I tend more to WRPG, but I don't see the incompatibility of open world with story. The Witcher 3 is a story heavyweight. You only often have the choice of the order in which you discover parts of that story. Or side-stories. Same goes for the Gothic games and the Ultima series. They are open world, but are story-driven.

So my answer to your 'open world or story' question would be: both!

JRPGs Give me a story and stick your open world where the sun doesn't shine O.O

There's exactly two (modern!) open world RPGs I really liked. The first one is TES IV: Oblivion and the second one is Fallout 3. I guess they just got me at the right time. When I played Oblivion, I was working in a very, very small town. The few people that lived there were freakin weird (some fresh blood in the gene pool would probably work wonders there). So I had two choices: Drinking beer in the town's bar, or drinking beer at home while playing something on my new XBox 360. Oblivion had hundreds of hours of content and it just hit my taste with its setting. It basically saved my ass during that time. I lived in Cyrodiil and not in that small town.

Years later I got Fallout 3 GotY (I never buy games that aren't complete), because it was a new Fallout. It felt like Oblivion, but they got the humor and the setting right, so it was okay. I liked exploring the different places in the wasteland and felt well entertained. I never touched the DLCs though... Today I know that this was a first sign.

Since I liked Oblivion and Fallout 3, I got New Vegas. I didn't like it. I thought this had soething to do with being from a different developer. So... When Skyrim came out, I got it shortly after release (NOT waiting for the GotY!)... I really tried to like Skyrim. I REALLY tried. But... honestly? It sucks! I wasted 50 hours of my life trying to like that piece of garbage.

When Fallout 4 came out, I thought that I just didn't like Skyrim's setting (which is true, I really didn't like the setting). So I got Fallout 4 (GotY, again :P). After 3 hours I hit the uninstall button. Sorry...

Somethimes I get a feeling that I want to replay Oblivion or Fallout 3, but when I'm going to install them I always think "Nah, don't do it... They'll quickly get as boring as Skyrim or Fallout 4 are. Just keep them in good memory."

But my open world problem isn't just with Bethesda RPGs. It is the same with FPS or action games. Far Cry 3 got boring when I had to hunt some sharks to be able to carry more ammo (you needed a ressource from the shark to craft a bigger bag). Even the second game from the Tomb Raider reboot ("Rise of..." or "Shadow of..."? I don't even know...) got pretty boring when I realized that it is nothing more than a sequence of mini open worlds.Whenever you reach a new area, you stop playing the game and waste a lot of time searching the area for useless crap. It's just not fun.

No, I really don't like open world games. Developers and publishers are always pushing for even bigger maps. But bigger isn't always better! Not if all you do is collect some random stuff on a huge, empty map. And sadly, most western RPGs are open world games nowadays. JRPGs are differnt. They usually don't throw you into a huge, open area, where a crapload of random stuff keeps you from playing the game. Yes, there's the notorious "grind" in JRPGs, but... I never really felt like I had to grind to be able to proceed. Grinding is for the "end game" when you try to beat secret bosses or get some special items. I can live with that.

ps. Thinking of it, there's one western "RPG" I still really enjoy: Diablo 3. I don't see it as a RPG though... Yes, it has stats, levels, progression, etc., but... nah, it's just not a RPG. In Germany, we used to call Diablo's genre "Hack & Slay". That's more fitting, I think.

I liked Witcher 3 as well, but is it really free when every part of the sidequest is also scripted and once its finished you move on to never see the village again because that particular part of the checklist is done and dusted? It certainly gives an illusion of "freedom" but it feels like i've being led around by the developers rather than on my own device, but thats a flaw I see in general modern open world design.

At any case, The Witcher 3 had lots of amazing designs that rewarded exploration just by looking at stuff. Doing the deed of walking around alone was more rewarding then getting some clutter or watching some scripted side quest. As an example, Novigrad blends so well with its surrounding areas and how it tries to mirror real european cities of the 14th century with its own fantasy flavor. Just riding around that area while being enthralled by the atmosphere was one of the most memoriable moments I had in any of the sidequests in the game.

