• Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 hours ago

    8 times bigger than Witcher 3 filled wilth Witcher 3 quality content would be a godsend. 8 times bigger than Witcher 3 filled with procedural generation and AI slop… not so much.

    • Khrux@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I do think a huge world with an engaging and dense design can still be made worse with size. In some games like Skyrim, Breath of the Wild or GTA 5, you could probably drop me anywhere and I’d know where I was, half due to good and differing region design and half because the map isn’t that big.

      Back in 2015 I’d dream of a GTA 5 expansion that adds San Francisco and Las Vegas to the map, turning the north and east of the map in to a 500 yard straight of water, but in reality, two more large cities and their surroundings suburbs and wilderness would have never kept it’s memorability like the first region.

    • bob_lemon@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      7 hours ago

      I will argue that Witcher 3 did not have enough content for it’s own world. Don’t get me wrong, the content was great, but there’s large swathes of emptiness inbetween. The devs tried to fill it with map markers that got repetitive very quickly (hello, random floating barrels).

      IMO, downscaling the world to 75% size and reducing the amount of non-quest content would have made the game better.

    • Pheonixdown@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 hours ago

      If we’re copying Witcher 3 levels of content anywhere, can we leave behind like 95% of the ocean based points of interest? That was the absolute lowest point of the game for me by a mile.