I stil think Gothic 3 had the best open world. It had pretty big cities, huge unground caverns, sprawling deserts, snow-clad mountains, wooded valleys, and deep oceans. And it was all streaming. You could swim from Kap Dun to Bakaresh at the beginning of the game if you wanted too, instead of having to fight your way through the bandit pass(22, near Nemora). Again, all streaming.

http://www.vgmaps.com/Atlas/PC/Gothic3-WorldOfGothic.jpg

better than gothic 2?

When it comes to quests and in playing different types of character moralities, Fallout: New Vegas blows Skyrim out of the water. Dragon Age: Orgins for character interactions and character moralities too.
I haven't played The Witcher.

Skyrim isn't that great of an rpg. There is very little player choice. Weak writing and story. Uninteresting characters. Character development is alright, but not nearly as in-depth as most roleplaying games that are released. I find it hard justifying the game as a better rpg than others, simply because it doesn't follow a specific character. Skyrim gives you no real way of brining personality to your character, so I don't see how it is a positive.

My favorite type of game is the open world RPG. It would seem some of the best games available for an open world RPG are only available on PC? It's a shame that I only have an Xbox. It makes me want to get a PC just for gaming.

I'm not really sure of open-world RPGs exclusive to the PC, or at least not newer ones that can't likely be run on what you have now.

I guess I just don't know of many aside from TES games.

There's the Two Worlds series, if you want to stomach them (highly criticized, not very recommended), which are available on the 360, but as for good open-world RPGs, Gothic 1-3 shouldn't be too difficult to get running on any modern PC (3's debatable) while Risen 2 is coming to the 360 and Risen 1 is already on it (but I've heard bad things about the 360 version's performance). "Gothic IV" (Arcania) is on the 360, but I've heard it's a crappy game. I don't know, there aren't a whole lot of open-world RPGs out there. Gothic 1-3 and Risen (though keep an eye out for reviews about 360 version performance if interested in 2) are the only ones I've really heard positive things about aside from some of Bethesda's stuff... unless you're willing to dig into some really old titles.

edit: Oh, and Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning comes out in 3 days. It's not open-world as in a sandbox, but it's an open-world RPG of a sort.

I come back to this topic after so long and so many replies and differing views. I don't agree with them all but I respect them all. We all want different things from what we might perceive to be an RPG.

I feel I should clarify my own expectations. I like games that allow me to choose my own identity and gender and stats and class. That to me is classic RPG. I know some of you disagree but hey ho.

The Witcher keeps coming up. It's a great game. The second one looks good too from what I have played of it but I never liked the character they forced on me in fact I hated him he's crude, brash and 'hip and trendy' not at all what I want from a fantasy RPG so to me it can only be enjoyed as an action adventure with a very limited skillset and a horrible main character. That last part is of course subjective but what is indisputable is it is NOT a freeform RPG your whole identity is forced on you and that blows in so many ways in my humble opinion of course.

I loved FONV and as I have previously stated if it could be married to Skyrim that would be my perfect game. Great story, great side quests, great and interesting characters but dull, dull, gameworld. Skyrim has the open world feel I love much more so than FONV because it feels like a world not just a wasteland with quests dotted around it. This is hugely subjective I know.

I have said before and will say now and will always say till the day I die that games that force a character upon you are not RPG's. End.

Some people pointed out past games that are much better than Skyrim that should be considered well if that was the criteria I could give you the longest list but I was talking about current games and Skyrim makes me feel like I am playing an old fashioned RPG with up to date technology and that's why I love it.

I'm rambling now, I know I can't touch upon all the points mentioned though I would just like to add that FF7 is my favourite game of all time and I don't consider it to be an RPG by any stretch of the imagination.

Thanks for the input from everyone whether you agree with me or not it's been an interesting discussion and a few games have come up I never thought of playing that I will now (Borderlands as an i.e.) but I still maintain Skyrim is the best 'traditional' RPG currently available. Feel free to tell me I am talking out of my ass this is not a new thing for me

It's great to see how open you are to other opinions, makes for a much better thread.

