Nightmare Genie asks you: Every game is open world OR every game is multiplayer

[Spring-Loaded]

The Nightmare Genie appears before you. You are forced to choose one of two "wishes,":

• Every future game is open world
• Every future game is multiplayer

All future games will retain their gameplay as much as possible (racing games are still racing, turn-based RPGs still turn-based), but either with mandatory open world experiences or mandatory multiplayer worked into the existing framework.

If you refuse to choose or attempt to game the system somehow, all future games will be both mandatory open world and mandatory multiplayer 😈

"But how would X game function as open world/multiplayer?" you might ask, the answer to which is: Use your imagination for once in your insipid existence.

All devs magically have the means to make open world function properly in their games—they gain the benefits of open world design, but are still subject to pitfalls of that structure, all based on dev pedigree/strengths. If multi is chosen, devs have adequate servers and you'll always have access to online or couch multi (not both in every in game, games that would only have online without couch co-op would still be that way, and vice versa). Each is unavoidable if playing a given game for any length of time.

Now choose.

 

[InternHertz]

It's time to nuke gaming then.

 

[alr1ght]

We're already there. 😏

 

[Tohsaka]

Open world, zero interest in multiplayer.

 

[Platy]

Multiplayer easily

most of the games i buy already have couch coop, so i think every game can be better with it

 

[captainpat]

open world easily.

 

[Raigor]

Multiplayer.

Everything open world is far far worse and boring than Multiplayer.

 

[Mesoian]

I mean, I remember when every game had to try to shoehorn in some sort of bad multiplayer mode in order to keep the games from being resold 3 days after their 5-8 hour campaign was completed.

To me, the multiplayer option is just gaming going back to the mid 2000's.

 

[Tobor]

That's not a nightmare. I'm always good with open world.

Thanks Dream Genie!

 

[mopinks]

I want to see open world tetris

 

[ShroudOfFate]

Open world. Multiplayer is not my jam most of the time

 

[Jawmuncher]

Mandatory MP isn't bad but it gets wonky when you realize that essentially means "Always Online"

 

[AshenOne]

Open world easily.
MP means that I can't play games anymore considering how bad the internet infrastructure is an how high the ping is.

 

[Greywaren]

I've never had an issue with open world games, so I guess that?

 

[megamanofnumbers]

Humans disappoint me. Single player all the way baby

 

[Pancracio17]

Open World is the future. A well made open world can do most things a linear game can do just as well if not better. There are exceptions, like segmenting areas on completely different enviroments, but maybe devs can get around that with portals. That technically counts as open world, right?

 

[Saiyaman]

Open world wouldn't be a nightmare scenario at all.

 

[Dreavus]

I refuse, and thus usher in a new era of all battle royale games all the time.

 

[SanTheSly]

Everything MP easily. I'm beyond sick and tired of open worlds that are vapid and shallow with identical mechanics.

I don't even enjoy the open world titles everyone else likes.

Would gladly take every game being multiplayer because it would at least offer far more variety in type of games on the market.

 

[CloseTalker]

Every game being multiplayer might get me to quit gaming altogether, that sounds like hell

 

[Nax]

Every game being open world still gives option of having some be multi-player. So easy choice.

 

[Soap]

This is a hard one because I tend to dislike myltiplayer games, but I think that's because there is usually a lot of limitations and trend chasing. As an example, I feel like MMO's still have a lot of untapped potential, but the risk of deviating too far from the popular formula isn't worth it for most devs.

 

[Bane]

Multiplayer has way more variety in genres. Kirby and the forgotten Land, Tetris 99, FFXIV, PlateUp, and Wildermyth are all MP games. Much better than everything becoming the same often bloated genre.

People aren't thinking of what all MP can mean.

 

[Chasing]

I don't count any open world game in my top 5 of all time.

On the other hand, FFXIV is one of my top 5 games.

Multiplayer it is.

 

[Lydecker]

Please every game is neither. Fuck off genie.

 

[Spring-Loaded]

Open world easily.
MP means that I can't play games anymore considering how bad the internet infrastructure is an how high the ping is.

Click to shrink...

The Genie provides reliable online infrastructure for all games (only the games though). This does not mean the multi will always be well-implemented however

 

[Holundrian]

There was a time shortly after the cod boom where it felt like everything had to be MP and a lot of games got entirely unnecessary MP. Also at that time indies weren't as much of a thing so my choices for games I like felt pretty small. So I'll choose open world. While I am bored with the checklist formula I can still appreciate aspects of those games more than I ever could any of the bad MP games.

 

[AshenOne]

The Genie provides reliable online infrastructure for all games (only the games though). This does not mean the multi will always be well-implemented however

Click to shrink...

Also I really suck at PvP in a lot of games, single player open world games would still provide a ton more entertainment.

