do you prefer seamless open worlds or worldmaps?

I prefer seamless maps

>>713342823 (OP)

They both have a place depending on game vision and both of them can be executed well.

/thread

>>713342823 (OP)
seamless. the less loading screens the better

>>713342823 (OP)

Worldmaps and it´s not even close.

>>713342823 (OP)
Give me some good towns and I am happy

the fact that people even care about this shit is the reason most games are creatively bankrupt boring UEslop thee days

>>713343403
retard

>>713342823 (OP)
I hate open world

Thinking about fundamental design principles, I think seamless open world is favored. However, basically none of noteworthy open world games utilize or take advantage of open world design: they effectively consist of isolated levels with the "in-between" areas filled in by procedural generation, while making the world suffer from distorted sense of scale (villages are hundreds of meters apart), meaningless waste of time, and harmful "point of interest" meme content that exists solely to fill the void. With very few exceptions, they would be better off using a world map to travel between the areas that actually matter. Exceptions include worlds that are dense and almost thoroughly utilized despite being open world (such as Gothic, or World of WarCraft), games that have some simulation going on such that the world is dynamic (I can't think of a "proper" open world example, but think of a game like Star Control 2), or the travel is the point (like truck or flight simulators).

For the record, they aren't mutually exclusive designs. Traveling through world map can be implemented such that internally the game traverses through the covered ground in accelerated time such that you can enter the world at any point, and encounters throw you into the world from the world map view.

>>713342823 (OP)
I prefer well crafted levels that loop into other parts like the first half of Dark Souls 1.

>>713345385
this. shame we'll never ever get anything like it again. seems to somehow be a lost art.

Between those options it would have to be world map
But my actual favorite is the way a lot of cRPGs do it with locations you can just visit whenever

>>713345505
Prey (2017)

>>713345586
oh yeah, true. that game has probably the best most well designed map ive ever played. forgot about that one. shame no imsim since has matched it

>>713342823 (OP)
Depend on game
Seamless openworld works better on games like dragon dogma and kenshi
While loading screen world map works better on games like monster hunter

>>713342823 (OP)
Haven't played E33 but I did play Rebirth and it had mayhaps the most dogshit open worlds I've ever experienced. Rivaled only by Deadly Premonition, and even in that the open world clearly had a purpose.

I don't care - but for open world, it has to have enough interesting stuff between different towns/landmarks when travelling between them. I don't want a big empty wasteland

>>713343371
The towns were the only well made part of Rebirth. If they had just connected them with a world map instead of having the game be "open world". I mean fuck I would have preferred a fucking list of location FFX style than what we got.

>>713345586
Bro that game was fucking fire all around.

>>713345586
this game deserved so much more

>>713342823 (OP)
open worlds are almost always shit unless they take place almost entirely within a city ie cyberpunk/sleepings dogs etc..
as for open "levels" those can be a hit like vatican city or gizeh from indiana jones or a miss like the wasteland and desert from stellar blade

>>713346684
Even Sleeping Dogs has way too much driving between missions with nothing happening