• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Elden Ring’s open world is actually kind of dead and boring

GooseMan69

Member
This game often gets credited along with Breath of the Wild as a pioneer for modern open world game design and I don’t really see it. It does some things well for sure. The hidden areas are cool, and I like the emphasis on discovering things for yourself, without the assistance of Ubi style checklists and map markers. I liked being able to do things in any order. But I dunno, it feels like most of the “discoveries” are just items that don’t even fit with my build, so they’re just useless. At some point I ended up just using a guide to find the best weapons and abilities for my build so I didn’t have to wander around aimlessly only to get rewarded with useless crap.

The world barely has any non hostile NPC’s in it. There’s no towns or settlements. For me, one of the great things about open world games is seeing a new town over the horizon. It feels like a reprieve from the sprawling forests, green fields, and mostly empty spaces that occupy open world games. I love going around to whatever unique shops a town might have, and talking to NPC’s. BOTW keeps this aspect, while still maintaining its free flowing open world. Elden Ring has basically none of this. MGS V gets derided for being empty and barren but ER doesn’t.

The only way to interact with anything in Elden Ring is through combat. Makes sense because it’s an essentially a Souls game, I know. But it became extremely dull as the game went on. There was no “discovery”, just a different enemy trying to kill me. The “what’s over there” feeling dissipated as I realized this. The game is just a series of enemy mobs and mini bosses. Most of them are very cool, no doubt. The art design is tremendous. Not denying any of that. But there is simply no world interactivity beyond direct combat.

For me, Red Dead 2 and BOTW are far superior open worlds. They actually feel alive and lived in. You can literally just walk around like a normal citizen in RDR2 and vibe with the games atmosphere because it is so filled with life.
 
Last edited:

hemo memo

Gold Member
display
 

Agent_4Seven

Tears of Nintendo
It is the first From game I haven't finished multiple playthroughs of and never will. I can't say I like open world design, From games are at their best with more compact and interconnected locations or linear and level-based like Demon's Souls.
I mean, I can't say it's terrible design for a souls like game, cuz it isn't and that's a fact, but at the same time it's bloated for no other reason than to prolong the playtime and not offer anything meaningfull and interesting in return tbh. I'd love to play another Demon's Souls-like game (or at the very least Dark Souls III / Sekiro) in terms of design again. Idk if I'll care to play their next game if it'll be just as huge and basicaly the same as all of their other Souls games - I think I had enought of that already. I mean, I don't need new Sekiro game with such gigantic and bloated open world for example.
 
Last edited:

Gandih42

Member
I think it's a fair criticism to want more from the open world of Elden Ring, but I think it is extremely deliberate in it's intent and design to be exactly what your describe. For better and worse. The dead remains of a long lost kingdom. BoTW obviously proves you can have a "dead" land which still has life.

For me, discovering the monsters, fauna, locations, enemies, items, puzzles makes it one of the most memorable open worlds to date. I find the weakest part to be that the significance of some bosses gets watered down with their repeated use in dungeons. But it's a decent compromise to fill out the huge map.

I would honestly prefer their next game to be a more traditional linear and interconnected, but I think Elden Ring succeeds providing an enticing and dangerous world, making it feel more immersive than previous entries.
 

Moonjt9

Member
I find it really odd that you can say Elden ring’s world is empty in the same breath as saying BoTW’s world is not empty. I mean, there is literally nothing in BoTW areas for miles. And there are about a dozen enemies in the whole game. And I like BoTW!

Very strange opinion.

Anyway, there is no one idea for what “open world” has to be. A lived in world like red dead 2 is one way, and that game did it impeccably.

Elden Ring’s take is a world that has been lived in and is basically dying. I’m playing these games with different expectations of what their idea of “open world” is.

Sounds to me like you want every open world to match your ideal of the idea. In that case, well, not to be mean, but go play a game that matches your taste.
 

GigaBowser

The bear of bad news
I find it really odd that you can say Elden ring’s world is empty in the same breath as saying BoTW’s world is not empty. I mean, there is literally nothing in BoTW areas for miles. And there are about a dozen enemies in the whole game. And I like BoTW!

Very strange opinion.

Anyway, there is no one idea for what “open world” has to be. A lived in world like red dead 2 is one way, and that game did it impeccably.

Elden Ring’s take is a world that has been lived in and is basically dying. I’m playing these games with different expectations of what their idea of “open world” is.

