General Gaming Should I give Horizon: Zero Dawn a shot even though I'm not into open world games?

[Bloodporne]

Just got a 4K/HDR TV finally and looking at a list of games with best Pro enhancements etc., I'm thinking of giving Horizon a shot. Some questions since I'm generally not into open world games from what I've tried. 

 

How "open world Ubi formula" is this game on scale of 1 to 10? Is the combat engaging and good? Just how big is it? 

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

You will absolutely despise this game.

 

(a) It's about an "8" on the Ubi open world formula meaning that it's very, very close to it.

(b) The ranged combat is very good, the melee combat is "passable"

(c) It's probably too big for its own good.

 

For tbe record, I put in around 90 hours into the game so I feel that I'm well-qualified in my statements.

 

[AbsolutSurgen]

It is REALLY good -- and won numerous GOTY awards.

 

I think the "open world Ubi formula" isn't really even being followed by Ubi anymore -- both Far Cry 5 and the 2 most recent AC games mixed up the mechanics pretty significantly.  You don't say what you specifically dislike about open world games, so it's hard to comment specifically.  If you are thinking of Fary Cry 3/AC2 as defining the formula, I would give it a 6 on "following the formula".

 

However, progressing the story DOES require you to continually go to icons on the map.  But, there are a number of different side quests, that are pretty varied in gameplay (unlike most of the "formula games").

 

What makes H:ZD so good, IMHO, is the combat.  At its best, it requires you to switch between different weapons and techniques to dispatch the different enemies.  The combat varies from stealth mechanics (for smaller enemies and humans) to hectic combat fighting much larger enemies.  What Guerilla did really well was mix up the enemies, so they are mostly VERY different from each other.  So I never got bored with the content.

 

What makes H:ZD really special is the quality of the story/acting/writing.  For a video game, the story is top notch, features a number of interesting twists/turns and is generally pretty interesting (if you like pulpy sci-fi).

[Slug]

Here's the thing about open world games...they're only as open as you want them to be.  There's no need to pass on an otherwise awesome game because it's "open world".  Just stay on the main story line and don't deviate.  There's nothing requiring you to do all the collectibles, hunts, side quests, exploration, etc.  You don't have to 100% the game.  Just focus on the main plot and suddenly you're enjoying just a really good adventure game.

[Bloodporne]

I should clarify, yes, you're right about that:

 

1. I hate the idea of HUD vomit making me feel like I'm simply performing a never-ending list of chores. Hope compasses and waypoints can be disabled and the game is still playable. 

2. I dislike nonstop crafting, massive skill trees, fifty billion busywork fetch side quests. 

3. I don't like a feeling of...aimlessness. In short, I hope there's a relatively propulsive main story here. 

4. Weak combat but you guys already addressed this. 

 

Last open world game I played was RDR2 and I thought the actual game was terribly designed, and utterly boring from a gameplay standpoint, outside of the beautiful world. 

 

Ass Creed 2 was the first game I remember actively hating for being open world btw. I didn't make it more than three hours into my free copy of Far Cry 4, it's my bar for how shit I find open world games. 

[AbsolutSurgen]

2 minutes ago, Bloodporne said:

1. I hate the idea of HUD vomit making me feel like I'm simply performing a never-ending list of chores. Hope compasses and waypoints can be disabled and the game is still playable. 

Most of the missions require you to head to specific points on the maps to "do stuff".  Some of the better designed missions are more akin to a "crafted single player" level, where you play for an extended period "out of the open world:".  However, the "list of chores" is still here most of the time.

2 minutes ago, Bloodporne said:

2. I dislike nonstop crafting, massive skill trees, fifty billion busywork fetch side quests. 

Lots of crafting, and a massive skill tree here.

 

2 minutes ago, Bloodporne said:

3. I don't like a feeling of...aimlessness. In short, I hope there's a relatively propulsive main story here. 

4. Weak combat but you guys already addressed this. 

IMHO, as I have already stated, I think the story and combat are really good.  (However it does take a few hours to get going.)

[eggydoo]

I concur that you will not like it if you do not like open world games.  Have you played spiderman yet?  It is probably the best open world game for people that do not like open world games.

[Bloodporne]

1 minute ago, eggydoo said:

I concur that you will not like it if you do not like open world games.  Have you played spiderman yet?  It is probably the best open world game for people that do not like open world games.

