226 réponses à ce sujet

[MasterSamson88]

I liked exploration in ME1 and I felt it did add to the overall largeness of the galaxy.

Not having it in ME2 made me groan a little but overall it didn't really hurt I have to say. I think my main complaint in ME2, while I loved it, was that in parts it was a pretty strict corridor shooter. That on top of the FOV being tighter than it was in ME1 made the game world feel constrained or smaller.

In ME3 the FOV is wider and it seems to have broken from endless corridors a bit with their new surprise diversions. Additionally the vistas seems to be much larger and much nicer than they were in ME2 and in turn it's making ME3 look very pretty. Certainly there are still corridors, it is a cover based shooter after all, but they're far less claustrophobic now than they were in ME2.

Exploration gone certainly is a downer. Certainly however it was one of the weaker sides of ME1 when one considers it strictly on a game play standpoint. The cover based shooting was the main focus of ME1 and as such that was what got ultimately overhauled and improved in ME2.

I think the exploration got the short end of that stick mostly because the solutions for that just aren't quite as obvious or easy to think of. Many liked exploration but just as many, perhaps more, hated it. Considering the biggest complaints were the Makos handling and the sometimes woeful terrain that some planets had it was hard I imagine from a game play perspective to improve those.

I mean what do you do? Improve the Mako, okay now you have the Hammerhead... But that basically flies over the terrain making it more of a flight tool and rendering the challenging terrain sort of pointless. Make the terrain less challenging? Okay, but now a lot of the planets are flatter, and with the barren look they also look very similar. Alright then, we'll add trees and other special features, but now we're putting more time into making a quick diversion from the main game than we probably should... If you put more work into a easier terrain system then you end up having what was basically Project Overlord. Which was great I thought, but I imagine creating worlds like that to explore would take a rather large amount of time.

Yeah yeah, TL:DR but whatever. Basically I am a little disappointed that exploration may be gone. But if it is, I understand why it got axed.

[Sebbe1337o]

Savber100 wrote...

I doubt it'll be open world and instead more like a linear hallway with some diverging path similar in Overlord.

Still better than most of what we had imo.

[Lord Jaric]

I for one kind of don't want it, after a while, expressly after several playthroughs it gets tiresome.

[Dragoonlordz]

Sebbe1337o wrote...

Savber100 wrote...

I doubt it'll be open world and instead more like a linear hallway with some diverging path similar in Overlord.

Still better than most of what we had imo.

They are keeping planet scanning as mini game from what I read but reducing it down in amount of which I am glad, that is something I really hated in ME2 so as a compromise I hope atleast they also meet us half way with regarding to bringing back exploration from ME1. I personally didn't buy ME1 and ME2 for specifically the corridor shooting element, instead for the RPG features such as dialogue choices, character appearence customisation, character growth and progression through skills and gear, exploration and branching story. The actual shooter element was just a means to progress from place A to place B and so on. It was done well but it was not my major interest or reason I bought the game by any stretch of the imagination.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 20 janvier 2012 - 12:17 .

[CannonO]

MELTOR13 wrote...

CannonLars wrote...

Or they could at least say "No, we removed open exploration." I don't appreciate how long such a major interest has gone publicly ignored. Just answer the thread question. It is either in the game by now or it isn't.

It's YOUR major interest. 1 person. I could frankly give to ***** about free-roaming copy/paste planet #392, heading for copy/paste bunker #4057, all while cursing the Mako while climbing a 90 degree angle for 20 minutes because apparently copy/paste planet #392 has mountains  EVERYWHERE. 

