310 réponses à ce sujet

[Phaedon]

Wizz wrote...

Modern games are far richer than older games, believe it or not. Their levels are, 90% of the time,more complex. Having two rooms not be copy-pastes is definitely complexity. It's probably more complex than creating ten copy-paste corridors to make the game less linear.

Levels of BG were copy-pasted or maybe levels of Planscape? I agree with things above but telling that modern games are less generic is just blashpemy.

Well, to design an asset in isometric requires one drawing.

To design an asset in 3D requires to make a drawing based on a UV map, 

To design an asset in 3D requires to painstakingly make a model, and then draw a much more detailed drawing based on it's UV map.

[byzantine horse]

Ok. We get it. CDProjekt and their new game is the second coming of Christ and we should all be apalled by the awesomeness of The Witcher 2. We really should. The game is a masterpiece as far as graphics and story goes. Truly. Sadly they forgot combat and character management, whereas the former is simply boring and the latter is plain bad.

Neither do I see where TW2 trumphs any of the ME games storywise. And the supposed complex level design I haven't seen anything off. All caves I have been in have either been a long windy trek with nothing but tiny side alcoves if the cave is supposed to lead me somewhere. If it isn't I am only there to slaughter everything inside and then it matters not whether it is complex or linear: I am going to run through everything anyway to kill all the Nekkers or whatever.

[Pallid]

Machines Are Us wrote...
Bioware have never allowed for that kind of choice in any of their recent games.

That kind of choice. Yes TW2 have two different acts in the middle of the game, but it's not that amazing. And any other Witcher 2 "choices" and "consequences" are not so much different from ME or DA.

[this isnt my name]

Therefore_I_Am wrote...

this isnt my name wrote...

Therefore_I_Am wrote...

Oh bioware is going to have a field day with this.
This is the final Mass Effect game; you can bet there will be a million and one things passed down from the other sequels, Casey has said it until his face turned blue.

They are making ME3 standalone, it will have little impact, maybe a camo or an email for some characters, but not much else.

...and this is how threads get locked. By people who come from other forums, from completely unrelatable forums of another product & company, and start crap that does nothing but bashing. If you don't like ME, than why are you here? If anything you people are causing misery for yourselves. Confine you're self loathing to another forum.

I dont come from other forums, I dont even own the witcher 2, i came here after playing ME1 iirc.
Telling truth = starting crap ? They said it would be standalone, if it is, then they cant fully realise the consequences of previous actions. Im being logical by stating that, you are being an idiot.

I am here becuase I counter people like you. A dev shouldnt have a forum filled with fanboys lining up to kiss ass who wont criticise the game, whats the matter dont like seeing flaws in your game ?
Allthough there are alot more biodrones here than people who dont kiss ass at every oppertunity, its funny fable isnt an rpgs in most peoples eyes, yet it has deeper elemts than ME2, oh thats right, it hasnt got BWs logo, becuase thats all it takes for some people.

Topics get locked becuase of idiots like you. Feel free to make assumptions, twist words and bury your head in the sand though.

[Ahriman]

Phaedon wrote...

Well, to design an asset in isometric requires one drawing.

To design an asset in 3D requires to make a drawing based on a UV map, 

To design an asset in 3D requires to painstakingly make a model, and then draw a much more detailed drawing based on it's UV map.

I know, that's why I think that isometric gives more freedom to level-designers. I still remember that Bioware had to change design of Collector Base because of technical reasons.

[Phaedon]

Because it's a fact that ME3 will be stand-alone right. At this point, you can hardly form an opinion, let alone a fact.

Topics get locked becuase of idiots like you. Feel free to make assumptions, twist words and bury your head in the sand though.

I don't know if any of your previous posts was flamebait, but this is.

[Phaedon]

Wizz wrote...
I know, that's why I think that isometric gives more freedom to level-designers. I still remember that Bioware had to change design of Collector Base because of technical reasons.

We are strictly talking about linearity and getting lost in 3D or pseudo-3D games, though.

It's probably much more difficult to get lost in an isometric game than in even a modern 3D game.

Modifié par Phaedon, 19 juin 2011 - 05:23 .

[DaveExclamationMarkYognaut]

Cyberfrog81 wrote..
Heavy Rain was mentioned. Heavy Rain is a QTE-based interactive movie. Important characters can even die, and the story keeps going forward. It's good (craploads of resources put into its development with it becoming a flagship game for the PS3), but it's not Mass Effect. It would be pretty awesome if the finale of ME3 were a bit like the one in Heavy Rain though; that is, significantly differerent depending on who lived and died (depending on your choices, in general) throughout the whole trilogy.

I don't just want ME3 to be a decent game, I want it to fantastic.

I agree - one of the benefits of ME3 being the definitive last installment in the series is that the possible endings can be widely different from each other.