It'd be interesting to see the comparison of choices by those that favour role or rule based playing. I think that for me at least is why I enjoy the Witcher more than say an Elder Scrolls game. I'm playing a role where the basis is set but I can choose their development, morality and direction - gave a tighter story at the expense of extensive character customisation. For me the Elder Scrolls to a lesser extent and more likely Diablo, Fallout and a blast from the past Castle of the Winds are spreadsheets with pretty visuals, a rule orientated direction. For me it's more enjoyable to play from a role mindset over a rule mindset. This likely compliments that I enjoy a darker, grittier world than that with tends to be presented in fantasy games, again why I enjoy the Witcher more.

You've got a civil and interesting discussion going here Be a shame for it to end.

Out of curiousity what's your take on the System Shock titles?

I loved them just as I loved Ultima Underworld but I don't know how much of it is just plain nostalgia. I'd have to see a SS1 remake with updated graphics and interface to give an opinion. I used to love all the Ultima games and they seem so shallow to me now

It was a little odd as I adore SS2 then went and played some of the original, the greater amount of control and interface usage, lets just say I missed it when I went back to SS2 as much as I enjoy it, it did feel that my control options were dumbed down a bit. I think I'm just becoming oblivious to the relative quality of graphics now and just playing for atmosphere and options Then again I'm comfortable now with having to learn how to play a game rather than the game having to accomodate me. It'd be interesting to see how twelve year old me would have fared with System Shock compared with twenty-six year old me now.

Man, you're in a world of hurt with that. I can't remember the last game I played that doesn't pretty much play itself with me 'pretending' to be involved.

Battlecruiser 3000AD was my limit. I just looked at the controls and went derp!

Might have to try it again sometime in the future.

When I first loaded up Oblivion and saw map pointers and fast travel I nearly cried. End of an era.

It's not just nostalgia. I love Ultima Underworld and System Shock and I only first played them sometime in the past 3 or 4 years.

I actually wish there were more games like that, everything these days seems so simple in comparison.

You know... I felt the same way about it when I couldn't find spears as a skill

Yeah I played SS2 3 years ago and I loved it.

You should try Dark Souls, it is the best RPG I've played that lets you do just that. Check my post I wrote earlier about it.

I really liked the design of its world. Clearly a lot of thought and effort had gone into it in a way that doesn't always happen. I think I liked Risen and Ego Draconis for the same reason: they were interesting to explore because they hadn't been filled with auto-generated landscapes.

Witcher 2 and Mass Effect 2 are the only recent games on the same level as Skyrim.

New Vegas is worthless. Although, if you're miserable nerd you'll probably enjoy it. Nerds loooove New Vegas.

Dark Souls is only good if you're self-loathing masochist...well, maybe not, but who cares?

I haven't played Gothic 3 or Ego Draconis, but I wasn't too fond of Risen's world. It didn't feel open, it felt like a number of large areas connected by fairly linear paths. You couldn't just pick a direction and walk without being impeded; most of the time the game was forcing you down an artificial path.

While that's true in most areas of the game, I think that makes the landscape more interesting. The world isn't as flat as a TES game, while still having a sort of openness to it.

Hmm, I see what you mean. That is actually somewhat true of Ego Draconis too, and to a lesser extent Gothic 3: I guess it's a kind of trade-off between open and vague on the one hand and hand-crafted but linear on the other. Although I loved the openness of, say, Oblivion, like many others I found it to be slightly uninspired in many places; but I feel that things like DA:O and Teh Witcher are just a little too limited and claustrophobic for my liking, so as a half-way house I quite like the design of these games.

I don't think there's any connection between hand-crafted and linear. That's purely a design decision. You can make hand-crafted environments that aren't at all linear or flat. I've done them myself. Skryim is like that: there are paths through the mountains, stairs, dungeons that open on a low area and exit on a high area, etc. If the landscape forces you along a specific path, that's a conscious design decision the developers made to control your experience. That's not a bad thing, it's just not a consequence of a hand-crafted world.