Somehow comic book stuff actively turns me off unlike seemingly 99% of the American population. I've actively avoided the game because of being A) open world B) Spider-Man.

 

I like the environments in Horizon, that's the appealing part to me so far.

[Keyser_Soze]

You can play the game with zero hud vomit, you can turn it off, or it will disappear after a while.

 

I would say give it a shot because unlike Ubi games, the combat isn't mindless, you have to think about strategies for the various creatures.

 

In any case if you do try it, give it a number of hours before you give up on it because it's got a kinda slow start until the world opens up and you can do lots of shit.

[Pikachu]

One thing I will add is that there is a story level difficulty level if you just want to cruise through the game and get through the main missions. It makes everything pretty easy.

[SaysWho?]

10 minutes ago, Bloodporne said:

I should clarify, yes, you're right about that:

 

1. I hate the idea of HUD vomit making me feel like I'm simply performing a never-ending list of chores. Hope compasses and waypoints can be disabled and the game is still playable. 

2. I dislike nonstop crafting, massive skill trees, fifty billion busywork fetch side quests. 

3. I don't like a feeling of...aimlessness. In short, I hope there's a relatively propulsive main story here. 

4. Weak combat but you guys already addressed this. 

 

Last open world game I played was RDR2 and I thought the actual game was terribly designed, and utterly boring from a gameplay standpoint, outside of the beautiful world. 

 

Ass Creed 2 was the first game I remember actively hating for being open world btw. I didn't make it more than three hours into my free copy of Far Cry 4, it's my bar for how shit I find open world games. 

 

1. You can disable a lot of the HUD.

2. The skill tree isn't massive. There are only a few "fetch" quests that give really good items, and there are merchants with maps to find them if you wanted to.

3. The lore of the game is fantastic. There's a point of the game where the overarching story of, "How did this all happen?" comes forward when you meet a certain character, and the entire story/set-up as to why the world is post-apocalyptic was REALLY good. I'm the kind of guy who typically does side quests in between the main quest no matter what, but this was one of those times where I looked forward to learning more about the backstory when I got back to the main quest. I will say I really enjoyed the cauldrons, especially considering the skills they give you.

4. Human combat isn't good, but the ranged combat is fantastic. I went an entire playthrough not using certain weapons, and then on my second run, wondered why the hell I didn't.  

 

It was one of my favorite 2017 games. There are definitely open-world tropes (you can scale these giant dinosaurs to open up part of the map, there are camps to overrun, etc.). All I can say is, there's a very good main plot if you want to focus on that. DLC has some great additional enemies. Use your best judgment, though Horizon is so freaking cheap now that maybe you won't regret it if you get open worlded.

[eggydoo]

10 minutes ago, Bloodporne said:

Somehow comic book stuff actively turns me off unlike seemingly 99% of the American population. I've actively avoided the game because of being A) open world B) Spider-Man.

 

I like the environments in Horizon, that's the appealing part to me so far.

Should consider it since it is only $16 right now with PS+ and $24 for Deluxe.  I only recommend it cause I have tons of friends that hate open world games, but they loved Spiderman because of the movement and combat.  Also the character design, story, and acting are actually really good for a video game.

[Bloodporne]

Well, the combat seemingly being good does make me want to try it honestly. And yeah, it's always on sale and pretty cheap so not much to lose here I guess.

 

I mean, I didn't have a problem with MGSV's literally empty open world because the actual game was so fucking good. 

[Dodger]

It's basically a UBI open world game with good combat, though even that can become stale once you realize there are a couple moves that are just completely broken and work on most of the big bad enemies, at least on normal. I never went through again on Very Hard or whatever the new ultimate difficulty is. It's definitely worth checking out since the core gameplay is different. I enjoyed the main story, but outside of the main characters, almost all of the NPCs are boring and not worth talking to other than to get those random quests. 

[best3444]

I'm currently playing it. It's a solid 8/10 after 12 hours in. It looks stunning.

[atom631]

i think this game has been as low as like 10-15bux. for that price, its worth checking out. 

[Xbob42]

I played it after playing Breath of the Wild. It wasn't even close. Breath of the Wild allowed for so much more world interaction and experimentation, whereas the world in Horizon felt very static and un-touchable, fucking puddles wouldn't react, water didn't put out fire, that kind of stuff. It felt like a big facade that was undeniably more technically impressive in terms of pure visual fidelity, but an infinitely inferior game in just about every metric that counted outside of story.