Machines Are Us wrote...

I agree but it won't happen,
Bioware have never allowed for that kind of choice in any of their
recent games. You are always forced to "care" about what is going on,
and certain people are always your enemy regardless of who/what you are.

Dragon
Age 2 this was horrifically noticeable when all mages in certain
missions attacked you even if you were one too...

Hopefully they can do this particular game differently, considering that's its the last installment and they don't have to worry about how your choices in this one affect later Mass Effect games.

Witcher as a series seems more willing to retcon past decisions than Mass Effect - I think someone mentioned waking up in bed with Triss because the Triss/Shani decision wasn't carried over. So that makes choice the result of intentional design decisions  as well as resources - do the devs maximize choice within a game, or between games? Since Bioware no longer has to worry about maximizing the impact of ME3 choices on future games, they're free to maximize the impact of those choices within the game.

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

This is the Mass Effect 3 forums. Not The Witcher 2 forums.

If you wish to discuss The Witcher 2 and how it's superior to everything else in the world and everything needs to turn into The Witcher with its porn and crap-ass combat, then by all means, do so. On its forums.

In short: Go the f away.

ITT: we have a reasonable discussion of the design decisions made by existing Witcher and Mass Effect games and how they could be used to make Mass Effect 3 awesome, and people come and flame because they think this is the "lol guise gaim A is so mcuh beter den gaim B!!11!" thread.

[crimzontearz]

^^ I partially agree with TIMN

Bioware, right now, does not have the quads to tell people

-Look, it's the third chapter of a trilogy. Can you play it by itself? yeah but try watching "return of the jedi" without having watched "a new hope" and "the empire strikes back"....you want the whole experience? play the other 2 games or else deal with less content and less awesomeness-

Bioware says it's not about punishing the newcomers for not having played ME1 and 2....I say it feels like it's about handwaving the loyalty and effort put in by those who have a dozen characters with different choices ready for import thus punishing them

Modifié par crimzontearz, 19 juin 2011 - 05:25 .

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

RageGT wrote...
And some reviewers says that "TW2 assumes that gamers are somewhat inteligent"... There's a beautiful tutorial in the  journal, wonderfully written by Dandelion, where everything that was shown OSD can eb reviewed, as long as the player can read! Also, since there's no unbalanced abilities in TW2 (try Insane diff without Quen if you thing that's unbalanced) and no dead-end classes (I played all three and they all get the job done very well in Insane diff!), I believe you're talking about some other game.

So the tutorial is just text in the journal? Sounds like a bad tutorial to me.

[Chromie]

Lizardviking wrote...
So the tutorial is just text in the journal? Sounds like a bad tutorial to me.

You sound like a person who can't be bothered to open a journal to find ou the mechanics and such. You get regular popups such as in Dragon Age but you just open the Journal for a more indepth explanation. Believe it or not Bioware used to the same thing. 

Modifié par Ringo12, 19 juin 2011 - 05:40 .

[DaveExclamationMarkYognaut]

crimzontearz wrote...

^^ I partially agree with TIMN

Bioware, right now, does not have the quads to tell people

-Look, it's the third chapter of a trilogy. Can you play it by itself? yeah but try watching "return of the jedi" without having watched "a new hope" and "the empire strikes back"....you want the whole experience? play the other 2 games or else deal with less content and less awesomeness-

Bioware says it's not about punishing the newcomers for not having played ME1 and 2....I say it feels like it's about handwaving the loyalty and effort put in by those who have a dozen characters with different choices ready for import thus punishing them

Really, they could get the best of both worlds by allowing people who don't have a save waiting to be imported to set specific values to major decisions (save/kill the Rachni, brainwash/kill the Geth, and so on.) That way they could have a game that responds to past decisions without punishing people who don't have savegames and eitehr can't or don't want to download an existing savegame.

[CroGamer002]

Lizardviking wrote...

RageGT wrote...
And some reviewers says that "TW2 assumes that gamers are somewhat inteligent"... There's a beautiful tutorial in the  journal, wonderfully written by Dandelion, where everything that was shown OSD can eb reviewed, as long as the player can read! Also, since there's no unbalanced abilities in TW2 (try Insane diff without Quen if you thing that's unbalanced) and no dead-end classes (I played all three and they all get the job done very well in Insane diff!), I believe you're talking about some other game.

So the tutorial is just text in the journal? Sounds like a bad tutorial to me.

Yeah, Witcher 2 the worst tutorial in modern games.

Hell I didn't know how to use potions until after 7 hours of playing it.

And until Yahtzee review I had no idea that 1 sword is for humans and other is for monsters.

Game never told me.
Oh and it forget to tell me about blocking until 4th battle!

[Kronner]

Mesina2 wrote...

Yeah, Witcher 2 the worst tutorial in modern games.

Hell I didn't know how to use potions until after 7 hours of playing it.

