Open-World or Plot-Driven?, Which do you prefer? Options

[TheDreamWriter]

This is the basis of a new long-term game project that I am developing (Explorer, exclusive to RPGRev).

It is an open-world explorer with no pre-set plot. The game will evolve around the player's game style.

If you complete a quest, it may unlock one quest but lock another from access. But, at the same time, you could sit at home farming.

Do people think it would be better for a game to be open-world or plot-driven?

~TDW

[bulmabriefs144]

Plot-drven. I am in favor of open-world, but well... look at the Elder Scrolls games. They have a central plot that you can completely disregard to do sidequests. I think the plot should be set in stone (I don't like the idea of shifting too much due to the characters, as I think the author should be trying to tell something specific in terms of a message for their players, which gets lost if it's too flexible), but the flexibility should instead be in the game's sidequests.

[TheDreamWriter]

This is very true, bulmabriefs144, but plot-driven very much limits the player. I certainly agree that it helpa to portray the author's message a lot clearer but it is very restrictive in terms of allowing the player the freedom of doing what he or she wants. Plot-driven games require you to be in the mood to play a specific game type, whereas open-world allows for you to play the game regardless of the type you feel like playing. It opens up hundreds of new doors for the player. Don't you agree?

[samer95]

I'm also in favor of plot driven games, but I disagree with bulmabriefs144 on having flexibility through side quests because they're meaningless. I remember playing games like Batman: arkam asylum & silent hill downpour and both have a lot of side quests but I never did any because, well, I didn't have much time but mainly because they're not important. so for me, an ideal game would be plot driven(where you know what to do next) but the flexibility should be within the central plot itself where you have choices that shapes the story.

[TheDreamWriter]

So, samer95, you're saying an open-world game that still has a set storyline?

So, for example, the player can do certain things (such as gambling at a casino) as long as it does not use money needed later in the game or use up precious time in a time-based game?

I think that a basic back-plot is needed to keep open-world explorer's valid and feasible, but their vast openness allows the game to shift around the player, rather than the player have to adapt to the game. Surely?

[phxDansuke]

I think there should be a balance between open world and plot driven.

For example, you have a wide open world to explore, but you can only go south because if you go somewhere else, you will know monsters are way too difficult. Because people grinding is something seen as both good and bad depending on the player, you should put sidequests that actually tells you a little bit more about the plot, or the characters' backstory and motivations. You know, like anime filler that actually makes sense.

That way you can level up your character and be more immersed into your story, and you're ready to go to higher grounds. Now, for people who loves to kill monsters and battle, you should put very elaborate dungeons and secrets and stuff in the more difficult areas, as an incentive to explore and be stronger.

And to avoid bosses being overpowered or underpowered, each should require a different strategy (for the immersive player), or enough HP to actually be difficult to button mash (for the offensive player)

In conclusion, get the best of both worlds

[Jens of Zanicuud]

I am for plot-driven games, like TWEWY and/or 999: Nine Hours, Nine Persons, Nine Doors.
If I have to be honest, the plot is exactly what I seek in a RPG game.
Some of my friends played Skyrim for a whole bunch of hours, and I saw it played for a good amount of time, but I think it is only a game with a good gameplay and countless options/sidequest, nothing more.
The perfect synthesis would be a plot-driven game with multiple endings according to the player's choices.
This is, in my opinion, the best way to connect freedom/exploration together with a solid plot, adding replay value.

Jens

[thatbennyguy]

Well yeah duh your game got the Best Story award for the R3 awards xD

But the thing I don't get it is when games try to tell a story as if it is a novel. What I end up doing is reading an interactive novel rather than experiencing an atmospheric game. I like the world to tell the story, not be told it through several blocks of text, like in a book. If I wanted a story, I'd pick up a novel, not play a game. However, an open world with no story at all is just as bad.

