So what is exactly is your criteria for an open world game to be not-emtpy?

So what is exactly is your criteria for an open world game to be not-emtpy?

Attached: best-open-world-games.jpg (1200x675, 120K)

SideQuests, from your pic Fallout New Vegas and Witcher 3 did it greatly

Attached: 367373467.jpg (477x477, 41K)

The Witcher 3 did it well. A shit ton of side quests and places with different variety. Too bad the combat was honestly ass. If it had Dragons Dogma combat, I would shit my pants.

It needs soul.

Attached: 91665bf0-f5f1-4fb4-b7f8-d43d9595940f.jpg (992x1762, 103K)

witcher 3's open world was as generic as they come tbqh. the open level system from 1 and 2 was much better designed

It's empty if I can play as a girl with a BIG BUTT

Attached: 1552491174558.jpg (2160x3840, 1.22M)

The game needs to show that the things you do actually matter. It changes the landscape, both literally and not. Whether it's businesses opening, a town being created or destroyed, or an army starting to occupy buildings. It needs to be a sandbox the player crafts, not just scenery the player runs in. There's no point in an open world RPG with different decisions if they have no visible impact.

A-Life like STALKER has, random encounters like Fallout 3 had.

All of the games in OP have that to an extent, do you consider them to be empty?

I like you, TW1 was best

Side quests that are more than just
>Take picture of thing and show it to this NPC.
>Give old man 50 mushrooms.

Attached: 047.png (400x240, 62K)

This is why NuVegas looks and animates like a pile of turd yet it feels more alive and immersive than your GTAs

BOTW is the only open world game on that image. The others are just games set in an open world

BotW and Dragon's Dogma feel like an entirely different thing from RDR, Witcher, Asscreed. As in better.

The Witcher and CDPR straight up used Rockstars formula for side quests, map and open world concept. Fuck off

>2019
>Rocks open world formula still reigns supreme 18 years later
>Has made CDPR, Nintendo and everyone else jump on open world bandwagon

Based I guess. Must blow having no competition though

All of those games are great. Yea Forums just likes to bitch and complain

>It needs to not be open world
alternatively
>Quests need to be common, given by unique and memorable NPCs, have their own small plotlines, and involve something more than uhhh kill 10 spiders. In short they need to have the depth of the main game. They should also reward interesting equipment, XP, or money to feel worthwhile
>Collectathons ARE NOT meaningful content and your open world will inevitably be categorized as empty and boring
>Minigames aren't meaningful content either
The only game in your image that does this well is New Vegas

Weeb

I do with RDR2

dont forget good gameplay and good/hard encounters
i fucking hate killing jobber bandits no. 19675473

That's a very stringent judgement for how 'dense' a open-world game is. If you're going to have it revolve entirely around NPCs and questlines, why bother having an open world?