Oh ok, I see where you're coming from on that. And yeah, I can't wait to see what Rockstar can do with an open world game with a real CPU and a real SSD, both things that should benefit their style of games tremendously.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Why is GTA V held up as one of the pinnacles of the open-world game?
- Thread starter Firmament1
- Start date
- Status
This, when I was a kid I wasted so much time without knowledge of a main story, and I am sure a lot of casuals just play that way and today we have multiplayer, but I no longer like to play that way.
You posed this as a question, so we're all going to answer. Heh. It's by far the most advanced simulation of a real city (and surrounding areas). Nothing has even come close. The unbelievable amount of detail, different areas in the game, the AI, etc. are still unmatched. It's almost a miracle that it all still works no matter how much havok and curveballs you throw at it.
I wandered around that city for hours, and way later on I would still come across some street art or something I had never seen before. I love that feeling.
I wandered around that city for hours, and way later on I would still come across some street art or something I had never seen before. I love that feeling.
True. But its more dense and larger than any Arkham world.
Right... but its not a super hero game? I don't expect your character to fly, or jump super tall buildings, or turn into smoke and climb through vents. Instead, you can switch between 3 characters and are put in a large world.
With a full dynamic day/night/weather system unlike inFAMOUS. With more density than inFAMOUS. With the ability to interact with vehicles - unlike inFAMOUS.
Agreed here.
When I played Yakuza I didn't feel like I was moving through the city. It didn't feel large, or deep. It felt like a brawler with a shallow open-world with some neat mini games.
GTAs mini games aren't fun, but they are there. It does also have a robust online mode, with online mini games as well.
It also... actually feels like a city. Unlike Yakuza.
Disagree. And I loved Sleeping Dogs.
Uhh... its not a super hero game.
What game is doing open-world better in your list above?
GTA V ran on fucking 360 and PS3.
Its more dense, larger, has a dynamic day/night cycle, dynamic weather system, animals, tons of NPCs, it has a robust online mode that takes place in the open-world, it has mini-games, you can literally jump into any car you see, you can go to pretty much any vista you see.
Which open-world game does all the above?
OP
OP
I'm talking purely in the context of the singleplayer mode. If I were to mention the online mode though, I'd definitely say it's fun to fuck around with friends, but I'd say that the fun of fucking around is moreso due to my friends, as opposed to the game itself.
>inFAMOUS
I'm not asking for the ability to grind rail in GTA V. I was just shooting it as an example of an open world that had something to offer over other open-world games.
GTA is a master in story telling (not that the story was that great). A master in open world design. A master in detail and so forth. Don't lump GTA in with the rest of the garbage.
I hate GTA for certain reasons, but I still know it's basically untouchable in almost every aspect of open world design.
I dont really get most of your examples as GTAV handily outdoes the vast majority of them at the thing you're comparing them for.
The random encounters can include police and by the emergent nature can end up more interesting. In infamous you ride power cables, in gta you can walk, bike, drive, fly or take boats or even a submarine. The sidequests can have good encounters within them but you're comparing it to an rpg. I genuinely don't understand what you mean by 'neat content' in yakuza so can't really compare that. Sleeping dogs has a very static world in comparison to the dynamic nature of gta where sleeping dogs' world feels closer to wd1 level of design. And finally prototype is a hollow excuse of an open world game where the mechanics amount to nothing more than 'didn't that look cool the first 5 times'.
It really seems more like you've no interest in the game and just want to undersell what it is actually good at it, which is immense amounts of detail on the vast majority of the things it does. There's a reason its held up so high. Hell, if all these games are better at it in every regard, why aren't they still in the charts 2 gens later?
The random encounters can include police and by the emergent nature can end up more interesting. In infamous you ride power cables, in gta you can walk, bike, drive, fly or take boats or even a submarine. The sidequests can have good encounters within them but you're comparing it to an rpg. I genuinely don't understand what you mean by 'neat content' in yakuza so can't really compare that. Sleeping dogs has a very static world in comparison to the dynamic nature of gta where sleeping dogs' world feels closer to wd1 level of design. And finally prototype is a hollow excuse of an open world game where the mechanics amount to nothing more than 'didn't that look cool the first 5 times'.
