169 réponses à ce sujet

[Walker White]

argonian persona wrote...

Speaking of Fallout...V.A.T.S. targeting is awesome. Great flavor of turn-base.

Worst gameplay evention of the past decade.  Run the numbers; mathematically, nothing  makes sense other than a headshot.  The tactical pausing in the Mass Effect series has infinitely deeper gameplay.

And related to this thread, while the plot and external world map of Skyrim may be nonlinear, many of the dungeons are far more linear than what we see in Mass Effect.  I have come to loathe Dwarven ruins in that game.  I hit my weight limit and it takes me four minutes in real life (cannot fast travel inside) to back out of that long corridor so I can drop my stuff off at my home.

[MordinKrios]

Gears 1, for me, was a really good third person shooter but 2 +3 are just cash cows, with no new aspects to them

Again, A.Creed, the first one was really good, but they have become the CoD of their genre, releasing yearly games.

Skyrim is overrated but does a lot of things really well. It is a great game.

If you want overrated, look at the Uncharted franchise. First one was great, but has as much plot as Cars 2.

Fallout is good, and again does a lot of things well, but no game is perfect and at least Bethesda don't churn out the some old garbage every year. *cough* Activision. *cough* Infinity Ward.

[Walker White]

One of the interesting things about these debates is how linear always gets bandied about as a negative term. Sometimes it is; sometimes it isn't.

If we are just restricting ourselves to the combat field of play (e.g. the shooting galleries), I think everyone agrees we would like a wider degree of freedom. You have to narrow it down in the beginning to act as a tutorial for newer players, but there is no reason not to open it up later. Hopefully BioWare is doing something here.

However, then we get to the issue of story progression. This is where it is not so clear cut. Yes, faction-based story progression has been around since the early 90s. However, games that rely on this type of story telling by-and-large have very weak narratives. They are so intent on emphasizing player voice, that authorial voice gets drowned out. Right now, the only way we know how to credibly insert authorial voice is with a moderate amount of linearity.

There is a lot of ongoing academic research in AI on how to get around this problem. Tools in this area are known as drama managers, and the cocktail party game Façade was one of the first to really popularize this idea. But the stuff is still very much in its infancy. So until then, if we want the narrative-driven, cinematic experiences that BioWare is known for (instead of the narrative-light, sandbox experiences Bethesda is known for), we will have to accept some degree of linearity.

[tetrisblock4x1]

AgitatedLemon wrote...

argonian persona wrote...

Bocks wrote...

All of it. Don't expect any deviation from the set path.

This game has to appeal to the casual fanbase who don't know any better, remember?

I know. It's so frustrating.

You want Skyrim with guns?

I like how you call people trolls one day, and then imply that there isn't a middle ground between this and that.

[Alex_SM]

 

Walker White wrote...

One of the interesting things about these debates is how linear always gets bandied about as a negative term. Sometimes it is; sometimes it isn't.

If we are just restricting ourselves to the combat field of play (e.g. the shooting galleries), I think everyone agrees we would like a wider degree of freedom. You have to narrow it down in the beginning to act as a tutorial for newer players, but there is no reason not to open it up later. Hopefully BioWare is doing something here.

However, then we get to the issue of story progression. This is where it is not so clear cut. Yes, faction-based story progression has been around since the early 90s. However, games that rely on this type of story telling by-and-large have very weak narratives. They are so intent on emphasizing player voice, that authorial voice gets drowned out. Right now, the only way we know how to credibly insert authorial voice is with a moderate amount of linearity.

There is a lot of ongoing academic research in AI on how to get around this problem. Tools in this area are known as drama managers, and the cocktail party game Façade was one of the first to really popularize this idea. But the stuff is still very much in its infancy. So until then, if we want the narrative-driven, cinematic experiences that BioWare is known for (instead of the narrative-light, sandbox experiences Bethesda is known for), we will have to accept some degree of linearity.

It's not so hard. Get rid of useless non-related-to-anything side missions every RPG has, and build a multiple-ways main mission with all the narrative clues intact in every of the different paths.

Problem? You need to make a 50 hours game for a 10 hours storyline.

But then you obtain real replayability, as making a different choice may lead the player to a whole new path, with different levels and different point of view in the same story.

If well done, the combination of different choices may lead to endless replays, as the combinations between story fragments could be a lot.

Not just faction storytelling, but a real branching story, with different endings depending on your choices and different missions, different characters, etc... Not just "choose who wins" or "have a nice text telling me how different everything is", but a really different ending.

It can be done with actual technology. It just needs more development time.

Also getting rid of those "kill everything -> advance -> kill everything..." action sequences would help a lot. There could be lots of different kinds of combat sequences. Players may need to escort, run away, hide, had to face the environment in some adventure levels, etc...

Modifié par Alex_SM, 08 janvier 2012 - 03:44 .

[Wulfram]

Alex_SM wrote...

 There could be lots of different kinds of combat sequences. Players may need to escort, run away, hide, had to face the environment in some adventure levels, etc...

Most of that sort of thing don't actually play very interestingly IMO.  Escort missions are particularly notorious

Modifié par Wulfram, 08 janvier 2012 - 05:12 .