 

If you come for the story and to enjoy your new TV, you'll be fine. If you're looking for much more than that that upends the open world formula? I'm really not sure.

 

2 hours ago, Bloodporne said:

Well, the combat seemingly being good does make me want to try it honestly. And yeah, it's always on sale and pretty cheap so not much to lose here I guess.

 

I mean, I didn't have a problem with MGSV's literally empty open world because the actual game was so fucking good. 

The ranged combat can be alright, but don't get too excited, MGSV's gameplay shits all over Horizon's. MGSV is in a league of its own when it comes to how good the gameplay feels in an open-world game.

[RedSoxFan9]

No

[Dexterryu]

4 hours ago, Bloodporne said:

Just got a 4K/HDR TV finally and looking at a list of games with best Pro enhancements etc., I'm thinking of giving Horizon a shot. Some questions since I'm generally not into open world games from what I've tried. 

 

How "open world Ubi formula" is this game on scale of 1 to 10? Is the combat engaging and good? Just how big is it? 

 

I'd put it on a 6 on the Ubi formula. There aren't nearly as many "towers" to climb or bases to clear.

 

Personally I'd say it's almost a mix of Witcher 3 and something Ubi-ish. I really liked the back story of the world and exploring the ruins... they all had good story components to them and finding out what happened was why was done well.

 

Some of the bosses toward the end were a little too tanky/spungy but they were doable.

 

As for your concerns...

 

1) I don't remember the HUD much. I do think you can turn it off.

2) Crafting, outside of amo wasn't really too heavy and largely optional. Could also be done on the fly during combat if that tells you how light it is.

3) The main story and world lore were really interesting... which is where it's open world feels great vs the typical Ubi jungle island.

4) The combat is solid, particularly vs the robot dinos. Fighting other people was pretty standard fare, not great but not bad either.

[SimpleG]

2 hours ago, Dodger said:

It's basically a UBI open world game with good combat, though even that can become stale once you realize there are a couple moves that are just completely broken and work on most of the big bad enemies, at least on normal. I never went through again on Very Hard or whatever the new ultimate difficulty is. It's definitely worth checking out since the core gameplay is different. I enjoyed the main story, but outside of the main characters, almost all of the NPCs are boring and not worth talking to other than to get those random quests. 

I am gonna second this. I love open world games and this did nothing for me.

[Bloodporne]

40 minutes ago, Xbob42 said:

I played it after playing Breath of the Wild. It wasn't even close. Breath of the Wild allowed for so much more world interaction and experimentation, whereas the world in Horizon felt very static and un-touchable, fucking puddles wouldn't react, water didn't put out fire, that kind of stuff. It felt like a big facade that was undeniably more technically impressive in terms of pure visual fidelity, but an infinitely inferior game in just about every metric that counted outside of story.

 

If you come for the story and to enjoy your new TV, you'll be fine. If you're looking for much more than that that upends the open world formula? I'm really not sure.

 

The ranged combat can be alright, but don't get too excited, MGSV's gameplay shits all over Horizon's. MGSV is in a league of its own when it comes to how good the gameplay feels in an open-world game.

Yeah I'm gladly not expecting that. MGSV is one of my favorite games of the past few years and it'd take a lot to get anywhere near that gameplay from basically any release.  That "facade" feeling though is certainly unfortunate. 

 

I still may buy a Switch eventually and give BotW a real shot as I feel I went in really biased in hindsight when I borrowed it. 

 

Unrelated but thanks for everyone chiming in!

[Xbob42]

5 minutes ago, Bloodporne said:

That "facade" feeling though is certainly unfortunate. 

It's actually one of the reasons I didn't find the game nearly as impressive visually as everyone else appeared to. It reminded me of pre-rendered backgrounds, as a matter of fact. What's the point of the most beautiful lake in gaming if you fall through it without making a ripple? The grass moved out of your way in BotW, but not in Horizon. Super basic stuff already done by games that look nice as well as those that don't. For all its superficial bells and whistles, in the end it felt distinctly last gen with the little interactions that sell the whole thing. At least to me. Clearly I'm in the minority, but I think there's value in discussing the failings of even highly lauded titles and their supposed amazing visuals!