Sounds to me like you want every open world to match your ideal of the idea. In that case, well, not to be mean, but go play a game that matches your taste.
Many towns and settlements in TOTKs and many npcs on schedules, fighting in wars, climbing, weather systems, hunting, survival, physics, building, ai layers emergent gameplay

all Elden Rings has is enemies in the world
 
For the OP and those who would agree, can you give an example of a better or maybe not boring open world game? Tryna get a baseline here.
They're going to say Red Dead 2 or GTA 4/5. I've already seen the future of this conversation. As a matter of fact, I already knew OP would bring up RDR 2 before opening the thread. It seems to be the go-to when arguing against any other open world game.
 
Last edited:
GTA V has a goods world and crud gameplay
RDR2 has a good world and OK gameplay
They both have very similar gameplay. When entering a mission, if you stray 5 feet away from your objective it's an instant mission fail. Somehow, this archaic design has never been evolved, and has somehow persisted in Rockstar's wonderful open worlds since the PS2 generation, and no one bats an eye to criticize it.
TOTK has a good world and the best gameplay
I have no opinion on this game yet so I guess you're right. I'll wait to play it at a better framerate before saying anything further.
 

bender

What time is it?
I think some of the inexperience and lack of confidence in crafting open worlds shows in Elden Ring. While I think it is miles ahead of most other open worlds, it didn't have the content variety to support the size of the world they created with the density of content they chose to populate that world with. I wish it would have been a little more barren and given the areas room to breath. The first stage coach you encounter was magical but the third time it popped up, I was like, "oh this again". Less repetition across the board would have gone a long way to making the world feel handcrafted instead of copy/pasted like it has a tendency to do. That's not to say the game doesn't have a massive amount of content and variety as it certainly does. I just wish more games took cues from SOTC. It's okay to have empty spaces in your open worlds.
 

GooseMan69

Member
For the OP and those who would agree, can you give an example of a better or maybe not boring open world game? Tryna get a baseline here.

I gave Red Dead 2 and BOTW as examples. Those to me are the gold standards, for different reasons.

And yes, RDR2’s mission design is dated and overly linear. But the open world itself is absolutely stunning.
 
Last edited:

TrueLegend

Member
Really now, Elden Ring is boring but Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom are teeming with life...... are you serious? Breath of the wild is the most empty open world ever, it makes ubisoft games look like they are light years ahead. Breath of the wild is fun during combat and puzzle solving but by God you have to be a fool to call it a lively world. Elden ring doesn't feature lively world by design, if features a deadly world and it's beautiful and it's gameplay is simply the best in industry and the discovery of location in this game wows in a manner Zelda has never ever done. I will say player agency is much higher in Zelda but sense of epic journey and mystery, not so much.
 

ZehDon

Gold Member
The world being dead is kind of the point of the game. As for its open world design, I think it's a masterclass in exploration. Unlike games like GTA or even Cyberpunk, where the world is alive and has systems to interact with, Elden Ring's focus is getting you into the cave, over the hill, and around the corner. The way its world is structured, the way the design of the world works with the game's progression mechanics, and the way it does it all without stopping for cut scenes every seven steps or a tutorial pop up every other second is pretty special. The kind of undirected-but-subtly-directed-kind-of exploration it employs isn't for everyone, but it was certainly for me. In fact, it was the on-ramp for me into the Souls games after I bounced off Dark Souls entirely.
 

Fredrik

Member
The open world is dead and static, no doubt, but it’s filled with content and it rewards exploration and that’s where most other games fail, including RDR2 and BOTW.
If you find it boring then exploration just isn’t your thing. Don’t overthink it, just go play another game where there is no point exploring.
 

The Cockatrice

Gold Member
Many towns and settlements in TOTKs and many npcs on schedules, fighting in wars, climbing, weather systems, hunting, survival, physics, building, ai layers emergent gameplay

all Elden Rings has is enemies in the world

Most open world games have that, TOTK isnt special either.
 

Drizzlehell

Banned
None of the things that you described about the game sound problematic at all.

Why is the fact that "the only way to interact" is through combat a problem? This isn't fantasy GTA. It's a souls-like game in an open world. Combat and exploration are what these games are about. Expecting the developer to shove in some token open world fluff just to satisfy some nebulous need for "content" is exactly what led to Assassin's Creed series being what it is today.