It really seems more like you've no interest in the game and just want to undersell what it is actually good at it, which is immense amounts of detail on the vast majority of the things it does. There's a reason its held up so high. Hell, if all these games are better at it in every regard, why aren't they still in the charts 2 gens later?
Because of all the reasons you listed, it may not do each of those the best, but it does each of those good enough. And that puts it over the top.
Just like in sports, LeBron might not be the best in every category, but he does each thing good enough and that makes him the best player.
Also, Arkham doesn't have any random encounters. You just beat up people walking in the street lol
Just like in sports, LeBron might not be the best in every category, but he does each thing good enough and that makes him the best player.
Also, Arkham doesn't have any random encounters. You just beat up people walking in the street lol
I personally don't like GTA games that much. The writing is too edgy for me and I find the stories to be quite boring so I always end up noping out after playing in the sandbox for a bit, BUT the open world is still master class. The city feels very alive and populated with tons of explorable interiors, and it's just all around a great sandbox with tons of side activities, character customization, tons of open world impacting goals to work towards etc.
A lot of those games you listed are better in certain aspects, but none of them are better in all aspects of the open world, and I definitely got to disagree with you on Sleeping Dogs feeling more alive, and having less ways to mess around compared to Prototype. GTA V has sooo many ways to mess around that people are still hooked on online so many years later.
A lot of those games you listed are better in certain aspects, but none of them are better in all aspects of the open world, and I definitely got to disagree with you on Sleeping Dogs feeling more alive, and having less ways to mess around compared to Prototype. GTA V has sooo many ways to mess around that people are still hooked on online so many years later.
I think GTA5 was an incredible accomplishment and actually think it holds up well even when measured against more contemporary entries in the genre.
Every game you mentioned the worlds just feel fake, made by a developer. The citizens are nothing more than animated mannequins. Rockstars world's just feel alive more than any other, they're designed better and come across more natural. The sound is incredible, not just the obvious stuff, just walking around in quiet areas of the maps is really emersive.
OP
OP
My point isn't that GTA V should give me the ability to grind rail all over the city; My point is that a lot of the other open worlds at least offer something that makes it stand out from the competition in how the worlds are designed. So is the main selling point for GTA V supposed to be the online mode?
It was great, but I had my nextgen open world experience with GTA IV and Assassins Creed 1 (and 2). That was when open world and exploration truly changed for me. Recently I think Horizon Zero Dawn did it best.
Probably my least enjoyed GTA by some margin.
I respect the attempt to capture a realistic, expansive West Coast LA vibe but there's so much wasted space in the base game outside of Los Santos. I'm sure it's better utilised in GTA Online but I stopped playing back in 2014 thanks to the already ridiculously inflated economy , the lack of things to do and the general bugginess of the experience.
GTA4's Liberty City is maybe still my favourite "realistic" open world map. Small, but dense. Didn't feel like a single inch of that map was wasted.
[I also really didn't care for 5's story, characters, tone, etc]
I respect the attempt to capture a realistic, expansive West Coast LA vibe but there's so much wasted space in the base game outside of Los Santos. I'm sure it's better utilised in GTA Online but I stopped playing back in 2014 thanks to the already ridiculously inflated economy , the lack of things to do and the general bugginess of the experience.
GTA4's Liberty City is maybe still my favourite "realistic" open world map. Small, but dense. Didn't feel like a single inch of that map was wasted.
[I also really didn't care for 5's story, characters, tone, etc]
Yup. Everyone should watch this:
Makes Cyberpunk look like a joke.
Because the world feels more alive than the other games you mentioned. Though I personally feel like Red Dead Redemption 2 & Watch Dogs 2 surpassed it in that regard.
Oh for sure GTA V was absolutely an improvement over IV, I can definitely agree to that.
I listed several selling points.
Its a large world - larger than all/most of those on your list. It includes dense traffic, NPCs, day/night cycle, a weather system, and character switching who each have their own story.
Games like inFAMOUS and Prototype don't let you jack any car and drive all around the city. They don't let you drive airplanes and helicopters.
I don't remember seeing a dart mini-game or poker mini-game or etc. with most of the games on that list.
And hell, how many games on your list do have an online mode allowing you to cause chaos on that large map?