[Bloodporne]

1 minute ago, Xbob42 said:

It's actually one of the reasons I didn't find the game nearly as impressive visually as everyone else appeared to. It reminded me of pre-rendered backgrounds, as a matter of fact. What's the point of the most beautiful lake in gaming if you fall through it without making a ripple? The grass moved out of your way in BotW, but not in Horizon. Super basic stuff already done by games that look nice as well as those that don't. For all its superficial bells and whistles, in the end it felt distinctly last gen with the little interactions that sell the whole thing. At least to me. Clearly I'm in the minority, but I think there's value in discussing the failings of even highly lauded titles and their supposed amazing visuals!

I'm with you in terms of preferring interactivity and gameplay-serving things over sheer graphical fidelity so I could imagine feeling the same way about it actually. I mainly thought of it because I was curious about 4K/HDR games to check out and I keep seeing this on mentioned nonstop. I might be getting that fix with God Of War already though, a game that I actually thoroughly like. 

 

PS: I've never played Witcher 3 either on account of its combat being seemingly shitty. 

[Dodger]

Playing Witcher 3 after being a big SoulsBorne guy definitely took a lot of getting used to. TW3 is just one of those games you just have to play though. Which reminds me, eventually I need to finish the DLC.

[Dre801]

I enjoyed my time with it, but didn't finish it.   Fatigued on it.  Now I'm playing AssCreed Origins and will likely fatigue and not finish it as well 

[CastlevaniaNut18]

I'm skeptical you'll like it based on what you've said. 

 

I still need to open and play my $10 copy. But I'm also suffering from open world burnout.

[ShreddieMercury]

Opinions seem pretty divisive.  I thought it was mediocre to abysmal.  It's competently made, but it has the generic, focus-grouped, shaved-off-edges feeling of a Ubisoft game, tied to the ubiquitous third-person action of a AAA PS exclusive.  I struggled to find anything interesting about it, and I played through probably about 10 hours of the game and a good portion of the story.  I should also note, since you mentioned the HUD, that it has probably the worst one that I've ever seen in a videogame.  You can minimize what you see with a settings tweak, but it's still pretty awful.  The graphics are frequently praised, and the models of the people and robo-saurs are certainly good, but I thought that the skies and vistas were very garish.

 

I know that it's different, but I can't help but compare it to Zelda since they released a week apart.  Where Zelda completely reinvents what an "open" world is, HZD goes in the opposite direction and refines the most basic and generic aspects of what this type of game used to be up to that point.  Only one of these games will serve as an inspiration for the mechanics and vocabulary of open world games in the future.

[Biggie]

No. Play a good game instead. 

 

You are welcome. 

 

 

 

Love, Biggie

[Bloodporne]

51 minutes ago, ShreddieMercuryRising said:

Opinions seem pretty divisive.  I thought it was mediocre to abysmal.  It's competently made, but it has the generic, focus-grouped, shaved-off-edges feeling of a Ubisoft game, tied to the ubiquitous third-person action of a AAA PS exclusive.  I struggled to find anything interesting about it, and I played through probably about 10 hours of the game and a good portion of the story.  I should also note, since you mentioned the HUD, that it has probably the worst one that I've ever seen in a videogame.  You can minimize what you see with a settings tweak, but it's still pretty awful.  The graphics are frequently praised, and the models of the people and robo-saurs are certainly good, but I thought that the skies and vistas were very garish.

 

I know that it's different, but I can't help but compare it to Zelda since they released a week apart.  Where Zelda completely reinvents what an "open" world is, HZD goes in the opposite direction and refines the most basic and generic aspects of what this type of game used to be up to that point.  Only one of these games will serve as an inspiration for the mechanics and vocabulary of open world games in the future.

I frequently agree with you and @Xbob42 on minutiae so for now I'm going to take your opinions to heart and get something else. You were able to verbalize a lot better what I hate about that Ubi open world template more so than myself and it's indeed the whole safe, generic, focus-tested feel. 

 

I've been meaning to play Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen for years, maybe I should do that instead...

[SimpleG]

1 hour ago, Bloodporne said:

I've been meaning to play Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen for years, maybe I should do that instead.

Do it

Its a great open world euro jank /japenese rpg.