Finding cool loot isn't really as much of a reward as finding a cool new place to explore with a unique new enemy or boss to fight. You want a dopamine hit from dropping a legendary sword at the end of a dungeon, go play Diablo. A new one comes out in a month, you should like it.

Not sure what are those empty spaces that you're talking about either because the game is filled with interesting places to explore and discoveries to be made.

Overall, it sounds like you want the game to be something else without really being receptive to the fact that it's just a different kind of open world game that doesn't bother with the established norms of the genre and tries to do its own thing.
 
Last edited:
Because the residents of the world are hostile - and you interact with them solely through combat? That’s a bad thing? That it focuses on what it’s actually best at?

So it’d be less “empty” if it was a bunch of friendly towns and npcs you could go and do random checklist tasks for and have empty chit chat with and play lil mini games and no thanks - give me a break with this narrative
 

Soodanim

Gold Member
When I played Elden Ring I remember thinking that the game had a better open world than BOTW because there were actual rewards for exploration. BOTW's reward was 1/4 of a token for a heart/stamina upgrade. Sure, there's the odd equipment piece, but it pales in comparison. Sure, there's some NPCs in BOTWs, but take out the filler if you're comparing numbers. Plus, overall, the combat has much more to it and the gameplay doesn't active discourage combat.

Overall I don't actually think it's fair to compare them, because BOTW's influence on ER is clear and it's more of a shoulders of giants situation than anything. BOTW crawled so ER could run.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GHG

K2D

Banned
The lands between feel more life-less than than any soul game before it..

A non-open world can have easily have more soul and personality than a open world game.

Yarnham might be as barren as the world's between, but the streets themselves have a personality which an open air field or a crypt/dungeon/hole in the ground can never have.

Soulsborne games feel occupied when you enter their games. Like you're an intruder..!
 
Last edited:

Majukun

Member
what i don't like about it is that for no apparent reason 95% of its inhabitants are hostile on sight..I get that hopelessness is a signature of from software, but after a while it looks less alive when you can only interact through swords.
 

Doom85

Member
Nope, vastly prefer Elden Ring because I enjoy its combat especially because I can go with a weapon that I enjoy its move set, whereas BOTW is constantly slapping weapons out of the player’s hands with its durability mechanic. I’m aware some like that, but I definitely did not.

Also, due to its vast increase in size of its world, BOTW really doesn’t feel that lived in compared to certain Zeldas like OoT and TP. And even then, so what? Elden Ring was designed that way due to the nature of its story, so I roll with it. Wind Waker felt less lived in compared to some other Zeldas, but that was the nature of its world.

And exploration felt way more satisfying in Elden Ring over BOTW as the enemies and environments were generally far more interesting.
 

The Cockatrice

Gold Member
No others open world game has TOTK physics and gameplays smoothness. Elders scroll is the only games with as close to sames amount of things to do but the gameplay is like janky floating on cardboard

Elden Ring has purdy good combat but zero else to doos

TOTK does some unique things compared to other open world games and other open world games do unique things compared to TOTK. Again, nothing really special but I know you love to sniff Nintendos ass so no point going further.
 

Larxia

Member
and no one bats an eye to criticize it.
It's the main thing that people always criticize about RDR2...
I do myself, I love RDR2, the open world is fantastic, but the gameplay is indeed too restrictive in missions. It was okay for me because I only did story missions every once in a while, I spent a lot of time exploring, but if you start playing a lot of them in a row, it becomes very noticeable how limited it is.

RDR2 strenght are its open world, atmosphere, story, characters etc... But the mission design is something I've seen everyone complain about.

edit: wait maybe I read your post wrong and you meant that no one hesitates to criticize this, I'm not sure :messenger_grinning_squinting:
 
Last edited:

Bekind

Neo Member
I gave Red Dead 2 and BOTW as examples. Those to me are the gold standards, for different reasons.

And yes, RDR2’s mission design is dated and overly linear. But the open world itself is absolutely stunning.
Who gets the right to define the term "Open world"?

Do open world only have two standards like RDR2 and BOTW?

What if there could be all kinds of open world games? If this kind of open world game is not for you, does that mean this game is a bad open world design?

I hate people saying that there should be a "golden standard" for a freaking video game genre. Its like they want to every single game to be the same. Sorry, i dont want that.

Instead, i want more creativity, more diverse game design. I want devs to take more risk pushing the medium forward. Stop gatekeeping the term "Open world".
 
Top Bottom