And until Yahtzee review I had no idea that 1 sword is for humans and other is for monsters.

Game never told me.
Oh and it forget to tell me about blocking until 4th battle!

RTFM
(that came with the game)

Simple as that.

I actually think The Witcher 2 is cool, since it requires you to..you know..read the MANUAL..oh the horror, right? Pretty cool to see that not all new games must include annoying amount of hand holding.

Anyway, The Witcher 2 is an amazing game and the non-linear story and severe consequences of your actions are absolutely amazing.

Modifié par Kronner, 19 juin 2011 - 05:42 .

[Chromie]

Mesina2 wrote...

Yeah, Witcher 2 the worst tutorial in modern games.

Hell I didn't know how to use potions until after 7 hours of playing it.

And until Yahtzee review I had no idea that 1 sword is for humans and other is for monsters.

Game never told me.
Oh and it forget to tell me about blocking until 4th battle!

OPEN the journal that's it. And you need a review to tell you that which sword is for which? You hear it in dialogue, your combat log tells you and you have the damn journal. You can't drink potions in combat you meditate. 

Don't go being proud of not reading or patience.

[Nashiktal]

Tutorial? In the Journal? But what if the game doesn't tell you how to open the journal?



Come on mate, this has nothing to do with intelligence, at least not on the players part, this is about explaining mechanic to players. The game wasn't intuitive. The game gives you hints to run from the dragon. But in reality you have to fight it, activate an ability with a strange name that lessens fire damage (Oh but you have to be intelligent to know this without any explanation apparently) and kill the damn thing. In fact, if someone had NOT played the first game, I bet they wouldn't have even known Geralt had magical powers.

Here is an excerpt from a review... (that gave it five stars BTW)

"One of my biggest complaints with The Witcher 2 was the lack of any detail in the tutorial. Without playing a ton of the first game, you would hardly know that Geralt has some magical powers. It took me almost an hour to read through all the tutorial documentation in the menu system. If I did not know that all the information was tucked away in there, I would not have had as much fun during the more difficult sequences. Once you find out how to use those powers, the game becomes even more fun and it just seems like a poor decision to keep that out of the tutorial."

A player should not have to read tutorial documents for an hour just to to know how to play the game.

[DaveExclamationMarkYognaut]

omskman wrote...

Machines Are Us wrote...
Bioware have never allowed for that kind of choice in any of their recent games.

That kind of choice. Yes TW2 have two different acts in the middle of the game, but it's not that amazing. And any other Witcher 2 "choices" and "consequences" are not so much different from ME or DA.

Well, I don't know about you, but IMO the ability to completely change the end of Ch.1, the entirety of Ch.2, and the endgame for Ch.3 (I.e., about half of the game content) based on choices you made is pretty awesome. And Mass Effect 3 could be even better at this sort of thing than Witcher 2 since saves are carried over more thouroughly and level structure is more modular (in other words, it's easier to swap out a mission than a questing area.)

Lizardviking wrote...

So the tutorial is just text in the journal? Sounds like a bad tutorial to me.

Yeah, lack of tutorial (alongside the rushed ending and hilariously bad UI) is one of the few elements of Witcher 2 that isn't absolutely stellar.

[CroGamer002]

That doesn't change the fact that Witcher 2 tutorial is sh*t.

And how the f*ck I suppose to know that journal has tutorial?
Not many games do that and all of them are RTS.



And check out ExtraCredits on how to make a good tutorial.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Ringo12 wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...
So the tutorial is just text in the journal? Sounds like a bad tutorial to me.

You sound like a person who can't be bothered to open a journal to find ou the mechanics and such. You get regular popups such as in Dragon Age but you just open the Journal for a more indepth explanation. Believe it or not Bioware used to the same thing. 

Excuse me for my ignorance regarding the Witcher 2 (Have considered buying it since DA2 was poop, but not sure if I am going to like it). But the way you described it made it sound like it was just in the Journal and nothing else.

And no. I do read the Journal/guide from time to time if I feel like I need some more clarification on some gameplay elements. But dropping the player off without any kind of tutorial is bad. Along with not explaining all the major gameplay elements in your game.

Watch this for an explanation for what makes a good tutorial.

"EDIT"

Lol. Mesina Ninja'd me!

Modifié par Lizardviking, 19 juin 2011 - 05:50 .

[In Exile]

RageGT wrote...
I hope you're not talking about TW2, a game that has sold

No. I was actually talking about some posters who I debated with in the DA2 forums.

I would be outright lying if I said TW2 had dead-end classes. The abilities aren't numerous, but they're all very well done, with the exception of the Act II boss fight that strips you of your alchemy buffs. That was a big design flaw.

