Playing D:OS 2 lately (which I am quite enjoying, by the way, despite lacking much of what this thread is about; see below) made me realize (or re-realize) that many RPGs suffer from a distinct lack of adventure.
What I mean by this is that playing them often fails to convey a sense of openness -- they are too confined, too "close in on themselves" -- and thus can become stale or unappealing quite early on in their playthroughs unless nearly every other aspect of them otherwise appeals greatly to the player.
One excellent example of this, a classic, is Gothic. Now, Gothic may not be a small game, per se, but I think it's easy to agree that it's fairly well confined. Once you start to comprehend its general layout and areas and get a feel for its density, you realize you're never going to traveling to distant lands in it and will be restricted to generally the same kind of terrain and "look and feel" for its duration. That's not necessarily a bad thing, seeing as how Gothic is an all-time classic, but imagine if it were larger, had more distinct settings you could visit in it, and conveyed more of a sense of wonder and exploration.
The Divinity: Original Sin games are another prime example. The first one, in particular, feels like you're playing the entire thing in a small apartment. Everything in it is so tightly packed that you begin to develop an actual sense of claustrophobia in it. This ultimately led me to abandoning it, as not only did its setting take on that closed-in feeling, but so also did its gameplay style; it was just the same fights over and over, with nothing new or exciting to look forward to. D:OS 2 is a little better on both fronts, and thus has kept my interest longer so far. It at least stands a chance of me completing it some day.
Is this a plea for more open world RPGs? No. Not necessarily. Is it an observation that most if not all RPGs could benefit from at least the sense of being more open, of offering more freedom, of allowing the character to breathe more? Yes. RPGs should convey a sense of adventure. You can't go on an adventure if you're confined to one relatively small region.
All the greatest RPGs in history gave you room to roam. Fallout had you driving around in the desert and visiting other towns across a large map. Torment had many distinct areas and realities to get lost in. Arcanum seemed huge and wondrous right after crashing in the dirigible. And none of these are even considered to be "open world" RPGs.
I want that openness. I crave that sense of adventure. If I just wanted to stick to one area, to never venture out and discover what I had never expected to see, I'd forget about RPGs and fantasy novels and decent sci-fi movies and lead the life of a wage slave normie boomer instead. RPGs with variety and room to roam set my soul free.
What I mean by this is that playing them often fails to convey a sense of openness -- they are too confined, too "close in on themselves" -- and thus can become stale or unappealing quite early on in their playthroughs unless nearly every other aspect of them otherwise appeals greatly to the player.
One excellent example of this, a classic, is Gothic. Now, Gothic may not be a small game, per se, but I think it's easy to agree that it's fairly well confined. Once you start to comprehend its general layout and areas and get a feel for its density, you realize you're never going to traveling to distant lands in it and will be restricted to generally the same kind of terrain and "look and feel" for its duration. That's not necessarily a bad thing, seeing as how Gothic is an all-time classic, but imagine if it were larger, had more distinct settings you could visit in it, and conveyed more of a sense of wonder and exploration.
The Divinity: Original Sin games are another prime example. The first one, in particular, feels like you're playing the entire thing in a small apartment. Everything in it is so tightly packed that you begin to develop an actual sense of claustrophobia in it. This ultimately led me to abandoning it, as not only did its setting take on that closed-in feeling, but so also did its gameplay style; it was just the same fights over and over, with nothing new or exciting to look forward to. D:OS 2 is a little better on both fronts, and thus has kept my interest longer so far. It at least stands a chance of me completing it some day.
Is this a plea for more open world RPGs? No. Not necessarily. Is it an observation that most if not all RPGs could benefit from at least the sense of being more open, of offering more freedom, of allowing the character to breathe more? Yes. RPGs should convey a sense of adventure. You can't go on an adventure if you're confined to one relatively small region.
All the greatest RPGs in history gave you room to roam. Fallout had you driving around in the desert and visiting other towns across a large map. Torment had many distinct areas and realities to get lost in. Arcanum seemed huge and wondrous right after crashing in the dirigible. And none of these are even considered to be "open world" RPGs.
I want that openness. I crave that sense of adventure. If I just wanted to stick to one area, to never venture out and discover what I had never expected to see, I'd forget about RPGs and fantasy novels and decent sci-fi movies and lead the life of a wage slave normie boomer instead. RPGs with variety and room to roam set my soul free.