there is, by chance, a day-night cycle), because there are very, very few games that use a calendar and take advantage of various dates.

Having recently played Persona 4 Golden (I know, pretty much the opposite of an open-world game), I think that having a calendar that spans a long period of time and offers a fair amount of leniency while still putting the pressure on during quests would be pretty fun. There would need to be some compromising of games mechanics - Maybe time doesn't pass while you're in a city or town, or passes slower when you're actually in a quest area than traveling along the world map. But I'd like to see an open-world game that actually takes advantage of the passage of time, and changes the world around you dynamically as time goes on.

But then, I'd also like to see greater character interaction with the environment beyond "LOL you just smacked into a wall shaped like a tree!" Environmental objects are rarely 100% static like they appear in most games (and yes, I know why they're usually static objects, but it doesn't change the fact that I wish it were different).

 

[More Fun To Compute]

You're the one said you made an effort to explain your position logically. You are correct, you have no responsibility to be logical or support your arguments. This is an internet forum, not a graduate thesis.

I don't get this. If I did take the time to build some detailed argument about why people don't like time limits then I would either get people just saying "strawman lol" or going on for ages about one word I used that they didn't like. So why not just stick to talking about what I think they can add and why I reject the idea that they can be easily be removed or replaced and should be.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I don't get this. If I did take the time to build some detailed argument about why people don't like time limits then I would either get people just saying "strawman lol" or going on for ages about one word I used that they didn't like. So why not just stick to talking about what I think they can add and why I reject the idea that they can be easily be removed or replaced and should be.

Actually, people said "strawman lol" in response to your strawman. Rather than waste a lot of time and energy over several pages defending what you said and claiming everyone else has the problem, you COULD just accept responsibility. It's not that hard. Here are some examples:

1. "Yeah, maybe that wasn't the best choice of words."
2. "I was attempting to use hyberbole for humorous effect and came off like I actually thought that, sorry."
3. "I guess I'm just hyper sensitive, I feel like games are getting robbed of all challenge and it drives me nuts."

Or, you could continue with option 4, which is basically a refined version of "U MAD BRO? Y U MAD?" and keep wondering why people aren't engaging you in collegial discussion.

 

[Zipa]

Isnt the new final fantasy game that is coming out almost entirely based of fighting against the clock?

 

[winginson]

Personally I like the idea of time limits, maybe make them optional. I do like the added sense of urgency, do I go for the better armor or the better weapon?, Save the kitten from the tree or gather more supplies?, Can I do both?.

To me this makes all the choices you make have that much more impact on you.

 

[renegade7]

I agree. I love Skyrim, but I want to see more games like Majora's Mask.

You had plenty of freedom because you could restart the clock, but in so doing you would lose your progress in whatever task you were working on, so you had to be very careful about your time. I would dearly love to see the principal of Majora's Mask extended to an Oblivion-like scale.

 

[pilouuuu]

Well, Mass Effect 3 had a time limit for some quests and that resulted in that I lost a few quests and I said "Fuck that! Well, nevermind... I don't care, if you don't want me to play your stupid quests, Bioware, it's OK, I won't play them.". And after the awful ending I don't have any intentions to play the game any time soon, if ever, so those are lost quests for me. Maybe some were actually good...

 

[Ickorus]

You might be interested in this game, OP:

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1473965863/sui-generis

Essentially life goes on whilst you faff about in the depths of a dungeon.

I do agree to an extent with you, I love my open-world games but very often it feels like story has been sacrificed for it and as a big fan of lore and exploration that leaves me in a bit of a pickle.

 

[The Funslinger]

tl;dr Why don't more open world games have more time limits?

Because it's an utterly terrible idea. People who play open-world games usually do so specifically because of the more relaxed, 'take your time and do what you want, when you want' feel.

Suspension of disbelief is all that is required here. Screw realism and screw time limits.

Terrible idea. Glad someone came out and said it.

That said, I actually like the stories in the Elderscrolls games. Yeah, pissing about while Alduin goes desecrating the corpses of his friends somewhat breaks the flow, but that's on you.

This is a game where you assume the role of the Dragonborn, and that means I acted in character to how I thought my character would act, and reacted to events with an appropriate sense of urgency. I didn't cut out sidequests and exploration completely. I did some of them, as I travelled manually a lot of the time, which is often an aspect of 'journey of the hero' type stories; taking time from the larger goals to help with smaller, but still impactful issues.

That's also how I acted in the Mass Effect games, and one thing that really impressed me about ME3 was the way that bit my character in the ass. Got Ashley to the hospital, visited her, and then left. Shit started blowing up on Tuchanka, and it all had a sense of urgency that told me it needed dealing with now.

So I lost Ashley. That was an emotionally impactful development and a brilliant way to utilize the freedom aspect of a game.

 

[Ranorak]

SNIP

What's stopping you from ROLEPLAYING this urgency?
Keep time yourself?

Example: In skyrim, after you escape from the Tutorial Town and arive in ... the people ask you to warn the Jarl, so he can send guards.

Why can't you just think for your self, Oh! my character would find that important, lets hurry.
Or; Meh, what do I care about your town... is that a mine over there?