And some reviewers says that "TW2 assumes that gamers are somewhat inteligent"... There's a beautiful tutorial in the  journal, wonderfully written by Dandelion, where everything that was shown OSD can eb reviewed, as long as the player can read!

TW2 doesn't assume that gamers are intelligent. Design-wise, the game is simplified from TW. For example, in TW1 you had to research monsters to be able to complete Witcher quests. In TW2 you can just kill monsters until you get the appropriate 2/3 in their category and then go and complete the quest. In TW1, with alchemy, you could experiment with differnet formulas and effects. In TW2, you can only craft if you have the appropriate ingredients and you no longer need alcohol as a base.

More generally, TW2 does fail at a tutorial, because a proper tutorial isn't an exhaustive list of statements about how abilities work. It's an interactive gameplay segment at the start of the game that allows a player time to familiarize with commands and basic abilities.

TW2 is an easy game once you learn how to play it. It has a lot of fake difficulty (the best example being insanity as a whole).

Also, since there's no unbalanced abilities in TW2 (try Insane diff without Quen if you thing that's unbalanced) and no dead-end classes (I played all three and they all get the job done very well in Insane diff!), I believe you're talking about some other game.

I wasn't talking about any game. I was talking about what people expressed as their taste.

For example, one person said that useless abilities are a 'reward' for players who invest time and energy into learning the system to play at high difficulties because they know the ability is a dud and players that don't invest as much time as s/he did would be punished.

Modifié par In Exile, 19 juin 2011 - 05:49 .

[DragonRageGT]

Mesina2 wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

RageGT wrote...
And some reviewers says that "TW2 assumes that gamers are somewhat inteligent"... There's a beautiful tutorial in the  journal, wonderfully written by Dandelion, where everything that was shown OSD can eb reviewed, as long as the player can read! Also, since there's no unbalanced abilities in TW2 (try Insane diff without Quen if you thing that's unbalanced) and no dead-end classes (I played all three and they all get the job done very well in Insane diff!), I believe you're talking about some other game.

So the tutorial is just text in the journal? Sounds like a bad tutorial to me.

Yeah, Witcher 2 the worst tutorial in modern games.

Hell I didn't know how to use potions until after 7 hours of playing it.

And until Yahtzee review I had no idea that 1 sword is for humans and other is for monsters.

Game never told me.
Oh and it forget to tell me about blocking until 4th battle!

No, that's not what I wrote but some people do seem to have difficulty with reading. I wrote we can REVIEW the tutorial that was shown ON SCREEN, in the Journal.  And honestly, if someone didn't know how to use potions after 7 minutes playing (nopt to say 7 hours) or that a Witcher has a Silver and a Steel sword... now I know why they used "auto-level up" on Bioware games!

People that would never play F1-2010 because they're too dumb to try and make a decent car setup that will give much better results than the pre-set setups, and then blame the game because they can't win a fraking race!

[Kronner]

Mesina2 wrote...

That doesn't change the fact that Witcher 2 tutorial is sh*t.

And how the f*ck I suppose to know that journal has tutorial?
Not many games do that and all of them are RTS.



And check out ExtraCredits on how to make a good tutorial.

Ever heard of MANUAL? No, not in-game journal.
No offense, but Witcher 2 is obviously not a game for you.

Modifié par Kronner, 19 juin 2011 - 05:54 .

[In Exile]

Kronner wrote...
I actually think The Witcher 2 is cool, since it requires you to..you know..read the MANUAL..oh the horror, right? Pretty cool to see that not all new games must include annoying amount of hand holding.

Let's play a game. We can call it the "fly a plane without dying" game. We both get into real planes. You read a book about how to fly the plane. I train with a real pilot using a simulator. At the end, we see who doesn't die.

I have a better one: try to teach someone how to tie their shoelaces by writing an instructional booklet without pictures.

Putting my neuroscientist cap on for a second, physical skills require experiential learning. Any game that wants you to do something but tries to teach you that thing by reading something is doing it very wrong. It's why math or physics textbooks have problems and not just theory.

Modifié par In Exile, 19 juin 2011 - 05:56 .

[CroGamer002]

When did freaking game tell me I have to meditate to drink the potion?
How did I suppose to know that?!
And why do I have to meditate to drink a freaking potion?!

Modifié par Mesina2, 19 juin 2011 - 05:58 .

[CroGamer002]

Kronner wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

That doesn't change the fact that Witcher 2 tutorial is sh*t.

And how the f*ck I suppose to know that journal has tutorial?
Not many games do that and all of them are RTS.



And check out ExtraCredits on how to make a good tutorial.

Ever heard of MANUAL? No, not in-game journal.
No offense, but Witcher 2 is obviously not a game for you.

Maybe if game gave a good tutorial, I would enjoyed it a lot more.

And no, I shouldn't use a freaking manual to know how to play a freaking game! It's job for a game to show me how to play it!
It's just very lazy design.