Story vs Open World
andrewc
Join Date: 2016-12-20 Member: 225231Members
Join Date: 2016-12-20 Member: 225231Members
What do the players prefer? Please read before voting:
Currently the game has both Story and Open World goals.
Bare in mind that the devs only have so much time - so more focus on the one means the other gets neglected.
Below are some pros and cons atleast from my mind.
Story Focused:
Self explanatory
Pros:
Cons:
Open World Focused:
This is where the game focuses more on a open experience - allowing players to explore and rewarding them for their endeavors.
Everything in the world has a potential quest around it able to complete in different ways. The players drive would be to explore and unlock everything in the game.
Pros:
Cons:
Currently the game has both Story and Open World goals.
Bare in mind that the devs only have so much time - so more focus on the one means the other gets neglected.
Below are some pros and cons atleast from my mind.
Story Focused:
Self explanatory
Pros:
- Immersive story
- Slight linear gameplay.
- Rewarded as your progress through the story
Cons:
- Open world experience limited (forced in some way to follow story)
- End of story means generally end of game (atleast much of the motivation)
- Everyone's experience is mostly the same
- Rewards are mostly progressing through the story chapters
- Limited replay-ability
Open World Focused:
This is where the game focuses more on a open experience - allowing players to explore and rewarding them for their endeavors.
Everything in the world has a potential quest around it able to complete in different ways. The players drive would be to explore and unlock everything in the game.
Pros:
- Each player has a potentially unique experience
- Replayability high
- Rewarded for actions taken.
- New biomes and content can easily be added without being limited by a story line.
Cons:
- No large scale cut scenes / animations in order to tell a story
Comments
NOT
BOTH
I feel the devs are currently more focused on the story - causing the open world experience to be a little lacking...
Also, story gives meaning to new biomes. If they added biomes without story, then it will look cool for a few minutes until we are bored of it. Add a Precursor Gun to the Mountain Island instantly makes the Mountain Island biome more interesting. It gives purpose to go exploring instead of staying in the comfort zone waiting for rescue. Why bother risking your life to go to the Active Lava Zone to find a cure when we can soak up some rays while waiting for some ship to come rescue us?
An immersive story paired with open world exploration gives that much more depth to a game. Focusing just on one or the other will make the game feel lacking. As @starkaos said, having the story gel with new biomes makes it worth it to explore those areas more.
Truthfully, they should make some of the story elements more difficult to complete so as to keep the player from progressing to far ahead and leaving the exploration part in the dust. I don't enjoy finishing a story without seeing what other things there are in the game and vice versa. I won't mind staying on this planet for awhile longer before rescue/escape is possible. As nice as it was to see the effects of the Sunbeam come down and get blown to bits...it was too soon in my point of view.
Which is what I would vote for.
BTW: The Dev's don't need us telling them how to create the version of the game, They chose from the outset.
In truth, what we would "prefer" individually, isn't Their main goal...
The Main Goal is to sell as many copies of the game as possible and appealing to only one particular type of gamer isn't the way to go.
You either have the length of an ocean with the depth of a puddle
Or
A puddle with the depth of an ocean.
I think the story is necessary to lead you to a satisfying end game narrative. I think the game is populated enough to allow for story mechanics. But overall? I'd rather have more maps, oceans, enviroments, biomes, and size.
Hence why I suggested adding player made maps.
I adore the basics of survival games of collecting and setting your own pace and paths, but very few survival games appeal to me because of, among others, the whole procedural generation stuff (which I find pretentious and/or deadening in all cases I've seen it) and the lack of an ending (I like to be able to finish my games rather than stop playing them). Survival games used to come with stories and static maps at least half the time before Minecraft brought them into the spotlight. Think the Survival Kids/Lost in Blue series, Biosys (Dear GoG, please get a deal done with Take2 for 2017), Robinson's Requiem/Deus, and the 2013 mini-survival Rust and Blood. That is the kind of survival I like and I am glad UWE is straying from the post-Minecraft mindset to do their own thing.
None of the cons mentioned qualifies as a con to me; maybe that one about ending the story auto-ending the game, but we already know ending the game is going to be optional.
The fact of the matter is that you can have the biggest world in existence and there's not much point to it if it's not full of interesting and fun things to do, and reasons to explore it (No Man's Sky). The world of Subnautica is never going to be a contender for the biggest out there, not if they're hand-crafting terrain. What it can do is showcase that personal craftsmanship and make each area actually legitimately valuable to the player and game in one way or another. A light story is an amazing way to do this, and the way they've been doing story in this game doesn't force people along a singular One True Path to play. It's more like 'Hey, if you need a suggestion for something to do next, why don't you try...' kind of thing, which I love in an open world game.