You obviously are being ignorant of the thread. Those of us in favor of the feature and the potential it showed (there are clearly more than just one or a few interested fans) are not asking for the Mako, repetitive designs, or a mass number of the planets. We want a well-controlled, well-varied, series of quality designed open planets that allow a free roaming experience in space locations that present a clear interest in pursuing the potential of the core feature in Mass Effect that was inexplicably removed entirely for Mass Effect 2. No one is asking for 30 planets that cause development issues and lead them to placing copy/paste bunkers or frustrating routes. We also aren't asking for the completely linear ME2 experiences. We want those moments where we got to run for our lives from Thresher Maws in a snow storm, stare up at awe-inspiring planets of artistic genius, drive across fields until we find ourselves pausing and gladly surprised to find those strange creatures grazing in their herd, and last but not least, get to stand in the big open expanses of another place you were never sure existed and feel how small you are in this galaxy as you look to the horizon breaking miles in front of you and then to the stars above your head that frame that big multi-colored marble that you played pretend-astronaut with as a kid. It means a lot to some people to have those adventures. I just wish BioWare didn't invite us to dinner without ever serving the dessert that we dreamed such and impressive idea would become.

Jackal7713 wrote...

Doodledorf wrote...

MELTOR13 wrote...

CannonLars wrote...

Or they could at least say "No, we removed open exploration." I don't appreciate how long such a major interest has gone publicly ignored. Just answer the thread question. It is either in the game by now or it isn't.

It's YOUR major interest. 1 person. I could frankly give to ***** about free-roaming copy/paste planet #392, heading for copy/paste bunker #4057, all while cursing the Mako while climbing a 90 degree angle for 20 minutes because apparently copy/paste planet #392 has mountains  EVERYWHERE. 

<< Now it's 2 persons. 

Great now we have two people that want to pause a Galactic War to find mummies, minerals, and want to waste time traversing rocky terrains.    
Don't get me wrong, if thats your thing more power to you. Hell, I enjoyed it myself in first two games. However, It would seem more benifical to to over-all plot to have the exploration tied to beating the Reapers. 

Now you are being one of those people who acts like it was okay in ME1 and 2 to have exploration because Shepard didn't care that Geth were slaughtering hundreds or Collector's killing by the thousands. Do you really not see how saying exploration is innappropriate in an urgent situation is a poor argument in an explorable RPG series? All RPGs would have to sacrifice the idea of the player exploring if it was truly a bad idea to allow it when the story is still occurring.

Modifié par CannonLars, 20 janvier 2012 - 12:28 .

[ParagonForLife]

Ghost-621 wrote...

CannonLars wrote...

 At this point BioWare knows if they are putting in ME1 style open planets to explore, or some variant of a more open vehicle exploration. So, yes or no? Should we keep holding our breath, or is it more along the lines of ME2 where both vehicle (regardless of whether they can or can't confirm vehicles) and on foot scenarios are technically linear?

It still says it is possible in the features thread, but that is quite a big portion of a game to still have a maybe on.

Please and thanks,

a fan who is still holding his breath

*Holds out an airmask connected to an oxygen tank* You're going to need it.

Exploration is one of the things the ME fans LOVED, and they removed it. We loved exploring the worlds, we just didn't like the "generic warehouse #52" part.

It's not coming back. Not on the scale of ME1 anyway.

Yea but frankly it was alot more fun then what we had in ME2 finding resorces in ME1 was so fun driving around in the Mako flash to randomly spaming triggers and it took all the fun of exploration not to mention they locked you into one area of the planet as to before when you had to drive to the mission area overall huge disapointment

[Il Divo]

CannonLars wrote...

Now you are being one of those people who acts like it was okay in ME1 and 2 to have exploration because Shepard didn't care that Geth were slaughtering hundreds or Collector's killing by the thousands. Do you really not see how saying exploration is innappropriate in an urgent situation is a poor argument in an explorable RPG series? All RPGs would have to sacrifice the idea of the player exploring if it was truly a bad idea to allow it when the story is still occurring.

Exactly how I feel. Exploration and side quests work in a context where there is no pressing need to get anything done. As others often point out, calling the ME1 main quest "Race against Time" makes the idea of exploring planet to planet very absurd. That was one advantage of storylines similar to KotOR and ME2, which have very indefinite time frames for how long it will take the main villain to accomplish his plans. In the case of KotOR, it also helps that most side quests were condensed to whatever planet the PC was working on, with three exceptions.

And that's only accounting for the absurdity in allowing the player to explore while Saren attempts to kill us all. It doesn't say anything about how bad I thought the exploration elements in Mass Effect 1 actually were.