You talk about mini-games in Yakuza when the overworld doesn't even feel like a city. You talk about movement in inFAMOUS when you can't even interact with the cars and you have to wait for a loading screen so the day/night/weather can change. And Witcher 3, which does have a fantastic overworld, doesn't really come close to the density of GTA V (tho Toussaint is nice & gorgeous). On top of that the physics engine and attention to detail in Rockstars game outclasses pretty much all the games on your list.
Its easy to see where GTA V excels and where it fails - but ultimately the world Rockstar created was ambitious and unique. Extra props for running (barely) on last-last gen consoles.
For a contemporary setting the map is unmatched. Even though I've spent thousands of hours in GTA Online, I'm still impressed by the sights and scope. Console updates have not been kind to the game's performance, but it's still easy to drop into the map and get lost on foot.
The driving is some of the best in the genre. It's arcadey, but the vehicles have a weight and inertia to them that makes them intuitive in a real world sense. 30fps aside, the driving could stand alone in a dedicated racing game. On foot moving and shooting needs an overhaul though. The shooting is good enough, but movement is more "directing your character to move" than it is actually moving your on screen avatar. Though this is a common problem with R* and I doubt it will be fixed in future entries after what I've seen with RDR2. Flying is equally as pseudo real as driving.
Missions and activities are adequate when compared to other open-world titles. They are compelling enough to move the narrative, but I can barely remember them outside of a few iconic ones. Saints Row 3 on the other hand has plenty of memorable story missions and events that I found genuinely fun. So much so that I have replayed the game just to experience them again (as there is no NG option). I can't say the same for GTAV.
For me GTAV remains a sum of its parts. I think it deserves the praise, but it also doesn't do any one thing particularly great (other than driving, voice acting, and the map itself). As a whole it still stands above what's out there in a contemporary setting, and I think that R* might be the only ones with the money and the talent to continue moving the needle.
The driving is some of the best in the genre. It's arcadey, but the vehicles have a weight and inertia to them that makes them intuitive in a real world sense. 30fps aside, the driving could stand alone in a dedicated racing game. On foot moving and shooting needs an overhaul though. The shooting is good enough, but movement is more "directing your character to move" than it is actually moving your on screen avatar. Though this is a common problem with R* and I doubt it will be fixed in future entries after what I've seen with RDR2. Flying is equally as pseudo real as driving.
Missions and activities are adequate when compared to other open-world titles. They are compelling enough to move the narrative, but I can barely remember them outside of a few iconic ones. Saints Row 3 on the other hand has plenty of memorable story missions and events that I found genuinely fun. So much so that I have replayed the game just to experience them again (as there is no NG option). I can't say the same for GTAV.
For me GTAV remains a sum of its parts. I think it deserves the praise, but it also doesn't do any one thing particularly great (other than driving, voice acting, and the map itself). As a whole it still stands above what's out there in a contemporary setting, and I think that R* might be the only ones with the money and the talent to continue moving the needle.
Because driving off cliffs and doing barrel rolls in the middle of the countryside is still more fun than anything else in an open world. I don't think this world will ever be outmatched...it's criminal Rockstar doesn't allow all the online craziness offline so I can fly around in a car without dealing with A-Holes online.
Last time i was driving around (driving off cliffs) I came across a small commercial property and got my beat up car stuck on a half wall...I got out and noticed fluid was starting to run from underneath the car onto the ground and pool realistically. Naturally I shot at it and blew the whole thing up. This level of detail is crazy! Next I was stranded so I SWITCHED CHARACTERS, a feat still outmatched. This game is magic and the only thing that comes close is RDR2, Rockstar are in a league of their own as far as open worlds are concerned, and Cyberpunk has only made that more clear.
Last time i was driving around (driving off cliffs) I came across a small commercial property and got my beat up car stuck on a half wall...I got out and noticed fluid was starting to run from underneath the car onto the ground and pool realistically. Naturally I shot at it and blew the whole thing up. This level of detail is crazy! Next I was stranded so I SWITCHED CHARACTERS, a feat still outmatched. This game is magic and the only thing that comes close is RDR2, Rockstar are in a league of their own as far as open worlds are concerned, and Cyberpunk has only made that more clear.
In terms of graphics I think what Rockstar nails is the consistent level of detail throughout, as compared to say Bethesda's happily-sloppily thrown together Fallout games.
