What are your top 5 open world games? (3rd person)

[Drake]

This game was great. Way ahead of it's time. Dropping bunker busters on fools and leveling city blocks with bombing runs never got old.

Some fun vehicles too. Loved the Comanche Attack chopper. That thing was slick as hell.

Toooootal classic. Had so much fun with it. It was kind of like a Battlefield open world game with how much you could destroy.

I always loved placing C4s on the street then blowing them up as cars went over them & seeing how high I could get them

Hunting down all the clubs, etc. was also so awesome. Soooooo awesome...god I miss that game.

 

[Hollywood Jack]

1. Grand Theft Auto 5
2. L.A. Noire
3. Grand Theft Auto: Vice City
4. Grand Theft Auto 4
5. Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas

 

[Hollywood Jack]

At what point does an open world become a sandbox? Because Arma is pretty fucking dope.

The difference between "open world" and "sandbox", if any, remains unclear to me. Not to completely dismiss the argument that there is indeed a difference. But the terms have been used interchangeably for so long that...

 

[MMAmathwiz]

Current:

GTA V
Sleeping Dogs
Arkham Knight
Witcher 3
Dark Souls 3

All Time:

Shenmue
GTA 3
GTA Vice City
Dark Souls
Mafia

Honorable Mention:

Scarface

 

[Based and White Pilled]

Mount & Blade: Warband

I wanted to include this one but it doesn't really fit into my brain's idea of open world due to using the overland map to travel. It's definitely top 5 for me, if I count it, though.

I don't know if games like Mass Effect, Fable, Fallout, Elder Scrolls, etc count but if they do than my picks would have been vastly different.

Mass Effect games are not open world. The others are. I didn't include ES or Fallout, because I think it's disgraceful to play them in third person.

At what point does an open world become a sandbox? Because Arma is pretty fucking dope.

The difference between "open world" and "sandbox", if any, remains unclear to me. Not to completely dismiss the argument that there is indeed a difference. But the terms have been used interchangeably for so long that...

Sandbox and open world describe two different aspects of a game. Open world is primarily about level design. You can go anywhere you want without walls containing you to some linear level or small area. Sandbox basically describes gameplay. It means that you can do essentially whatever you want and change the game world how you want with little to no direction on what you are "supposed" to do by the game.

Many games fall into both categories.

 

[HereticBD]

The difference between "open world" and "sandbox", if any, remains unclear to me. Not to completely dismiss the argument that there is indeed a difference. But the terms have been used interchangeably for so long that...

For me, "Sandbox" means you can pretty much do anything, right from the outset. Take GTA for example. You can wander around and interact with the entire world from the start, without too much impeding you. The only upgrades you receive, are different weapons to experiment with.

Contrast that with something like Skyrim, where if you stray a little too far into the unknown without being properly prepared, you'll get smashed by high level enemies, and be forced to stick to certain surroundings.

 

[GoGOPlata915]

I absolutely loved crackdown , all of them

 

[MarkyMcFly]

Mafia 2 doesn't have the staying power, it doesn't hold up real well, to me. When it came out though? That shit was wesome

 

[Tamriel Terror]

For me, "Sandbox" means you can pretty much do anything, right from the outset. Take GTA for example. You can wander around and interact with the entire world from the start, without too much impeding you. The only upgrades you receive, are different weapons to experiment with.

Contrast that with something like Skyrim, where if you stray a little too far into the unknown without being properly prepared, you'll get smashed by high level enemies, and be forced to stick to certain surroundings.

not to many high level enemies in skyrim imo. I can go basically anywhere. A better game would be the Witcher 3 (if you go in most areas outside of the starting land you'll get rekt'd.)

 

[empsim]

1. san andreas
2. saints row 2
3. shadows of mordor
4. assassins creed 2
5. fable

honorable mentions:
sleeping dogs, red dead redemption, mafia

 

[Unknown Pleasures]

Mafia 2 doesn't have the staying power, it doesn't hold up real well, to me. When it came out though? That shit was wesome

Interesting. I recently finished Red Dead Redemption - I guess it' been 5 or so years since it came out. I don't think he holds up very well either to be honest. I really don't understand the level of praise it got. Certainly it's not a bad game, but I really don't think it merits a score higher than an 8. Personally, I think it was an ambitious effort given it's a pretty big world, but 7 or 7.5 seems like the right score for it to me while online consensus seems to be 9.5.

