But in the fantasy realm you're right I can't think of anything since Skyrim off the top of my head thats open world AND first person.
Metro is about as on-rails as you can get? It's all "go down this one tunnel and shoot everything" or "follow this actually quite narrow and linear path across the rubble and shoot everything". Some of the missions are literally on rails (you're in a subway, after all)
Far Cry is much more open than Metro, and often has some quite fun things to do if you stray off the mission path and talk to the right person. Depends how much you like to hunt and fish amidst blowing up the bad guys!
I'm not sure I'd call Far Cry series RPGs. Don't mean that in a bad way (I fuckin love Far Cry), I've always seem them as an FPS with stats (a la No One Lives Forever) in an open world.
I really wanted to like The Outer Worlds, but the writing seemed extremely juvenile; it touches on a lot of heavy themes (LGBTQ romance, corporate power, worker exploitation) extremely hamfistedly and without nuance. I had to put it down as I couldn't stop cringing at the writing...
Now, Outer Wilds on the other hand...
https://forums.dfworkshop.net/viewtopic.php?t=1689 (I really can't stand forum-as-documentation...)
However, towns with 300 houses with different variations of the same vendors and assets would not be immersive to most modern players. You definitely need a little on the authored side. Heck, I think Bethesda copy/pastes too much now compared to something like New Vegas which has barely has any repetition.
Less immersive than an ostensibly grand city that only has a handful of named NPCs and a few guards? The best and worst city Bethesda have made thus far is still Vivec. Best because it has enough NPCs and redundant economy to feel like a plausible city. Worst, simply because the structure of the cantons is poorly conceived, and because the exterior is barren.
Deprecating authored settlements in Fallout 4 was quite disappointing but Boston is probably the most impressive technically, diamond city etc nestled amongst the sprawling and surprisingly explorable ruins of the city.
Basically if I can't get lost, it doesn't feel like a city. I can get lost in Boston or Vivec, those feel like cities. The others require a lot of suspension of disbelief, but Diamond City particularly makes that hard.
I concede that Vivec is dated (although I first played Morrowind about 2 or 3 years ago and still enjoyed it.) I consider Witcher 3's Novigrad as an example of a modern game getting it right. There's not exactly a ton of named NPCs in Novigrad, but there are enough buildings, alleyways, etc to get lost when wandering around. Also there is redundancy in the town's economy; numerous smiths, taverns, etc.
DayZ (and it's ilk) is probably the only game that comes close to 1:1 but is not to most players tastes to take a human amount of time to walk across rows of empty fields. That game is absolutely enormous. It's a pretty niche game though.
Do you think that in the 2020s, we can't do better generators than what existed in the 1990s?
At the time, you could get a demo run a stone so at least some of the party could join quickly. But that took human interaction, some synchronisation ... it was nice and involved.
Disclaimer: I havent touched WoW in more than 10 years, but from what I know of it today -- it's teleport all the way, straight into the instance, with pre-made aor automatically composed groups. You pop in, you loot, you get out. Rinse and repeat.
Some people will enjoy the "instant gratification" part of this. I'm probably amongst those who did not, who don't and who probably never will. It is my opinion (widely shared? no idea) that immersion has been killed by all those "QoL" improvements.
My 2p.
There's really nothing stopping people from going the extra mile for role-playing and immersion, it's more the local server communities that have been harmed by these tools but WoW classic brought back a lot of that "old-school" feel for those who seek it.
I'm not really up on the current state of either but I think there's merit in both approaches, I personally found both enjoyable.
Debatable. I wasn't around for Vanilla but I played Classic up through AQ. The game felt like a walking simulator.
Current WoW is certainly more streamlined, but you still have to earn the ability to travel around faster in current content. One of the Shadowlands zones didn't even let you mount (except for a rare drop for a special mount) until one of the content patches. And that and another zone still don't let you fly.
When you use the matchmade dungeon/raid finder, you do get teleported right into the instance. But for Mythic+ dungeons and Normal or higher raids you still need to manually gather a party and 2 people need to get to the summoning stone.
All of the city portals and the 15 minute hearthstone cooldown do make me a little sad though. My mage portals aren't appreciated nearly as much! :)
Fair enough, didn't know that :)
non combat abilities is something I feel like modern MMO needlessly eschew. Some people just want to fish and read lore and don't care about combat segments at all.