Last edited:
I basically agree with you and I think we even agree that the story itself was terrible. The open world design was fantastic. I don't think I lump it in with garbage?
Are there other open world games you can fly way overhead in or go underwater and explore dense reefs and aquatic life?
I found those two things just so damn cool.
I found those two things just so damn cool.
OP
OP
> The random encounters can include police and by the emergent nature can end up more interesting
So what is about the emergent gameplay in GTA V raises it massively beyond other games? Genuinely curious.
> Sidequests
Or y'know, what if all open-world games had good sidequests? Instead of just restricting that aspect of open-world games to RPGs?
> Prototype
Hence why I specified later on in the thread that it's about what the games have over others; Compared to most other games, Prototype is pretty hard to beat when it comes to the sheer potential of fucking around.
> You've no interest, and want to undersell it
What would I even gain from that?
> It sells
Because it's GTA; It's one of the largest gaming franchises on the planet, and there hasn't been a new installment in 7 years.
> dense traffic, NPCs, day/night cycle, weather
I too play games because they have traffic, NPCs, and a day/night cycle.
> Vehicle-jacking
Then in that case, I'd play Just Cause.
> Minigames
You yourself said that they weren't very good. Compare that to a Yakuza game.
> Online mode
Hence why I asked "Is the main selling point the online mode"?
So is your point basically that "It's a jack-of-all-trades"?
This might sound crazy but even GTA San Andreas felt way more interesting to explore. The game was really varied and even though the map was much smaller than 5, it still felt bigger.
Going from Los Santos to Las Venturas felt like a damn Road Trip.
Going from Los Santos to Las Venturas felt like a damn Road Trip.
You know what would be cool?
Rockstar reusing the assets of their games and making a GTA RPG like Fallout and Elder Scrolls.
Imagine creating a character from scratch, joinig gangs, going to jail, doing various side quests with lot's of choices.
Rockstar reusing the assets of their games and making a GTA RPG like Fallout and Elder Scrolls.
Imagine creating a character from scratch, joinig gangs, going to jail, doing various side quests with lot's of choices.
It's the immersion factor, the city has a very natural looking layout and does a great job at distributing some of the most recognizable buildings and landmarks of LA while making it its own thing. Also there's not only the individual npc detail but how certain npcs are dsitributed in certain areas ie gangs, beach bodies, rednecks in rural areas etc. The animation variety of npcs is incredibly impressive as well, just watch how an npc walks in GTA V and they almost all have their own unique walk style and euphoria rigging. Rockstar have been masters at this kind of thing since IV with Liberty City/NYC. Now RDR2 definitely laps it in terms of AI reactivity but that's a game from the same company that came out five plus years after GTA V so that sort of iteration is expected.
I recently returned to Los Santos in VR and its insane just how well it still holds up in terms of detail on a block by block scale. Its the micro detail, the number of unique assets per street, its a feat that has since to be beaten in game dev in terms of city detail in an open world imo. 2077 has some crazy diversity of architectural styles for buildings but the on the ground storefront type stuff is still very typical copy-paste fare you see in other open worlds.
As for the gameplay V felt dated when it came out, the go here pick up x drive to y then go to z mission design is stuck in PS2 era mission design, with RDR2 doing the same. But it still sells so I'm not sure when we'll see Rockstar try something new or at least more freeform than their current style.
I recently returned to Los Santos in VR and its insane just how well it still holds up in terms of detail on a block by block scale. Its the micro detail, the number of unique assets per street, its a feat that has since to be beaten in game dev in terms of city detail in an open world imo. 2077 has some crazy diversity of architectural styles for buildings but the on the ground storefront type stuff is still very typical copy-paste fare you see in other open worlds.
As for the gameplay V felt dated when it came out, the go here pick up x drive to y then go to z mission design is stuck in PS2 era mission design, with RDR2 doing the same. But it still sells so I'm not sure when we'll see Rockstar try something new or at least more freeform than their current style.
It's a very jack of all trades/master of none scenario. Alot of other games do aspects of GTA 5 better but they aren't all interlocking like 5
Feels incredibly lively for it's time and doesn't feel like you can always see the gears moving interms of it being a breathing city.
