First time I discovered Minecraft (a friend gave me a pirate copy -> no multiplayer), I spent many hours exploring caves, discovering biomes, and building subway tunnels. > As for open world games - they tend to bore me out after a while, when I hit the discovery limit.
So the categories are pretty fluid, I guess. Similarly with Terraria and Starbound (though I started playing it again now on a server with a group of friends - probably scratching my "social" itch there). But when I reached the point of knowing pretty much all the mobs, blocks and features of the game, I got bored. I do enjoy achievements in most games a lot, which presumably makes me fall under the "achiever" archetypeĪs for open world games - they tend to bore me out after a while, when I hit the discovery limit. I did play a lot of shooters too - mostly Quake 2 & 3, Unreal Tournament, and currently Overwatch optimizing for ammo/currency: check I do that out of the fear that I might need it later, which in case of Fallout 1 and 2 ended up with me finishing the game with more gear and cash than I knew what to do with Interesting, because I identify with a lot of what you wrote, too. > it raised questions since I identified with you, while still feeling characterized under "achiever". I don't know how this turned into a longwinded games rant, but it raised questions since I identified with you, while still feeling characterized under "achiever". I have no doubt that this is why MineCraft (which I haven't played much for lack of story/"game", although having plenty of sandbox/open world) and that genre has sprouted up to much success. "Open world" games I've played in recent years - after the original concept of open world once went linear for consoles, and then consoles catching up enough to enable open world games again - don't seem to be so much about designing a world with some rules and a number of tools, but simply providing more than 1 or 2 designed solutions to a problem, which feels completely hollow to me. I've bought GTA 4, 5, Far Cry 3, 4, Just Cause 3, and many many others, played them for less than a handful hours, and given up because it just feels like I have to churn this mill just to advance a movie, at which point I may as well watch a movie, or watch someone else play the game (which I now completely understand as a concept). When thinking of what the last bigger/sorta AAA games I enjoyed playing was I think it's Half-Life 2 (kind of obvious), but also FarCry (1), Crysis (1, but also Warhead), Just Cause 2.Īll of them had a story, most of them were open world and allowed you to approach a problem with undesigned solutions, which is what I really love.
I grew up loving games like Quake (for the multiplayer/mechanics/general tech side of it), The Longest Journey for the story, Half-Life for both aspects, and a bunch of games struggling with either storytelling/mechanics or other but loveable for their attempt at trying something more than they could achieve (examples being Outcast, Citizen Kabuto, Oni, Advent Rising, Too Human). I also like you love singleplayer games and a well-written story, but I on the other hand hate open world games (because they're never open nor "worldy" enough), and equally hate too linear games (looking at CoD past 3 and the like). I do however always accumulate/optimize for maximum ammo/currency/gear/weapons/items, to the point where I believe I completed >80% of Half-Life with the crowbar, to conserve ammo. I didn't think I would, but I seem by those archetypes to land under "Achievers", this despite me never 100%:ing a game (the rare exception being Binding of Isaac, love the item synergy sandbox/breaking of that game), and hating achievements, never looking for collectables, etc.