 

[Javier23]

If I choose open world do I still get some multiplayer games, and if I choose multiplayer do I still get some open world games?

 

[Dougieflesh]

Multiplayer is more fun cuz of friends, so that one.

 

[JigglesBunny]

Multiplayer, easily. I am so fucking tired of every AAA game chasing the open world RPG with loot bullshit.

 

[Tygre]

I am ASTOUNDED open-world is winning.

Every game having multiplayer still leaves room open for so much possibility, so many genres, so many types of game. Every game being open-world narrows the possibility space by so much more.

 

[Rosebud]

Open world easily, if every game was MP I wouldn't game anymore, they give me a huge anxiety

 

[Rats]

If this is a magical world where games can go open world while still retaining everything else good about them, I don't see a downside.

EDIT: Whoops, misread the OP; I'll stick with my answer, this is basically where we're heading anyway.

 

[cyrribrae]

I'm shocked so many people are against MP. MP is the natural choice, there are lots of single player concepts that could be made to work in coop with some work. If the other part of the question is that the quality drops accordingly, then would I rather play a bad open world game or a bad MP game, then probably the OW. But that's not the question. There are few games that COULD NOT EVER POSSIBLY be good in coop. TLOU could be a coop game. Red Dead could be a coop game. Coop RTS. Why not?

 

[Patriiick]

MP, and it's an easy choice. I'm so tired of open world games.

 

[Dougieflesh]

I am ASTOUNDED open-world is winning.

Every game having multiplayer still leaves room open for so much possibility, so many genres, so many types of game. Every game being open-world narrows the possibility space by so much more.

Click to shrink...

People on Era don't have friends.

 

[Rosebud]

People on Era don't have friends.

Click to shrink...

Good luck convincing my friends to pay half their monthly salary for MP games in Brazil lol, at most they will play Fortnite and Fall Guys

I'm shocked so many people are against MP. MP is the natural choice, there are lots of single player concepts that could be made to work in coop with some work. If the other part of the question is that the quality drops accordingly, then would I rather play a bad open world game or a bad MP game, then probably the OW. But that's not the question. There are few games that COULD NOT EVER POSSIBLY be good in coop. TLOU could be a coop game. Red Dead could be a coop game. Coop RTS. Why not?

Click to shrink...

TLOU and RDR co-op wouldn't be the same experience at all. Like imagine if you want to explore and do side activities or stealth while your friend is rushing you to kill more stuff...

 

[Pancracio17]

I'm shocked so many people are against MP. MP is the natural choice, there are lots of single player concepts that could be made to work in coop with some work. If the other part of the question is that the quality drops accordingly, then would I rather play a bad open world game or a bad MP game, then probably the OW. But that's not the question. There are few games that COULD NOT EVER POSSIBLY be good in coop. TLOU could be a coop game. Red Dead could be a coop game. Coop RTS. Why not?

Click to shrink...

Waiting to play until my friends are available sounds like a pain in the ass, and solo coop games have the balance fucked.

Besides there are no genre limitations in open world games. Its a structure at most. Unless the genie is hyper specific, making a small open world with different tetris machines you can play would count as open world tetris. Also multiplayer would still be possible.

 

[J-Tier]

I'm a 10. What do you think I'd pick?

 

[Sagroth]

Open World easily. 90% of my gaming I do to entertain myself while avoiding the f$&k out of other people. I'd quit gaming altogether if every game was multiplayer.

 

[FinalArcadia]

I didn't even have to stop to think about it. The answer is open-world, easy.

 

[scottbeowulf]

I play mp maybe once a year, not my thing. Open world I love, so this is easy.

 

[zzz]

I'm a 10. What do you think I'd pick?

Click to shrink...

You're a 10 but you talk to Nightmare Genies about your gaming preferences.

 

[Pancho]

Open world, no brainer. Multiplayer games rarely appeal to me anymore.

 

[Hasney]

Option 1 sounds like a blessed dream to me

 

[DaleCooper]

I would take an infinite number of GTA-sized games chock full with Yves Guilllemot-faced NPCs over fragging whiny teens in multiplayer games.

 

[cyrribrae]

Waiting to play until my friends are available sounds like a pain in the ass, and solo coop games have the balance fucked.

Besides there are no genre limitations in open world games. Its a structure at most. Unless the genie is hyper specific, making a small open world with different tetris machines you can play would count as open world tetris. Also multiplayer would still be possible.

Click to shrink...

Well that is true. If the question implies that I will always need someone else there to play the MP portion, then that would indeed be a problem. Plenty of even MP and coop games do have SP modes, though. If that's not a possibility, then indeed, the basic logistics of gaming would be a problem.

 

[Ferrs]

Why not both? Sounds cool to me.

 

[Pennybags]

Open world Papers, Please but you're shot the moment you try to leave your desk.