Feels incredibly lively for it's time and doesn't feel like you can always see the gears moving interms of it being a breathing city.
You mention words in your OP such "dense" "alive" etc etc. I believe all those factors contribute in making it the most immersive open-world in gaming. And yes, you might not play for those reasons. But other people do. And unless I'm wrong this thread is you asking why people like GTA/why is GTA praised. So there you go.
I really don't give a shit about Yakuza's dense mini-games when the open-world is barely an open-world. Or inFamous failing to let me interact with my environment and going through some bullshit transition and taking me out of the game just so it can be nighttime.
I wouldn't say those games "do it better" as you put it.
Play what you like.
I'm not a fan of GTA V in general.
I gave you several reasons, the online mode being one of them.
I'll ask the same question I asked before and you failed to answer:
I'm not even a big GTA fan but it's leagues ahead of all the other games you mentioned in terms of open world/sandbox design.
The only game that rivals it is Red Dead 2. Rockstar just have this shit figured out. If only they could figure out satisfying third person gameplay/combat.
The only game that rivals it is Red Dead 2. Rockstar just have this shit figured out. If only they could figure out satisfying third person gameplay/combat.
The shooting is bad by TPS standard, and the driving is terrible by racing game standard.
But it's way better than watch dog/just cause or any competitor it has, so yeah
OP
OP
Fair enough.
Because the online mode would make by far the most sense as the main selling point. As opposed to traffic.
Your comparison with fantasy/sci-fi games make no sense, because we're talking about a realistic contemporary world simulation.
And in that genre it's second to none. The city feels real in scope and detail. You can take a ride downtown and stop for drinks, go play a round of golf, go the the harbor, take a boat to the airport, hop on a jet and land on the countryside, take a jeep ride to the mountains, take a parachute jump, and land on top of a fucking moving train, all of this in half an hour. And that's barely scratching the surface in terms of activities. The sandbox factor in this game is unparalleled.
Millions upon millions of people haven't been spending so much time on GTAO because of the amazing gameplay. It's because fucking around on a map of this size that has so much variety while still looking super realistic is insanely fun.
And in that genre it's second to none. The city feels real in scope and detail. You can take a ride downtown and stop for drinks, go play a round of golf, go the the harbor, take a boat to the airport, hop on a jet and land on the countryside, take a jeep ride to the mountains, take a parachute jump, and land on top of a fucking moving train, all of this in half an hour. And that's barely scratching the surface in terms of activities. The sandbox factor in this game is unparalleled.
Millions upon millions of people haven't been spending so much time on GTAO because of the amazing gameplay. It's because fucking around on a map of this size that has so much variety while still looking super realistic is insanely fun.
It's a massive city with lots of attention to detail, sharp writing and production values. There's also absolutely a ton of depth to the city itself, so I don't know what you mean by Sleeping Dogs being "more alive".
Playing a ton of Cyberpunk has made me appreciate the little things Rockstar do, that is just absent from that game. They don't waste your time with bullshit the way Ubisoft's open worlds love to do. And they don't make the city feel like a glorified jungle gym the way inFamous or Prototype did.
I wouldn't hold it up as the "pinnacle" of the genre, because I think RDR2 is even better. But GTAV is absolutely an incredible game overall, even if there might be other games that do any single thing better than it does. And that's despite mechanics and design that are rooted in the 360 and PS3 era.
They spend a lot of time and money on those games, and it shows.
Playing a ton of Cyberpunk has made me appreciate the little things Rockstar do, that is just absent from that game. They don't waste your time with bullshit the way Ubisoft's open worlds love to do. And they don't make the city feel like a glorified jungle gym the way inFamous or Prototype did.
I wouldn't hold it up as the "pinnacle" of the genre, because I think RDR2 is even better. But GTAV is absolutely an incredible game overall, even if there might be other games that do any single thing better than it does. And that's despite mechanics and design that are rooted in the 360 and PS3 era.
They spend a lot of time and money on those games, and it shows.
RDR2 is boring as s**t and feels like an on rails game. It's nowhere near as fun as GTAV is.
What makes GTAV a great game is the big picture. It's mechanics on its own aren't the best, but combined, it's the top tier set.
lol but seriously, GTA 3 beats Cyberpunk, GTA V is humiliating
- Status