In alot of cases yes.

Pointless stuff in games that take weeks or months to complete actually has the effect of a deterrence from me buying the game.

It varies from game to game, but for single player games its ALWAYS the gameplay and story that counts as content, NOT collect "5 billion herbs then 10 billion metal scraps" for 100% completion.

don't really care so much for the size, it's how the dev's use the open world and what they give us to do in it that needs to change. they need to go back to the drawing board and look at how some of the older open world games did it... oh and there is no point giving us an open world if you are going to give us such a linear path to follow or be so scripted with missions etc. just how i feel anyway

Witcher 2 did it best imo,it gave you three decently sized sandboxes to play around in with many things to do.I wish mgs5 was like that, every act should have been like ground zeroes ,decently sized and good on content and then move on .

as long as side content is good and meaningful, immersion needs to be priority.

Do you have the content to fill a massive open world? No? Smaller would be good then.

I had this problem with Assassin's Creed Black Flag.
Huuuge open world, but with not much to do in it but sail around & search the map for collectables.
Sometimes a smaller map with more focused gameplay can be better.

No bigger:)

If the best you can do is scatter it with collectibles, then smaller may very well be better.

Over 50% is PC. RE9 was the same

From this moment henceforth, Xbox hardware shall simply just exist but have no significant bearing from a business standpoint or from a gamer culture standpoint. It will simply be there for the people that want to have it and that's fine if they're selling it at a high price and actually making money off each sale.

But they should never ever again be Xbox fanboys anymore than they should be Lenovo laptop fanboys it's just a piece of hardware that exists to serve a purpose for niche group of people.

I’ll say this. Cyberpunk had a tumultuous start on console. Even if it had sold like crazy, that whole almost unplayable fiasco and being given no questions asked refunds made a lot of people not look back.
When it comes to PC, people are a lot more forgiving of things like that, especially on Steam, because of the return policy. I really think console manufacturers should implement the exact same refund policy. Was it played under X time? Refund it. It makes people take that risk on games a LOT more than on console. Bought this game and it was broken? Refund it. They said they fixed it 3 months later? Buy it again. It’s fixed but just not fun? Refund it. On console you don’t have that luxury. Was it downloaded? GG. No refund. Lord knows my Steam library is full of “I’ll try it” games that I loved and I’m glad I can take a rush on. On console, specifically PlayStation because I’m not buying Xbox games, I take calculated risk. Known developers. Shinobi, Ninja Gaiden ragebound, stuff like that. Obviously big exclusives and games too. I would have never tried Little Bookstore on PlayStation, but on Steam… why not? Hellish Quart? Why not. Buckshot Roulette? Why not.

this is why console sales matter, folks.

Never gonna complain at this especially as I havent played the PS5 version yet. Give me a Pro patch 😂😂

They're finally fixing the godawful inventory system? Yes!