It makes sense for a lot of design, including destinies (Destiny)

by Xenos , Shores of Time, Wednesday, July 22, 2015, 15:20 (3511 days ago) @ cheapLEY

It also adds to the "Box ticking" feature mentality, where people will not buy your game if it misses these crucial features, many of which they will never use (online play! cinematic cutscenes! RPG progression system! Open world!), and this weird arrangement where online servers are now expected, but no long term funding mechanism is apparent.

I hate this so much. You know how many open world games there are that don't need to be open world? Like ninety percent of them. So many of them are just so empty and lifeless, they would have been much better without being open world. Everyone expects it now, especially out of RPGs. A lot of the best RPGs aren't open world.

Racing games are especially bad. Open world racing games blow. There's nothing to be gained by driving aimlessly from one race to the next. I want to race, not spent ninety percent of the game driving from objective to the next, or trying to find all your fucking billboards to smash. Just . . . please stop doing this, developers. If you can't fill your open world game with interesting things to do, and most of the time spent in said open world is just moving from one object to the next, it doesn't work.

I totally agree that 90% of games don't need to be open world, but I love open world racing games. But they should be a completely separate category. You just can't get the crazy driving exploration in other games that you could in Burnout Paradise.