Modifié par Il Divo, 20 janvier 2012 - 02:53 .

[Il Divo]

Bluko wrote...

Also as for the "THERE'S NO TIME TO EXPLORE! GO GO GO!" if Shepard has time to talk to his crew and fool around with whatever Love Interest I don't think landing on a planet and saving a bunch of colonists from Husks is the end of universe. (No one one wants to look for more Prothean Disks believe me.)

It is when you consider the different scales involved in each activity. From a narrative perspective, what is the time requirement for Shepard to travel back and forth across the galaxy ad infinitum versus speaking to Wrex for five minutes? That's really the problem with planet exploration compared to past Bioware endeavors; other games made sure that most side quests took place in whatever location the player was exploring (with a few exceptions), which really meant they were occurring along side the main quest.

Mass Effect doesn't follow this. They're not side quests as much as "Go completely out of your way and into the middle of nowhere" quests. Although admittedly if the side quests themselves were better designed, I'd be more willing to give them a pass on this.

Modifié par Il Divo, 20 janvier 2012 - 03:07 .

[elitecom]

Any information about the type of exploration which will be present in Mass Effect 3?

It's getting close to release with about 1 month away, anything in regards to exploration must have been decided. Such as if it'll return to ME1 or ME2 or a little of both. So who else thinks it's time for some information about exploration?

[Pepper4]

I think that the "Search & Rescue" operations are going to be the major "exploration" feature of ME3. Wheter they include free roaming, we don't know yet.

[G3rman]

It's galactic war, there isn't time to sightsee.

[CannonO]

elitecom wrote...

Any information about the type of exploration which will be present in Mass Effect 3?

It's getting close to release with about 1 month away, anything in regards to exploration must have been decided. Such as if it'll return to ME1 or ME2 or a little of both. So who else thinks it's time for some information about exploration?

I agree. Like I said, the feature is definitely been decided on, so why not tell us if there is open exploration or not?

G3rman wrote...

It's galactic war, there isn't time to sightsee.

Shush. I can't believe you seriously are yet another person who wants to pretend things weren't urgent for Shepard in ME1 and ME2. As if he didn't care about the thousands being killed by Geth and Collectors in those two. Stupid argument.

Modifié par CannonLars, 30 janvier 2012 - 06:35 .

[mjh417]

G3rman wrote...

It's galactic war, there isn't time to sightsee.

Right but there is time to chat with your crew on the Normandy or hang out around the citadel (confirmed feature) or do any side quests what so ever. Do you se how dumb that argument is, especially when you consider the previous two games (which involved URGENT story lines to save the Galaxy) or really any RPG or even many modern action games which have exploration or open world elements. Open world exploration does not mean a distraction from story telling, it can enhance it the same way Bioware has been saying most the side missions in ME3 will, by improving "Galactic Readiness" and gathering more "War Assets."
I for one am with all those in this forum who crave the open world planetary exploration first envisioned for Mass Effect. ME1 did it, but not well. ME2 had it absent except for one DLC what while excellent still and much better than ME1 in many areas, felt all to brief and not very "open" at all. I think ME3 could fix the issues of both previous efforts and deliver something great that almost everyone will love.

Pepper4 wrote...

I think that the "Search & Rescue" operations are going to be the major "exploration" feature of ME3. Whether they include free roaming, we don't know yet.

Wow I really hope your right that they do!! See this would be a perfect implementation of open world exploration into the galactic war scenario and the whole "Galactic Readiness" and "War Assets" systems.

[AlanC9]

CannonLars wrote...

Shush. I can't believe you seriously are yet another person who wants to pretend things weren't urgent for Shepard in ME1 and ME2. As if he didn't care about the thousands being killed by Geth and Collectors in those two. Stupid argument.

He's pretending things aren't urgent? It's the people who do sidequests who are pretending that.

ME1 was a terrible design, since so much of the content is based on Shepard not believing that his quest is urgent.

ME2 not so much, since Shepard is actually either unable to go after the collectors directly for most of the game, or suffers severe consequences if he does delay. With the single and horrible exception of being able to delay the IFF mission, which pretty much wrecks the game.

