Open worlds in games

[Sheriff-murder]

Hey, I was wondering if you could help me with this survey, perhaps fill it out and give me some comments.

I need some help figuring out what kind of general consensus there is on this topic.

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/6QQ2LXM

Thanks in advance!

Edit: Had to clear the data, there was some mistakes in a couple of questions. But everything is ready to go now!

 

[killer-blead]

Filled it in.


Did you make this survey? what is it for anyway?

 

[Sheriff-murder]

Yes I made it, it is for research. For my own game design, and possibly an official document.

 

[Kazzan]

Done. I like Open Worlds, but I don't like too much random generated content, like randomly generated loot and so on, or randomly generated monsters in dungeons for example.

 

[Chewbacca]

Done

 

[Slawtering]

Done-Diddly-Un

 

[vadermath]

Done!

 

[Swadius 2.0]

Done. I like Open Worlds, but I don't like too much random generated content, like randomly generated loot and so on, or randomly generated monsters in dungeons for example.

When the content is generated only in a first order descriptive sense, I agree that it will get boring fast as well as predictable despite being "random". It is only when the randomness is applied more thoroughly that it appears to be worth the coding effort. Where the randomness is allowed to permeate into second order concepts of whatever entities the game is making random.

 

[Scully]

Some amount of randomness is essential imo. But instead of random monsters spawning anywhere in an open world (i.e Minecraft), having random monster lairs spawn around the world is better. Actually the less random they are the better. If you clean out a dragon lair, there should be a higher chance that certain carnivore creatures should make their home there, or maybe some cult drawn there by the magic emanating from the dead dragon.

Put the same principle in all situations of a game imo. Something being completely random gets boring fast.

 

[Phonemelter]

Put the same principle in all situations of a game imo. Something being completely random gets boring fast.

Completely random, yes, but there should still be a degree of it present. I personally do no like the idea of having lairs in the case described because that would get boring fast in my opinion; every time I would see a sort of cave I would know there would be creatures there. There should be certain places that specific creatures should spawn, but having it varied would keep things more exciting than "genetic lairs."

 

[Scully]

Who says they can't be abandoned? Not me.

Now that I think of it. I believe Dwarf Fortress has something similar in it's world/history creation code. Nothing is ever the same, but it's not completely random either.

 

[Amagic]

Done. I think RTS games need more open worlds, and not the turn-based kind RTS.

 

[Jhnking]

Did it.

 

[mr.master]

Dun it.

 

[killer-blead]

Who says they can't be abandoned? Not me.

Now that I think of it. I believe Dwarf Fortress has something similar in it's world/history creation code. Nothing is ever the same, but it's not completely random either.

You mean in the way that it's random but follows a set of rules to which degree it should be random?  That's what I filled in too. I don't really like the random loot in oblivion. From a certain level you almost always find a enchanted item in every chest. While imo it would be more rewarding if you needed to go to the far end of the lair/dungeon to reach the jackpot.

 

[Crroatian]

done (forgot to post yesterday)

 

[AWdeV]

Aiite Graylord, I've surveyed your monkey.