I agree with this intensely. I remember when I first joined these forums, I was avidly anti-story. In my opinion, I like having a laid-back exploration game, where the daily events unfold on your terms. However, as I got more experienced with the game and with the forums, I did realize the importance of story. The precursor array and bases greatly add to the intrigue of the world, and large cinematic occurrences can add just as much awe as the discovery of a new biome.
I really like the concept of environmental storytelling, however. Some of my favorite moments in the game were discovering the abandoned bases and speculating on the fate of previous survivors. I really think that environmental storytelling is the way to go with subnautica. If the game gravitates more towards story, players could be rushed through biomes or miss out on some of the more beautiful elements of the game. For me, at least, subnautica draws its appeal from the exploration at your own pace, and learning about the active world around you; having the story be something you can seek out while you explore greatly appeals to me.
Also: Holy cow, this poll is clutch!
I Mean I Voted Story But The Story Has To Be A Good Story.
I enjoy exploring this game so much I even play a version from 2015 to explore the map as it was then, gigantic spires piercing the surface and deep underwater cliffside dwellings and all. I don't even know what else could be out there because the biome map doesn't match the underwater landscape that has changed so much over the years.
So, has becoming a "Julianite" turned into a thing now?
If it is, I quit.
You don't realise how hard it is to type like that when you're not used to it. I had to backspace nearly every word because I didn't hit shift.
Though Even Doing It On Purpose Is Annoying.
So This Will Be My Only Foray Into The Weirdness.
I actually agree with you (mostly) on the whole dislike-of-precursors bit. However, I think that they could be added to the story well, I would simply prefer a more exploratory approach. For example the precursor array, while providing an awesome cutscene, seems a bit too "in your face" for me. I would like a more minimalistic approach, tiny bits of tech scattered around, with a few hints about the possibility of an ancient civilisation. The one problem with that is that the current story lends itself to grander structures, and faster action (gun that has shot down several ships, planet-wide ultra-alpha-hyper-death plague).
I just find the whole concept of a long dead advanced culture pretty cliche and unoriginal. And quite boring. The Precursors don't interest me, I simply don't care, they're not a presence, they're a relic.
I would have liked something more akin to The Forest. Some sort of primitive intelligent species of aquatic humanoids that were still living on the planet. I'd like them to threaten the player, hunt him in packs maybe. Make you worry, even in the Safe Shallows, about a roaming pack of fish people. (I'm thinking of the Drowners in the Witcher games now.)
I'm not saying that would be any more original, it really wouldn't. But I'd be drawn in far more to any story about them, because they matter to the player's immediate survival far more.
Meanwhile, I enjoyed the story, partially DUE to the rising stakes and tension that was felt because of the slightly linear structure.
"Lost ancient civilization" and "the sub-humans come to kill me" are effectively sibling tropes from the adventure genre as developed by the West in the colonial era. The latter is more... charged than the former, so I vastly prefer the lost ancient civilization cliche. Besides, within SN's no violence foundation, arbitrarily aggressive roaming packs of any sapient species just doesn't fit.
I fully agree about the Precursors and everything relating to them being cliche, and I think I had the same misgivings about the story at first as you still have. I'm not sure whether I've simply accepted the inevitable or come to appreciate the variety to the gameplay the cliche nonetheless offers. There's only so much the Degasi can leave to explore, so I'm glad another takes over.
Without good story it will remain what it already is but nothing more. Its not so bad but it can become so much more if the story/lore is well created/implemented. Im not sure so far if the Carar is related to Natural Selection's Khaaras in any way (as suggested in @Bugzapper 's Borealis Rising) but if it is .... it'll be awesome
That's not refusing... you just can't vote.
Don't enable power where there is none.
Oh... I think I am a Misanthrope?!
Which just proves that the vote is extremely flawed. Which is why None of the Above should be added at the bottom of every single vote be it political, marketing, or some other type of vote.
Yes there's a story, and you can go through that story without exploring, only going to the places the story demands, and flying away at the very end That's taking the story at extreme face value. In reality, there are three-four different stories being told in this game, and one and a half you get to experience fully if you only take it all at face value:
The story with the Sunbeam can be fully explored and understood when we take the game at face value
And the Survivor's story can be explored at face value, but only half way if you don't explore the pod wrecks and pick up the PDAs.
At face value you learn nothing (much) about the Precursors and nothing (much) about the Degasi survivors. If you want to really experiance this game to it's fullest you'd do your very best to explore whilst also playing through the story. You'd be doing yourself a favour balancing the two.