If you liked Novigrad and exploring its architecture as much as I did, go a little bit meta and research some Hanseatic history. Lots of the stuff you see in this city was inspired by the era of the Hanseatic League, which is one of the most important eras in european history. Since you're a fan of The Witcher I'm sure you're going to love the history and especially the architecture as well.

The problem with this is that the RPGs that have gone away from invisible random encounters tend to fall into the trap of turning the game into an action game when you don't want to fight (or are chasing down an enemy like a metal slime (Dragon Quest series enemy that likes to flee but gives a lot of XP if you're lucky enough to defeat one; also famous for single digit HP and defense so high your attacks *might* do one damage)). About the only games I have seen that manage to avoid this issue are Final Fantasy Mystic Quest (enemies don't move at all, but this does mean you can't avoid those that are on the path you need to take) and Lufia 2/The Legend Returns (enemies move only when you do).

Case in point: The SaGa 3 remake (which uses visible enemies moving in real-time) is worse in terms of enocunters than the original SaGa 3 (where you get invisible random encounters); in SaGa 3 reamake, enemies eventually move faster than you do, and you can only avoid them by stopping time, which is a limited-use ability.

Don't forget that demos exist for these games.

(Note that the limitation on enchantmens applies to Constant Effect; Cast on Strike weapons still give you plenty of freedom once you go through those hoops. I really wish they hadn't taken out the ability to make custom Cast on Use, however.)

By the way, speaking of opening quest doors, in Arena certain doors in dungeons that are meant to be opened via key or riddle simply have extremely high lock levels. If you are a spellcaster (preferably a Nightblade or Sorcerer), and you create a strong enough Open spell (50%+ per level success rate), you can actually open the doors with the spell.

By the way, which 3 are you referring to? There are 5 main series games in the Elder Scrolls series.

Personally, I like to call games of that type Diablo-likes, much the way there's a genre called roguelikes, which is named after an ancient computer game called Rogue.

(By the way, I am not sure if procedural generation and open world really mix well; I have watched a lot of Dragon Warrior Randomizer (which has these two traits but no permadeath), and am still undecided on this issue.)

Feels like with Oblivion they did a knee jerk reaction and reduced so much of the magic system; So that enchantments general were gimped down. You used to be able to specify on strike, on struck (shield only? i forget, might be armor too), on cast/use, and constant for the enchantment activation type.

For my snap & trap spell for example i'd do a bound weapon and soultrap on target with AOE. Put that on a weapon and the first hit you do you automatically switch weapons and every enemy that died shortly after got trapped. Oblivion i saw no way to get more than 1 enchantment, was always a damaging or constant effect, and so many spells/abilities were stripped i figured it was near useless and pointless. Though i'd have to pull up my old games to pour through my spells.

True nothing wrong with those. But in Oblivion I just remember going to a cave, a crappy wooden door, and it said it required a key... nevermind it was flimsy enough you could kick it open. It felt very stupid. Like invisible walls, or chain link fences with total immunity against superman.

Probably the only 3 that matter. I've only played Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim.

Tried daggerfall and arena, and couldn't get into it; and the whole 'click and drag to do fighting which says which direction the weapon moves' is a little overboard. When i was younger i'd have played them; But Morrowind is the benchmark. Though it was a mishmash of RPG and other elements, many which have been removed (mostly for the better)

For Cast on Strike weapons, you actually can put multiple effects on them. In fact, one weapon enchantment (that also works well on a Destruction spell) is:
* Shock Damage X
* Weakness to Shock 100% for ~3 seconds
* Weakness to Magic 100% for ~3 seconds
(The order might seem backwards, but Oblivion (unlike Morrowind) is rather strange in this regard.)

With this combo (assuming no resistances on the enemy), the second hit does 4X Shock damage, and the third 9X, provided you get the hits in before the other effects wear off, allowing you to kill even high HP enemies in a reasonable amount of time (handy at high levels when enemies have lots of HP).

I still wish you could make Cast on Use enchantments, as those were my favorite enchantments in Morrowind.

