Why do Open worlds kinda suck now?

The open world game is a bit of an interesting batch, even if most of the actual games are as interesting as watching a gelatinous blob simmer in the summer heat.
Most of them these days follow the Ubisoft method of creating a large detailed world and then just try to fill it with as much busy work as humanly possible. Basic things like 4 reskinned collectables, time attack races, some scattershot combat challenges, and towers. Oh god the towers.

These games that adhere to the basic "Ubi-box" format leave me cold and often bored, as their games change incrementally. If you were to play Assassins Creed 1, followed by AC Valhalla, you'd certainly notice a difference in gameplay. But considering there are 10 mainline games in the series separating them, across 13 years, and that's not even including the portable games and spinoffs. It just all became more or less the same thing, with the occasional tweak. Far Cry has also seen the same treatment, with 1, 2, and 3, all feeling quite different but then after that they all kind of descend into the standard Ubi-box format. 

Even the critically acclaimed Horizon: Zero Dawn, and Forbidden West aren't immune from these tropes that have left the term "Open World" fall flat to my ears when I see games announced with that term.

It has given me a kind of sense of "Open World Fatigue". Although recently I have gone back to some older ones prior to the homogenisation of the open world format.

This is where I should start to describe what I consider to be good open world games. Then I can break down why I think they are good. As they are not all built the same. Then like an attempt at being a good writer I can come up with some kind of thesis and conclusion.

So let's begin with a brief list of some open world games that I genuinely enjoy.
-Yakuza Kiwami
-Shadow of the Colossus
-GTA: Vice City
-GTA: San Andreas
-Death Stranding
-Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild
-Fallout 3
-Fallout: New Vegas
-Subnautica
-Batman Arkham City
-Burnout Paradise
-SSX3

There are a few more, and most likely plenty more that I would love given the chance, however time and money are not exactly my best friends these days. 
You may notice that most of these games have quite different kinds of open worlds, from condensed sections of a city, to entire mountains, and even large sections of a continent. That is because I like variety in my games. I don't just want a singular experience over and over again with a new coat of paint a-la the Ubi-box method.

That being said some of these games do share qualities with the Ubi-box standard model, for instance Breath of the Wild has the tower system that progressively reveals the map as you climb and activate each of them. Burnout Paradise has some a very limited array of different kinds of activities spread across the game world. Death Stranding and BOTW have huge expanses of nothing but landscape to separate the instances that make up the action portion of the games. But they all do it in different ways that either work with their stories, or use it to facilitate specific game mechanics. 

Death Stranding for instance uses it's large swathes of nothing but world terrain to really drive home the terrain traversal mechanics. Where you need to maintain stability while under load. Using your local area scanner to highlight difficult to traverse terrain and planning your route accordingly. And once you hit a certain point of the game it opens up with all manner of structures from simple ladders to use as makeshift bridges, to a network of ziplines for speedy travel between. This also builds on the narrative of reconnecting the world after humanity's withdrawal into the safety of their heavily secured cities away from each other.

Breath of the Wild on the other hand Uses the emptiness of the open world to show how ravaged Ganon's assault has been, with the remnants of society cropping up in very small hidden away villages, or small stables surrounded by an expanse of open terrain. The ruins of what was once the great Hyrule stand destroyed, and the remains of the guardians that were corrupted and destroyed in battle litter the lands. It really lets the open world do the story telling and also reinforces what exposition there is in it's sparse narrative.

Subnautica also has a very sparse narrative. Even though it's predominantly a survival crafting game in an open world, the tightly designed underwater world with designated biomes, and world building through the in game PDA, as well as the minimalistic story telling, leads to an engaging experience that still makes me want to go back and just exist in the world. 

GTA: Vice City and San Andreas were from the early days of the Open World, but they managed to create worlds that were memorable, vibrant, and well laid out. San Andreas had its mixture of cities, ghettos, rural outback, and even a Las Vegas pastiche, while Vice City had it's Miami setting, vibrant visuals with all the neon, and the first major expansions of the open world to include other indoor areas to explore. A variety of missions between them, and plenty of what is now standard open world busywork, that at the time was still fairly new. Tonnes of personality, and a great sandbox to play as an agent of chaos on a whim. Something that Saints Row 2 and 3 would expand on several years later.

Yakuza has one of the smallest open worlds on my list but is packed so densely with side stories, and distractions, as well as a great core mechanic in its fighting system that means the game never runs out of steam. You can always find something you never did before. Jump into an arcade and play the fully fleshed out card game on the machines, or hop on a UFO catcher to win prizes. Search for all the missing keys, meet a former Judo master who is in town for a good time, hit the underground fighting pit to hone your skills, or go to the Pocket Circuit and build the perfect slot car to race it's multiple courses. It's so densely packed with different things you'll have plenty to do for quite a while. 

Each of these games are memorable, and work with the open world setting in different ways to suit their intentions instead of using what I can only describe as a gameplay template.

I think the biggest thing that holds many open world games back from being genuinely good, is they aren't made with any realy purpose. They're just there for a sales pitch, or to justify it's budget/sale price. I'll quickly run through a couple of open world games I like that fall prey to this:

Cloudpunk - Could have been a much more streamlined raceing style game to allow the exposition to be dealt at a proper narrative pace, instead of needing to wait for dialogue to finish while 6 feet from the destination marker.

Ghost Of Tsushima - Honestly it kind of needed to be open world, but it suffers from the Ubi-box design where there are many things thrown in as open world fodder. Thankfully the sheer bueaty of this game helps me look past it.

Prototype - Once again suffers from the Ubi-box format, although the power fantasy elements help it along. Especially when you lift a monster and use it as a projectile to destroy a tank. That's very satisfying.

These games all have their flaws rooted in being open world games, but the overall experience isn't ruined by it. It just once again showed me that the open world isn't always the ideal format for every game. I think the crux of the matter is that not necessarily the open world's fault. I think devs or publishers aren't all that aware of what makes a really good open world.

Now I fully understand that it's a highly subjective thing, but there are a few core principals that I think, if publishers allowed devs to focus on, could really help make these games the best they can be. On top of that, also allowing for "Pseudo-open worlds" to be more often used in leu of fully open worlds, would free up dev time for more important aspects of the game.

1. - Stop focussing on the world size - The size of an open world is absolutely meaningless unless you have the game to back it up. Shadow of the Colossus feels huge because of it's scale and it's emptiness, but is actually relatively small. While Far Cry just seems to include bandit camps, towers, and repeated small bits of busy work to fill out the oversized world.

2. - Allow your story and setting to dictate your world - Not every kind of story works with an open world setting. Smaller stories need smaller worlds to work within. Linear narratives that have clear beats to hit benefit from a linearity in game design. And if you are going the open world route, would a pseudo-open world suit better? Dark souls for instance uses the pseudo option for that Metroidvania feel, and it allows for a much more intentional design for progression and discovery, while keeping the player directed through set dressing, and encounters. Not a map marker.

3. - Stop with the Busywork - If all you can muster for players to do in your open world are a small list of copy/pasted challenges and collectables. Then you are likely not doing your open world justice. Time trials, races, and hidden packages are 1st level open world guff. Please add more variety to your worlds. Saint's Row had many of the same things, but with it's distractions like the Insurance fraud side mission gave it a breath of fresh air that changed things up and felt unique. Even Sim games like Euro Truck Simulator 2 have Landmarks and Photo opportunities to break up the main gameplay.