The story I found kind of lacking drama. The characters were not really memorable and I didn't care who lived or died. Every enemy seemed the same. The shoot-outs were pretty lame (I confess I much prefer using a mouse in 1st person or 3rd person shooting). The environment mostly bland and dull. The mini-games were boring and poorly designed. The side-missions were rather ho-hum. The fast travel system was frustrating. The music/sound was not memorable at all which is unfortunate because that probably could have really added to the Western feel to it.

It certainly wasn't a bad game, because the criticisms above aren't the same as saying the game was horrible in those regards, but it just didn't do it for me. think what would benefit GTA/RDR type games is less short missions and more longer missions. Maybe I've been too spoiled by Witcher 3 which I liked exponentially more.

 

[Unknown Pleasures]

On the thread:

1) Witcher 3
2) Vice City (just love the setting and property purchasing)
3) San Andres (not as big a fan of the setting but it felt like a big step up technically, RPG elements and in terms of exploration you could do)
4) Fallout 3 (confess I haven't played New Vegas or FO4) but I loved the gritty setting
5) Batman Arkham City

I am not the caliber of gamer though that most in this thread would be - a lot of highly regarded games I haven't played.

 

[BAM]

GTA (Series - can't pick one)
Red Dead Redemption
Witcher 3
Batman: Arkham City
Assassins Creed Black Flag

HM: Shadow of Mordor - I've had a full run-through and played again the other day. I love the action and the voice acting, but the gameplay was a bit shallow and the world wasn't that big. Hopefully they make another one.

 

[76Knockout]

Current:

GTA V
Sleeping Dogs
Arkham Knight
Witcher 3
Dark Souls 3

All Time:

Shenmue
GTA 3
GTA Vice City
Dark Souls
Mafia

Honorable Mention:

Scarface

Love the sleeping dogs love, just beat it for a second time on X1 (beat it on 360 originally)

 

[Evangelion]

Interesting. I recently finished Red Dead Redemption - I guess it' been 5 or so years since it came out. I don't think he holds up very well either to be honest. I really don't understand the level of praise it got. Certainly it's not a bad game, but I really don't think it merits a score higher than an 8. Personally, I think it was an ambitious effort given it's a pretty big world, but 7 or 7.5 seems like the right score for it to me while online consensus seems to be 9.5.

The story I found kind of lacking drama. The characters were not really memorable and I didn't care who lived or died. Every enemy seemed the same. The shoot-outs were pretty lame (I confess I much prefer using a mouse in 1st person or 3rd person shooting). The environment mostly bland and dull. The mini-games were boring and poorly designed. The side-missions were rather ho-hum. The fast travel system was frustrating. The music/sound was not memorable at all which is unfortunate because that probably could have really added to the Western feel to it.

It certainly wasn't a bad game, because the criticisms above aren't the same as saying the game was horrible in those regards, but it just didn't do it for me. think what would benefit GTA/RDR type games is less short missions and more longer missions. Maybe I've been too spoiled by Witcher 3 which I liked exponentially more.

It's 5 years old. Of course it looks and plays like shit compared to Witcher 3

 

[Unknown Pleasures]

It's 5 years old. Of course it looks and plays like shit compared to Witcher 3

Yeah, I think I waited too long to get around to playing it. I guess tho irrespective of the gameplay and graphics, I just didn't find the story captivating and the game design exceptionally good.

 

[HereticBD]

It certainly wasn't a bad game, because the criticisms above aren't the same as saying the game was horrible in those regards, but it just didn't do it for me. think what would benefit GTA/RDR type games is less short missions and more longer missions. Maybe I've been too spoiled by Witcher 3 which I liked exponentially more.

Well, they're different beasts. The Witcher is an RPG, so it'll always win out on depth of missions.

I do agree that the sandbox games need to up their game a bit in mission variety though. GTA V made some strides in that regard, but at the end of the day, it's mostly a shooting gallery, and the missions get boring after a while.

 

[Morning Star]

1. Red Dead Redemption
2. GTA Vice City
3. The Witcher 3
4. Farcry Primal (thought I'd hate it without guns. Was my favorite Farcry)
5. A Link to the Past (If it counts otherwise OOT or AC Blackflag)

I didn't put them in a specific order. Love the shit out of all these games.