Oddly, in my recent (incomplete) Knight and Sorcerer playthroughs, I find myself not actually attacking with my weapon. For the Knight, I can just use a Dagger of Firestorm, and I have a Lifesteal weapon for when I need to hit at range or need the healing; the weapons are automatically repaired when I fast travel. (Remember, pre-Morrowind, durability and magic charge are the same thing.) For the Sorcerer, I am also using that Dagger of Firestorm (which has *plenty* of durability, so I can still spam it even without the auto-repair), but in areas where enemy spellcasters are common, I can also use magic and regain SP vial spell absorption (think the Atronach birthsign from later games).

WRPGs, open world single thread story with as much power fantasy included as possible.

I'm not very keen on "you absolutely must do THESE specific choices to have the best ending", though I can tolerate that to a certain degree (AKA not THAT many choices).

I also tend to like games where you can be awesome at everything, like Skyrim.

In fact, my wish for TES6 is that I could solve a war scenario like Skyrim's by being my own side of the war and utterly annihilating both factions single handedly. And then move on to a quest line of doing the same to each and every Daedric Prince.

That would be so much fun.

I don't like when video games try to be movies. I'll watch a movie when I want a linear, story-driven experience. RPGs work best when they offer a world with characters and stories within it, but focus on gameplay and interaction.

The name rings a bell, but I have never played one of their games. I have something to check out now. Thank you both.

Open world, make your own story is a great proposition. However, what happens when you play Skyrim without paying any attention to the main quest?

The problem with that is repetitive gameplay. Eventually the player sees all the kinds of things the game has to offer, and that it will be more of the same, with details changed, but still.

Then, open world mixed with a story, giving the character some purpose, makes the trick in the Gothic series. It has been mentioned above.

Then again, Icewind Dale surely does not boast many cutscenes, yet you always have something to do. So no, story does not equal cutscenes.

Where does total freedom work? In games like Mount & Blade. But that is a strategy game with RP traits. What does happen in strategy games? that you can leave your mark on the world. Reactivity to the character actions has been mentioned above too, as a key for an open world to be catching. It does not need to be about whole kingdoms. It might be way more subtle, but still, the important thing is that you feel that you can make a real difference, no matter how small.

The thing is, RPG are way, way more fun if you RP (a bit or a lot). If the world does not keep score of the story you are making, it is all in your head. Not that fun, compared to the pen and paper experience with real people and a game director/dungeon master. However, if the computer game keeps track of the story you are creating with your actions, that is something different.

Another thing: life makes awful scripts. Random actions by a character makes awful stories, too. So, the PC needs a purpose and needs to have tools and some inspiration and possibly some help from the game world in order to make the virtual life of the playing character a story worth being lived.

My two cents.

Fallout and Fallout 2 are great examples of story and freedom in the same RPG. Unhappily, Bethesda Fallouts aren't that great.

I like RPGs to have a decent story, but I don't want to click through endless and pointless dialog, too much exposition bores me. It should be reflected in character action. Dialog should be natural and quests shouldn't be buried deep in dialog trees.

You can't, however, have the sort of cutscene heavy linear stories common in JRPGs (particularly from PSX or late SNES era onward) and still give the player freedom; you need to have a different sort of story, told differently (like in the dialog of the NPCs you talk to) for this to work.

Actually, I find the mechanical aspects of RPGs more fun. (Case in point: In Baldur's Gate 2 I spent more time experimenting with the game mechanics than actually playing through the game.)

I like the 100% freedom with a limited scope (like in Deus Ex 1 where there are small areas where you can do anything you want).
Open World is not really something that I need... even in a great game like Morrowind I usually follow the quests (not just main quest). I like to be able to kill main npc in the story and be able to continue with some consequence but still be able to finish the story... I love to make evil or or gray or good pg that I can role.

The real freedom is to be able to skip battles, boss, and find multiple path that are not made by the developers (like if I can level up jump and I'm able to skip the story inside a building just by jumping on the top... that's something that I love), I don't like rails and limitations.

But I see no reason for an infinite map full of fetch quests.