Modifié par AlanC9, 30 janvier 2012 - 07:04 .

[CannonO]

AlanC9 wrote...

CannonLars wrote...

Shush. I can't believe you seriously are yet another person who wants to pretend things weren't urgent for Shepard in ME1 and ME2. As if he didn't care about the thousands being killed by Geth and Collectors in those two. Stupid argument.

He's pretending things aren't urgent? It's the people who do sidequests who are pretending that.

ME1 was a terrible design, since so much of the content is based on Shepard not believing that his quest is urgent.

ME2 not so much, since Shepard is actually either unable to go after the collectors directly for most of the game, or suffers severe consequences if he does delay. With the single and horrible exception of being able to delay the IFF mission, which pretty much wrecks the game.

No. No one is pretending anything if they understand how a video game, especially an RPG with exploration, works with time. Doing sidequests is not part of a real time account. A game's story is not a real time account. Exploration should not be related to the urgency of the story, and it certainly shouldn't be excluded due to the urgency of the story. 

His argument is still stupid. It is trying to make excuses for excluding a feature based on consideration of real time, rather than of game time. It ignores how story urgency in games works entirely.

Modifié par CannonLars, 30 janvier 2012 - 07:19 .

[AlanC9]

CannonLars wrote...
No. No one is pretending anything if they understand how a video game, especially an RPG with exploration, works with time. Doing sidequests is not part of a real time account. A game's story is not a real time account. Exploration should not be related to the urgency of the story, and it certainly shouldn't be excluded due to the urgency of the story.

So RPGs just have to include this kind of phoniness or they're bad RPGs?

I don't play the RPG definition game anymore, so I'll use yours. But if that's the case, then the RPG genre itself is bad and RPGs should die out.

His argument is still stupid. It is trying to make excuses for excluding a feature based on consideration of real time, rather than of game time. It ignores how story urgency in games works entirely.

I thought it was an argument that games shouldn't work the way you like them to work. But I wasn't following his post too carefully, I'll admit.

Modifié par AlanC9, 30 janvier 2012 - 08:23 .

[Il Divo]

AlanC9 wrote...

So RPGs just have to include this kind of phoniness or they're bad RPGs?

I don't play the RPG definition game anymore, so I'll use yours. But if that's the case, then the RPG genre itself is bad and RPGs should die out.

Agreed. I have no problem with side quests per se, but if we're going down that route, I want the context to make sense given the scale of the conflict.

[King Minos]

I want rock aliens from Apollo 18 please.

[CannonO]

AlanC9 wrote...

CannonLars wrote...
No. No one is pretending anything if they understand how a video game, especially an RPG with exploration, works with time. Doing sidequests is not part of a real time account. A game's story is not a real time account. Exploration should not be related to the urgency of the story, and it certainly shouldn't be excluded due to the urgency of the story.

So RPGs just have to include this kind of phoniness or they're bad RPGs?

I don't play the RPG definition game anymore, so I'll use yours. But if that's the case, then the RPG genre itself is bad and RPGs should die out.

His argument is still stupid. It is trying to make excuses for excluding a feature based on consideration of real time, rather than of game time. It ignores how story urgency in games works entirely.

I thought it was an argument that games shouldn't work the way you like them to work. But I wasn't following his post too carefully, I'll admit.

I bolded all the irrelevant text.

I said nothing about why it is necessary or that it makes it a good RPG if it has open exploration. This was about his reasoning for its exclusion, which defies timing in games of any genre that allow you to have downtime, but especially games with exploration like all three Mass Effect games.

I did not use the term RPG to cover multiple points of discussion or features, so definitions were irrelevant here. I clearly was discussing exploration in a game like Mass Effect, which no matter what your definition is, the series is universally referred to in some way with the term RPG. The urgency in the story does not interfere with the features available regarding exploration because in a game with exploration, which ME3 has, there is great incentive to not strictly follow urgent needs in an attempt to react in real time. The fact that a place like the Citadel is back in ME3 means you are set up to have significant time spent in conversations and leisurely exploration of a non-urgent scenario, no matter what may occur when you are ready to go on to the next leg of the urgent story.