I don't buy that modern players don't have time either. WoW was only seen as an addictive timesink by the contemporary media but if they looked at the average hour counts of most modern multiplayer games, it would surprise many. Most modern service games demand fairly eye-popping time dedication to the casual observer.
I like discovering my own stories, but I want those stories to be how I fought off a dragon to save a town, not how I went into a dungeon for no reason whatsoever and came out with some more treasure and otherwise made no impact on the world.
I could imagine that potentially being extremely immersive, and doing it for a pure text-based interface would be a great first step on eventually doing it for a 3D open world game.
I'd say that having to tell the story in your head is a sign of failure on the part of the game. But, for an open world sandbox RPG, so is restricting you from enacting whatever story you want and we don't have the technology to avoid both.
Rim World, Dwarf Fortress, Kenshi, Caves of Qud are all fantastic narrative generators and give you a crazy amount of freedom.
Another type of game I've fallen in love with that I don't remember being around when I was a kid is automation games like Factorio or Satisfactory. Gives you that open world feeling + exploring but you're not just running errands or slaying dragons.
The basic idea of CRPGs is to give you an avatar that is as different or as similar to you personally as you want and let you experience the avatar's interactions with the world they live in. It might seem that it's currently the case for 90% of the games, but please remember that early CRPGs competed with Pong, Pacman, and Asteroids, not Quake. You'd have a hard time identifying yourself with a paddle or imagining spending your entire life in a maze being chased by ghosts. You would have a much easier time with an Elven archer roaming Middle-Earth, especially if you've read and memorized the Trilogy by heart.
From that basic premise, I'd roughly distinguish two main ways of realizing it: via numbers or words.
By numbers, I mean a situation where your avatar can be described as a bunch of numbers, as is the world, and you're supposed to find your own meaning in those numbers. Which ones matter to you, which you don't care about, or which represent an ability to do things you care about. You are then given an array of activities that both require the numbers to be aligned in a particular way and allow you to improve the numbers for you.
By words, I mean a situation where your avatar is presented to you via description. The numerical values that underpin the avatar identity and the shape of the world are still there, but you experience them only indirectly, through the description of the environment, your avatar actions, and their consequences.
There are not many "pure" realizations of either way because, taken to the extreme, the number case turns into an Excel sheet with all column and row names garbled, while words simply become a book or novel.
Of additional note is the issue of effort on the game creator's part. You generally can't procedurally generate descriptions above a certain length, especially not if you want the descriptions to be meaningful, not only readable. You'd need AGI for that. Procedurally generated content is crucial because it allows you to lengthen the time the game is played. You can read a good fantasy novel in a few days, while you can easily lose 200 hours to a single CRPG.
Back to exploring the wilderness. Morrowind leaned towards the numbers-based gameplay if my memory serves me right. You were required to perform an action repeatedly to improve your skill in that action. Take jumping, for example. I remember locking the spacebar in a depressed position on long treks between cities because jumping raised your strength. On the other hand, it did have a lot of hand-crafted, meaningful locations that you would visit multiple times. It had a few different plotlines you could follow and some memorable NPCs and you were given quite a lot of freedom in how you wanted to interact with the world. These are all features closer to the words-based gameplay. Still, most of the game consisted of repetitive, although more tactical than dexterity-based combat in the wilderness or dungeons.
Some people have a stronger preference for one gameplay style, and for them, Morrowind found a perfect balance. Relatively high freedom in what you could do, the plot, and the NPCs who sometimes even spoke more than a few words, were enough to give them a plausible reason to go and have real fun... By killing skeletons for 5 hours, nearly dying for 4h 50m, then getting a level-up, a corresponding dopamine rush, and going on a skeleton-killing spree in the last 9 minutes. You'd probably die to the boss lich in the last minute, allowing you to rage-quit the game and go back to beating skeletons again the next day.
Is it fun? Yes. It's one of the kinds of fun CRPGs are designed to give you. Since the early days - and I mean the times of ADVENT[ure] and Zork - the CRPGs evolved tens of subgenres, took advantage of the progress in hardware and in the general inflation of game makers' budgets, enlarging the scope, but the basic idea is still the same. To give players either: enough of the descriptions to make grinding meaningful or enough grinding not to frustrate them into not finishing the story.