I think that your game can be a mixture of open-world and plot-driven; it doesn't have to be a choice. Final Fantasy games let you roam around and do random things, before going on the main quest. The strength of an open world game is that you can do what you want, when you want, with little restriction. The weakness of this is the story, and the character development. A game like Fallout 3 had a good balance, and backed it up with awesome post-apocalyptic atmosphere.

[Jonnie19]

See, you cannot just choose one or the other because without the other the game becomes dull and boring. You need to ensure that you have a balance between the two.

The perfect synthesis would be a plot-driven game with multiple endings according to the player's choices.
This is, in my opinion, the best way to connect freedom/exploration together with a solid plot, adding replay value.

Jens

Basically this. You need a plot otherwise you end up running around with no structure, and a game with no structure is like a body with no bones in my opinion. Just a lump of mess.

Now I'm not saying it has to have a rigid structure. but some form of structure even if it's just which world order is ideal. Lets take FFX-2 for an example.

Now you can go straight through with "Hotspots" to progress the game to the next section. However there are other missions that can be completed, which not only increase game completion but introduces more aspects of the story line including the ideals of New Yevvon and the Youth League, and of course finding as many sphere's as possible to find out about whiny bit....I mean Tidus. and the sphere hunting...and the Ultimate Dresspheres...and the list continues.

That, although many people really hate FFX-2, is a brilliant example of a game that incorporates both an Open World and a structured story line.
/end WOT

[amerk]

An open world concept really only works for online MMORPG's, because the developers behind such games continue to expand on the world the players are in, creating multiple quests, achievements, side stories, etc. One group of players could spend hours on one quest, while another group is focused on other quests. The world continues to expand, new stories are added, and the players can more or less dictate how to proceed.

But even within those side missions, there's usually some form of restriction. A newbie generally can't go after the big bad for the ultimate weapon until he's had a chance to earn the right, and the stamina, to do so... unless he's very lucky or has found a way to cheat the system. And each quest still has their own goals.

Trying to create an open-world concept from a one-man-show for an indie game made out of RPG Maker doesn't bare so well. I'm not saying it can't be done, but I've only seen a small handful of such games in the various forums I've been a part of, and usually they end up flopping or going incomplete. The reason is simple: it's easier for a one man team to create a simple game with a more linear focus than it is to create an epic game with tons of epic possibilities.

Considering that this isn't going to be an MMORPG (unless I'm wrong), your game will either have to end somewhere, unless you plan to continually provide patches for the game, but then you need to ensure everybody's previous saves can carry over (not an easy task to do). You want a game that ends with a bang, leaving people wanting more, or at least appreciating the time they spent on it. Sure you could have a quest-driven game with no real plot, but what does the player think in the end? Was it worth their time? What was the point?

This doesn't apply to all games. Certainly, puzzle fun games meant to earn a high score, or a pet sim game meant to always loop with random results to keep your pet happy and healthy, or farming, etc., these games really don't have to have to have a plot, but rather than a plot, it should have a goal, and that's what you need to decide with an open world game:

What is the goal for the player?
What will I do to execute such a goal?
How have I emphasized this goal to the player?

Another idea is to remove the complete randomness of the game (ie., open world concept), but find a way to create replayability. Do the players choices or sequence of actions change the outcome of parts of the story (if not the whole story)? Think in terms of Chrono Trigger. Different things had different consequences, thus leading to a variety of different endings depending on what you did or didn't do, in turn create the need to replay the game a different way, and all of this while still having a main plot.

[JayRay]

An open world concept really only works for online MMORPG's, because the developers behind such games continue to expand on the world the players are in, creating multiple quests, achievements, side stories, etc. One group of players could spend hours on one quest, while another group is focused on other quests. The world continues to expand, new stories are added, and the players can more or less dictate how to proceed.

An open world concept does NOT just work in MMORPGs... Let's look at one of my favorite old time Space Sims, Freelancer. The ability to farm and explore unknown regions of space not used in the story was not only nurtured, but... wasenhanced by the engine. By allowing the basic explorations of the world, you may uncover secrets, power-ups and addons that while it was possible to play the game quest 1 to quest 100, you possibly could have won, you have a funner time blasting the boss with your more powerful artifact that wouldn't have been available had you not preformed those side-quests...

