1113 réponses à ce sujet

[didymos1120]

argonian persona wrote...

 It's nice, but its plastic to judge a game on "engines".

Plastic? 

[argonian persona]

Biotic Sage wrote...

argonian persona wrote...

How come you guys are so careless about exploration in Mass Effect? Is that all you want actual gameplay to be? Shooting....in corridors? You don't want exploration?

BioWare...there is a large market that wants open exploration. Add it as a nice compliment to mission combat.

There is also a large market that wants a more focused gameplay experience.  There can be different types of games to address both markets.  Sometimes they don't overlap.  Personally, I like exploration to be a feature in games most of the time, but I can enjoy games if they do what they set out to do and do it well.

I thought exploration of the galaxy was a ME staple, thus an element they set out to do?

Right, BioWare?

[lucidfox]

Skyrim is now worthy of being called an era? o_O

Personally, I hated Skyrim. Well, not the game per se. The game is merely meh. What really ruins it is its insane obsessive fandom putting it on a pedestal.

BioWare games and the TES series cater to different kinds of players, so I fail to see how Skyrim would make a difference on ME3. One is a sandbox game, the other is a linear game with a strong story. And never the twain shall meet.

[Biotic Sage]

argonian persona wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

argonian persona wrote...

How come you guys are so careless about exploration in Mass Effect? Is that all you want actual gameplay to be? Shooting....in corridors? You don't want exploration?

BioWare...there is a large market that wants open exploration. Add it as a nice compliment to mission combat.

There is also a large market that wants a more focused gameplay experience.  There can be different types of games to address both markets.  Sometimes they don't overlap.  Personally, I like exploration to be a feature in games most of the time, but I can enjoy games if they do what they set out to do and do it well.

I thought exploration of the galaxy was a ME staple, thus an element they set out to do?

Right, BioWare?

Exploration is a staple, and as far as I can tell it's still there in ME3.  It's not anywhere near the scale of exploration that a sandbox game's exploration aspect would be, but it is pretty consistent in both ME1 and ME2: can go to different solar systems, read about the planets, and land on usually one planet per solar system.  That's what the "staple" has been and that's what it will continue to be in ME3 (only maybe even moreso because we've already seen you can land in at least 3 different zone on Tuchanka).

If that's not enough exploration for you then the Mass Effect series probably isn't your type of game.  And there's nothing wrong with that.  In that case you should stick to Skyrim and Fallout.  ME1 wasn't anything like that though, so I'm not sure where the comparison is coming from.

Modifié par Biotic Sage, 01 janvier 2012 - 06:34 .

[log1x_dr4g0n]

ME1's explorations ended up being pretty damn boring and repetitive. I'm glad they took that out. I did like the mako driving, and it would've been nice to go to a planet and explore it with a great atmosphere like Virmire. At least in ME2, you could use the minerals you found to upgrade stuff. So, it was a little more bearable, even though it was time consuming at times.

[GayFemshep]

To me. At least he's seems really stuck on "Shooting in corridors thing" when, we've seen that it's not just that.

Seriously. Get over yourself.

[Gatt9]

argonian persona wrote...

jreezy wrote...

argonian persona wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

Post Skyrim Era...when Bethesda actually quits using Gamebryo.

What do engines matter, it totality? But what is ME3 using? What is their new engine?

:huh:You don't know much about video games do you?

Enough to know, in the scheme of things, a new engine is petty. It's nice, but its plastic to judge a game on "engines".

You're still not getting it,  the engine is what makes the game work.  You CANNOT judge a game without judging it's engine. 

To put it in other terms,  I could use the Build engine (Duke Nukem 3D) to make a game today,  I'll guarantee you that you will be first in line to decry my game as terrible,  because of the engine.

How come you guys are so careless about exploration in Mass Effect? Is that all you want actual gameplay to be? Shooting....in corridors? You don't want exploration?

BioWare...there is a large market that wants open exploration. Add it as a nice compliment to mission combat.