One note: obviously, at some point nearly all CRPGs became graphical and later multi-media, one way or the other. That didn't, and still doesn't, change much. You can present the description of the world with words alone, with words and images, words and animation, images alone, images and music alone, and so on. What's important is that you are describing a world, an avatar and its actions within that world.
Another note: multi-player changes things drastically in the case of CRPGs, especially if it is not co-operative or is "massive". The metaphor is still the same, but the cost-benefit ratio of various game features is completely unlike the single-player version. MUDs were early multi-player CRPGs evolved as a cross between BBS and IRC, and their rise and eventual brutal demise under the weight of op-wars and spam a warning widely heard by CRPG makers. The MUDs persisted, barely clinging to existence in some niches, and later gave us MMORPGs, which are also completely different from single-player (or 1-4 people coop, later on) games. So I don't think talking about WoW is very relevant to the topic, ie. Morrowind.
TL;DR: I think the distinction of CRPG vs. TRPG is useful, and directly comparing the two doesn't work that well.
I'm not even sure if you can actually reach another town on foot, there's so much of flat boringness. You can definitely get lost and never find your dungeon again in one of those (Arena?) because there's no map helpful enough to find your position.
Of course, I gave up at that point, having run out of things to do (besides walking), and not being able to come back to the fast travel.
But, to go back to the original topic a bit, you only gave up (wandering the wilderness) after you ran out of things to do. So, correct me if I'm wrong, but you did have fun until you had things to do there :P Exploring the wilderness in MM6 and MM7 was also fun, and actually essential if you wanted to seriously power-up your heroes. There were random encounters with enemies, some waaaaaay above your current level, but the physics engine and the exploitable real-time-but-turn-based mechanics were primitive enough to let you, with some luck, camp a troll safely from behind a rock. Then there were one-time semi-random treasures in chests to discover (watch out for traps), hidden locations with quests, altars and trainers, in general everything you would need to take it easy in the latter parts of the game. Of course, there was a high risk of ending up dead, having run into too powerful opponent. For example, in MM7 there was a killable and exploitable dragon (high-level monsters sometimes had more than one drop, and you had to click twice to get them - but if you saved after the first drop, you could repeat second click as long as necessary for there to be 3rd drop generated. Rinse and repeat. I spent a frickin' DAY doing this. Got enough money to last me to endgame, though) in the tutorial, that you could find if you explored a little. It was, obviously, mercilessly slaughtering low-level characters, and it was impossible to kill it without a very heavy save scumming and a lot of preparation. On the flip side, entering a random cave in the tutorial and facing a screenful of fire-breathing winged lizard kind of set the tone of "wilderness exploration" later on.
In summary: exploring the wilderness can be fun, but it's the "numbers based" part of fun. I mean, sightseeing was not really worth it until much later, when the 3d-accelerated graphics begun in earnest. And even then, the main motivation was to level up, find treasures, kill monsters for exp - all focused on bumping up some numerical values in your character sheets. There were certainly some useful clues to discover here and there, and the mentioned hidden locations and quests too, but the meat of the game at that point was to grind. And it was fun! At least as long as monsters still gave you enough exp, the drops were still worth the effort, and you could get back to civilization relatively quickly.
To be honest, I'd be very happy to play a modern take on the CRPGs from around MM6 time. Large, but not vast, maps filled with randomized content but hand-tuned and with frequent hand-made locations, with quests and subplots to discover, without "you cannot go there, because you cannot go there" prevalent in modern CRPGs... I would like it combined with a mainly tactical, but real-time combat as in Dark Messiah of Might and Magic. First person perspective, preferably solo, or in a party with mechanics similar to Vampire Redemption/Bloodlines. Non-linear plot, freedom to decide how to finish the more important quests (not just 2 choices, make it 6 at minimum), freedom to ignore the plot entirely and focus on buying a house... Fallout 3 was, IIRC, kind of similar to what I have in mind, but I'd like a dark-fantasy setting. If you know of any game like that, please share :D
Elden Ring is like that (or rather, not in-your-face about it). You can tell it's filling a void because re-releasing the DS formula keeps selling like hot cakes.