I said nothing about whether the feature is always good or the feature in the RPG genre is always good or bad. Your comment relates to none of mine.

Story urgency is not a valid excuse for excluding open exploration in a series like Mass Effect, which already has several degrees of other non-urgent exploration.

This has nothing to do with how I want a game to work. This is about the simple fact that real time concerns have no weight on features in the time scenario of Mass Effect and other games that offer both a storyline of urgency and game content outside of that story such as exploration that we experience in Mass Effect.

Yet again, you have responded to me on BSN with antagonistic comments that have nothing to do with evidence. You just argue with fallicies about my posts.

Modifié par CannonLars, 30 janvier 2012 - 09:53 .

[Complistic]

Lord Jaric wrote...

I for one kind of don't want it, after a while, expressly after several playthroughs it gets tiresome.

everything gets tiresome after several play throughs.

[CannonO]

Complistic wrote...

Lord Jaric wrote...

I for one kind of don't want it, after a while, expressly after several playthroughs it gets tiresome.

everything gets tiresome after several play throughs.

The first playthrough is kind of the biggest deal. Afterwards, you are free to ignore the feature if it tires you.

[string3r]

Considering planets around the universe are being harvested by the reapers. I don't think exploring random planets is one of Shepard's top priorities.

[Il Divo]

CannonLars wrote...

Story urgency is not a valid excuse for excluding open exploration in a series like Mass Effect, which already has several degrees of other non-urgent exploration.

Outline them, specifically with regards to Bioware games.

And I should point out that any example involving companion conversation or local exploration (such as Illium) is invalid. A five minute conversation does not occupy even remotely the same scale as Shepard traveling in the Normandy, landing on each planet, killing enemies a dozen times over.

Modifié par Il Divo, 30 janvier 2012 - 10:03 .

[CannonO]

Il Divo wrote...

CannonLars wrote...

Story urgency is not a valid excuse for excluding open exploration in a series like Mass Effect, which already has several degrees of other non-urgent exploration.

Outline them.

And I should point out that any example involving companion conversation is invalid. A five minute conversation does not occupy even remotely the same scale as Shepard traveling in the Normandy, landing on each planet, killing enemies a dozen times over.

We know for a fact that we will be able to explore the Citadel again along with other hub cities that aren't being attacked, meaning we will be out to explore, find sidequests that don't relate to the war resources, and roam freely in the locations. You can't seriously think we won't have more Conrad Verner, meetups aliens in petty arguments, or credit hackers to track down? Its Mass Effect mister. It isn't all about the rush from point A to point B to benefit story struggles. A huge portion of ME1 and ME2 did nothing to benefit their urgent storylines, they ust enrich the universe.

"Outline them."

If you have played Mass Effect and weren't looking to fight about this, you wouldn't have said that. The features outside of team strategizing and galactic war fighting are widely known. But if you insist, here is where you can find out just how much time you will spend outside of the urgent mindframe: social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/323/index/7649262

Modifié par CannonLars, 30 janvier 2012 - 10:09 .

[DaJe]

CannonLars wrote...

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

They won't. The planets were all just about randomized except for the pretty skyboxes and just about anything you 'discovered' was a retread. I guess there's potential in it, but I'm not going to miss it very much at all.

But for the 20 identical feeling planets there were, 5 of them are some of the most beautiful and beloved places in my gaming memory. There was absolutely massive potential and that was part of why I loved it. I thought, "By the third game, this is going to be mesmerizing and graphically beautiful and one of the best emotional feelings in gaming to walk on the surface of an uncharted moon and find creatures and artifacts and big spacecraft." It has so much it could offer if they put the tech to its task and add some uniqueness and variety to 15-20 planets for us to enjoy openly. I want to stand in a field and look up at a planet above me. I need to know if this will be linear or if I will get that feeling of being a speck of dust in a beautiful and sleek universe to see ever again.

I feel the same way. However, it requires effort and since the more immersive exploration you speak of is quite sciency and nerdy, I doubt it will ever make the cut.