Exploration is desirable.  Bethseda's completely empty worlds,  with completely useless occasional "Points of interest",  isn't exploration.

Bioware tried that once,  with Baldur's Gate.  They realized very quickly how boring it is.  Sad part is,  Bioware did it better 10 years ago on their first attempt than Bethseda does it today,  with what?  6 tries and 15 years of trying to get it right?  Grand Theft Auto does it better,  so did Red Dead Redemption,  and Saint's Row,  and Dark Souls.  Even the nearly 30 year old Might and Magic,  did open world and far better than The Elder Scrolls.

But I guess that's what happens when you waste your budget rendering paint brushes and forks for no reason,  instead of actually using your budget to make a game.

Bioware would be wasting their time and money implementing anything from Skyrim.  The fact that anyone's even buying TES games today is testimony to how very creatively dead the game industry currently is.  Bethseda was bankrupt years ago for a reason,  and it wasn't because TES was a great idea.  I'm confident that if it weren't for the fact that 99.9% of the other games released today are all shooters,  we wouldn't even be talking about Skyrim.

[AtreiyaN7]

argonian persona wrote...

How come you guys are so careless about exploration in Mass Effect? Is that all you want actual gameplay to be? Shooting....in corridors? You don't want exploration?

BioWare...there is a large market that wants open exploration. Add it as a nice compliment to mission combat.

You sure seem fixated on the idea that shooting in corridors is all that those of us who don't go around screaming over the loss of the boring, bland "exploration" of ME1 want. You also seem to think that sandbox-like exploration is the end-all be-all and should be shoehorned into every game - even when it doesn't necessarily fit with what's going on. Exploration is always nice, but not if it's like ME1's exploration on mostly lifeless, boring worlds with little of interest to do.

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 01 janvier 2012 - 08:19 .

[StowyMcStowstow]

Seriously? Post-Skyrim? Ha. Skyrim doesn't even hold a candle to Mass Effect's characters or story. The only thing Skyrim had (has?) going for it is the open world.

On-topic, the same as it would have been pre-Skyrim. The game comes out in March, a full four months after Skyrim. It won't matter in the least.

[SirDoctorofTARDIS]

There is no point in exploring open world planets in ME3. You are fighting WAR with a race of god-like sentient machines whose goal is to wipe out all organic life, it would be pretty immersion breaking for Shepard to have time to walk around mountains and coastal areas for no reason during a war.

[BiO]

Post-Skyrim era?

Ha Ha Haha Ha...

[didymos1120]

Awesomness wrote...

There is no point in exploring open world planets in ME3. You are fighting WAR with a race of god-like sentient machines whose goal is to wipe out all organic life, it would be pretty immersion breaking for Shepard to have time to walk around mountains and coastal areas for no reason during a war.

It already kind of was in ME1.  Especially after you go all mutinous and steal the Normandy, and yet can still go look for League of One medallions or whatever with no repercussions at all.  It's kind of funny that ME1's style of exploration actually would have worked a lot better in ME2 because for most of the game Shepard is stuck waiting for the Collectors to act or for TIM's people to supply new intel, whereas in ME1 you know exactly where you should go and are constantly being reminded that you really should get on that Saren thing. 

Or to put it another way: ME1 was predicated on the idea of "the chase", whereas ME2 was more of a "Now, it's a waiting game" situation. Time-killing makes a lot more sense for the latter.

Modifié par didymos1120, 01 janvier 2012 - 12:17 .

[Alex_SM]

Biotic Sage wrote...

argonian persona wrote...

How come you guys are so careless about exploration in Mass Effect? Is that all you want actual gameplay to be? Shooting....in corridors? You don't want exploration?

BioWare...there is a large market that wants open exploration. Add it as a nice compliment to mission combat.

There is also a large market that wants a more focused gameplay experience.  There can be different types of games to address both markets.  Sometimes they don't overlap.  Personally, I like exploration to be a feature in games most of the time, but I can enjoy games if they do what they set out to do and do it well.