My point is... don't let the open roam too imbalanced... If its believed that at around 20th level you should be defeating this particular boss before going on, make a cap to the open roam, allowing the person only so much overpowering... Final Fantasy did something like that with the experience caps... a 1st level character would get a certain amount of experience while a 6th level character would get far less... Then by creating a choke point in the game, with more powerful adversaries only accessible on the other side of this quest, you ensure that it becomes harder and harder to farm until pre-requisites are accomplished. An example of that, is back in Freelancer, where you could not reach beyond Freedom Space until you received the security codes to enter Britonia space.

[amerk]

I never said it only worked for MMORPG's, but in most cases I've seen, open world concepts are usually MMORPG's. Given, a lot of newer console games do include a lot more open-world concepts now than they have in the past, but the games you are listing are commercial development, which usually has a whole team of experts working on a part of the project. That's nowhere close to the same thing as an indie developer trying to make a game by himself/herself.

Can it be done? Certainly, if one person is dedicated enough. But the chances of it happening on any game editor is slim to none if you don't have a team helping you out. I've played through over a thousand indie games, and while I'm sure there's plenty more I have yet to play, I have never seen one decent open-ended rpg made with RPG Maker that makes it passed the planning/demo stage. The majority of them wind up being cancelled because it was too much for one person to do.

[Poteat]

A plot driven game that is non-linear coupled with side quest that can effect the story, if only slightly, can give off a sort of open world aspect. Although as far a TRPG's go if you give people too many choices they freak out cuz they don't know what to do in what order, but likely cuz they wanna explore all areas and not miss out on anything.

[bulmabriefs144]

So, samer95, you're saying an open-world game that still has a set storyline?

So, for example, the player can do certain things (such as gambling at a casino) as long as it does not use money needed later in the game or use up precious time in a time-based game?

I'm saying the same thing. I assume you haven't played the Elder Scrolls (Skyrim, Morrowind, Oblivion, Daggerfall) games, or you'd know what I'm talking about. They're mostly open-world. But they have a main quest, that you can choose to do. Or not, and go rob houses, gather mushrooms, or just be a general goof. And in the first case, there should be ways off earning money (such as getting employed).

Maple Story is another good example. You can do a great number of things, from chatting, to grind, to random jump quests, to just exploring (even areas you are way outclassed for). They have a few core quests though, that sorta tie together into a main story.

Not so much a balance between the two, so much as totally open-world, with a plot you can go back to if you really want (memos or journals help in this regard, getting you to figure out what to do next).

In order to make a successful open-world game, you need:

• A big world with cheap transport.
• A working sidequest system.
• A working journal system, that keeps track of what's happened so far.
• An original story, possibly one that offers item bonuses which can't be had just from wandering about.
• Lots of cool things to do (pets, unique spell systems, maybe class changes)
• Possibly the option to steal from or kill other characters, depending on the game (disallow this for plot characters, since it's literally game-breaking)

The actual code is simple or in some places nonexistent, except for the sidequests part (usually it involves at least three switches for acceptance, completion, and post-collection of rewards; I can't think of an easier way except maybe using a variable).

[rewells]

Both! Persona 3 and 4 mastered a happy balance, in my opinion. See my post An Analysis on Persona 4.

I need an objective to make me want to play a game, even if it's nothing more than "An Italian plumber must travel through magic drain-pipes to save the mushroom princess from evil turtle/dragons"....(see, the plot of Mario sounds really interesting even though it's a simple game). "You can plant turnips or go fishing or gamble!" on the other hand...not so exciting to me.

From what it sounds like, you are trying to make a game with a bunch of mini-games that can appeal to different players. That's fine, but I think you need some kind of backstory behind the world that the player is in. Give it a name and a history. Develop some interesting characters for the player to interact with. The plot doesn't have to "drive" the game, per se, but it can make your world worth exploring.