Sure, the game might not punish you, but there is nothing stopping you from setting up your own limits.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

It completely defeats the purpose of why people play those games. If you don't like it set yourself an arbitrary time limit in the game world you think is fair and if you don't meet it delete your save. Just like what people do in a Nuzlocke challenge. Why do you need people to enforce this when you can do it yourself? As others on this forum many times complaining about JRPGS you are in a RPG start doing so RPing in your Ging.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

I...don't want any of that, unless it's a case-sensitive thing. Fallout 1 and Majora's Mask both showed that games with a time limit can be amazing as you understand that you can't do everything, so you try to do as much as you can in that time, or you play it multiple times to get the most out of it, or you have a way to reset the time without losing all progress (just most of it). But this argument seems to stem mostly around the Elder Scrolls games, where timing and narrative pacing are things far and away foreign ideas. Something like Infamous 2, however, a large open-world game that has remarkable progression and a distinctly paced narrative that gives a great sense of timing, doesn't need a time limit because as the missions progress, and at loading screens, you see the Beast coming your way. Do keep in mind which elements the game in question is using most, though. You don't like games with bad narrative pacing? Play Deus Ex, or Dishonored. You want to dick around in a large sandbox filled with all kinds of ways you can play a game? Play Prototype. You want all pacing with little motivation? Play Black Ops, or something.

Or, you could just play Majora's Mask, and realize how annoying, though interesting as it may be, to have that ticking clock the whole time.

 

[TheVampwizimp_v1legacy]

SNIP

What's stopping you from ROLEPLAYING this urgency?
Keep time yourself?

Example: In skyrim, after you escape from the Tutorial Town and arive in ... the people ask you to warn the Jarl, so he can send guards.

Why can't you just think for your self, Oh! my character would find that important, lets hurry.
Or; Meh, what do I care about your town... is that a mine over there?

Sure, the game might not punish you, but there is nothing stopping you from setting up your own limits.

This is the solution. I played Skyrim about 8 times in six months after it released, but for the last six months since I had totally lost interest. The world feels so flat, and your character's interaction with it is meaningless. I totally understand the position that a time limit is the best way to create urgency and need in a plot, the best way to move it forward. The problems with this have been documented here, but I would be willing to sacrifice certain things to get a better feeling of a living world with consequences.

So, one day I had the idea that the only way I was going to go back to Skyrim was to fabricate my own sense of urgency. In RPGs I always try to roleplay, try to get into the heads of characters and do what they would do. But this time, I decided to take it to the furthest extreme and play a game with as realistic a character as possible. I developed a backstory for her and a set of motivations, and since the start of the game I have tried my hardest to stick to this setup as meticulously as possible.

She needs to eat every day, she needs to find shelter and rest every night, if she contracts a disease she may be laid up in bed for days. I have not nor will I ever fast travel; the closest I will allow is to hire a carriage. She has doubts and fears that she can't just shake off because her user has no limitations. The decisions I have made with her are all with her mind and her options as a person, and never with the idea of making the game easier for myself. Total committment to living in this world and reacting to its possibilities and dangers and problems from the personal perspective of someone who does not know all the ins and outs of the world. And it is the most fun I have ever had playing Skyrim.

SO, this is clearly a problem that has a simple solution. Just take it upon yourself to build an atmosphere appropriate to what you want to do. No one can interfere in that.

 

[More Fun To Compute]

SNIP

What's stopping you from ROLEPLAYING this urgency?
Keep time yourself?

Example: In skyrim, after you escape from the Tutorial Town and arive in ... the people ask you to warn the Jarl, so he can send guards.

Why can't you just think for your self, Oh! my character would find that important, lets hurry.
Or; Meh, what do I care about your town... is that a mine over there?

Sure, the game might not punish you, but there is nothing stopping you from setting up your own limits.

Because it's a role playing game that is supposed to be moderated by the game. Not some sort of acting workshop. You might as well say why don't I play ET on the Atari and pretend that it is the best game ever and really faithful to the movie. I suppose that I could do that.

Actually, people said "strawman lol" in response to your strawman. Rather than waste a lot of time and energy over several pages defending what you said and claiming everyone else has the problem, you COULD just accept responsibility. It's not that hard. Here are some examples:

1. "Yeah, maybe that wasn't the best choice of words."
2. "I was attempting to use hyberbole for humorous effect and came off like I actually thought that, sorry."
3. "I guess I'm just hyper sensitive, I feel like games are getting robbed of all challenge and it drives me nuts."

Or, you could continue with option 4, which is basically a refined version of "U MAD BRO? Y U MAD?" and keep wondering why people aren't engaging you in collegial discussion.

I'm not sorry about it. To be honest I don't see it as being that offensive in the great scheme of things. I suppose it could be argued that the term pussy is gendered and that it is bad associating it with something as weak as people who can't handle time limited quests in RPGs. In that case I apologise to women.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I'm not sorry about it. To be honest I don't see it as being that offensive in the great scheme of things. I suppose it could be argued that the term pussy is gendered and that it is bad associating it with something as weak as people who can't handle time limited quests in RPGs. In that case I apologise to women.

Ah yes. They "can't handle it".

I guess it's obvious we've taken this as far as it can go. This has been a very revelatory conversation though, so thank you.