Focused gameplay is not the same as turning the world into a set of extremely narrow corridors. 

[Fiery Phoenix]

Gatt9 wrote...

I'm confident that if it weren't for the fact that 99.9% of the other games released today are all shooters,  we wouldn't even be talking about Skyrim.

This quote right here... I'm so damn tempted to sig it.

[DRSH]

Well Mass Effect 3 has dragons... wait, I mean Reapers... so there u go OP... Mass Effect 3 will be awesome.

[Il Divo]

argonian persona wrote...

How come you guys are so careless about exploration in Mass Effect? Is that all you want actual gameplay to be? Shooting....in corridors? You don't want exploration?

BioWare...there is a large market that wants open exploration. Add it as a nice compliment to mission combat.

Primarily because I consider Bioware's attempt at exploration to be one of the weakest and most generic I've seen in a while. I'm not certain I'd want them to give it another shot, but to focus more on what Bioware is good at. Coincedentally, Baldur's Gate 1 was their other major attempt at using exploration as a gameplay mechanic, and those happen to be Bioware's weakest games, imo.

Modifié par Il Divo, 01 janvier 2012 - 03:58 .

[Il Divo]

Gatt9 wrote...

Exploration is desirable.  Bethseda's completely empty worlds,  with completely useless occasional "Points of interest",  isn't exploration.

You might want to actually play a TES game before making statements like this. Just my recommendation.

[LGTX]

Bethesda's Fallout 3 and, subsequently, Skyrim were the only games in the last years which actually overwhelmed me with content as I progressed, with quests piling up at a geometric rate - and without suffering in diversity and/or quality of execution. It's not deep, or overly complicated, but the system works. It keeps things fresh and pulls you in. That Mass Effect doesn't do this doesn't mean it's a terrible approach. But it would be terrible if the ME games tried to jump it. 

I'm glad Bioware dropped the exploration attempt (In-game stuff like the Mako and uncharted planets, NOT the Galaxy Map approach) from ME1. It had a majestic freshness, but nothing to keep you engaged repeatedly. If ME2 would have had such an element, no matter how polished or improved-upon, the parallels drawn between it and Skyrim would go to a worse extreme and things would get messy. 

And frankly, things depend a lot on the development process. For how long has Bethesda been working on Skyrim again? Since Oblivion, or Fallout 3? Either way, it's WAY more than Bioware spent doing ME2 or ME3. The open-ended approach wouldn't work for this reason at the very least: no time to clutter the game with genuinely interesting content.

Modifié par LGTX, 01 janvier 2012 - 04:51 .

[luzburg]

mass effect 3 wil simply have something from both games. and me2 is a little simple but still great and bioware knows that and is correcting it for me3. skyrim is a completly different game and bothe games are great in its own way

[Ottemis]

...

I'll prolly thank my lucky stars ME3 won't be half as bugged as Skyrim is.
Other then that comparing the two would seem completely useless, and a waste of time.

Modifié par Ottemis, 01 janvier 2012 - 06:35 .

[f1r3storm]

Meh, Bethesda still has lots to learn in terms of an interesting storytelling and staging. BioWare is far superior there.

And Skyrim is far from perfect at all, for example with it's antiquated combat system.

[MizzNaaa]

Ottemis wrote...

...

I'll prolly thank my lucky stars ME3 won't be half as bugged as Skyrim is.
Other then that comparing the two would seem completely useless, and a waste of time.

Quoted for truthiness.

For reference, I have skyrim and I love it.

[MizzNaaa]

f1r3storm wrote...

Meh, Bethesda still has lots to learn in terms of an interesting storytelling and staging. BioWare is far superior there.

And Skyrim is far from perfect at all, for example with it's antiquated combat system.

Quoted too

for truthiness.

[PlatonicWaffles]

As the next game of the Mass Effect series.

Modifié par Dylia, 01 janvier 2012 - 07:26 .