[Alex_SM]

Escort missions in some games are awesome, but that's not the point, it's about having variety of thigs to do.Every kind of sequence can be great if well designed, the point is to have different kinds of missions and nos just always the same. For example playing against environment in Hydrophobia Prophecy (PC - I know console version is crap) is great. It has around 2 frantic hours without a single enemy.

Playing hide and seek with and helicopter in Half Life 2, while fighting soldiers and searching a way to take down that freaking helicopter was one of the most exciting experiences I've ever played in a video game. More or less the same with running away from them unarmed at the beginning of the same game hiding in buildings, running over the roofs, etc...

Half Life 2 is probably the finest example of variety of level design with different gameplays for different levels (sometimes regular shooter, some times platform game, sometimes a horror game, sometimes a vehicle-combat game, etc...). With also extremely different environmental design (combining small, medium and huge places without problems).

And also keeping a strong narrative-drive gameplay (without cinematics), and "not looking too linear" while in fact is extremely linear.

Most of those things can't be done with the Gears of War gameplay that Mass Effect uses, it would need a extremely overhauled system. But it can be done (and I think it should be tried).

At least to surprise the player also with gameplay, and not just with story.

[alex90c]

nitefyre410 wrote...

My issue is people calling ME a Gears of War clone when the only thing similar is combat but there is a difference in combat even then. Beyond combat they really have nothing common.

Differences in combat:

1. In Gears the AI actually poses a threat
2. ME's combat has tech/biotic powers
3. Gears' combat actually allows you to manoeuvre and outflank your enemies, in ME you just shoot, move up, shoot, move up.

To be honest it's not really fair to compare "beyond combat" since Gears is purely combat so there's nothing to compare, but combat-wise, ME is extremely similar to Gears, just not as good.

[Ravensword]

They call me the Corridor Shootist.

[mackan__s]

My Shepard was so much down in the hallways that he went crazy, then he suffered out into claustrophobia.. Sad but true.

[MordinKrios]

I hope there is more to it than here is a room of enemies, kill them and move onto the next room of enemies.

Perhaps some defending objectives, push these buttons, something to vary it up.

Man my examples smell haha, but i hope you get the idea.

[Someone With Mass]

Ravensword wrote...

They call me the Corridor Shootist.

Corridors trembles before your wrath.

[Ahglock]

Walker White wrote...

argonian persona wrote...

Speaking of Fallout...V.A.T.S. targeting is awesome. Great flavor of turn-base.

Worst gameplay evention of the past decade.  Run the numbers; mathematically, nothing  makes sense other than a headshot.  The tactical pausing in the Mass Effect series has infinitely deeper gameplay.

And related to this thread, while the plot and external world map of Skyrim may be nonlinear, many of the dungeons are far more linear than what we see in Mass Effect.  I have come to loathe Dwarven ruins in that game.  I hit my weight limit and it takes me four minutes in real life (cannot fast travel inside) to back out of that long corridor so I can drop my stuff off at my home.

The math wasn't fantastic though I will point out at lower degrees of skill your chance to hit the head was small enough that it was actually not the better option.  Hitting and doing something is almost always better than missing entirely especially with early game ammo concerns.  But it was still an awesome system to merge the to hit rolls of a more turn based RPG with the FPS genre giving people who prefer character over player skill a option.  

[Genshie]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Genshie wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

*Snip*

 I can keep going but I won't since in the end I will just keep saying your own opinion and you will keep saying the same **** back. Dean why you here? Why are you even posting for a game you clearly are not going to buy since it seems you are so set on bringing it down before its own release? It seems like you didn't even enjoy the first two games at all from the way you are describing them.

Possibly because you are wrong on all accounts. As usual.

Grab a clue, will you?

It is funny how you completely didn't answer a single question that I asked. I asked why are you here? Why are you posting in threads for a game you clearly have ZERO support for. And as usual you avoid answering direct questions. Grab a clue, will you?

Modifié par Genshie, 09 janvier 2012 - 02:37 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Genshie wrote...
]It is funny how you completely didn't answer a single question that I asked.

I answered them all by refuting your underlying assumptions. If you can't put that together, wise up.

I asked why are you here?

Because I enjoy Mass Effect.

Why are you posting in threads for a game you clearly have ZERO support for.

Man, if you were twice as perceptive as you think you are, you'd be half as perspective as you really are.

I've made plenty of points of support for ME3 over the past several monthes. I don't agree with everything Bioware does, but that has never meaned I've disagree with everything they'll do.

And as usual you avoid answering direct questions. Grab a clue, will you?

Apparently I took yours. Here you go.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 09 janvier 2012 - 03:46 .

[Genshie]

Edit: Nevermind.

Modifié par Genshie, 09 janvier 2012 - 04:18 .

[Lucy Glitter]

Bam.

[DxWill10]

The op has truly mastered the art of inflaming. Kudos.. I can't figure out if you're a raging teen or a brilliant British aristocrat with a monocle.

Modifié par DxWill10, 09 janvier 2012 - 04:55 .

[AgitatedLemon]

Gears 1, for me, was a really good third person shooter but 2 +3 are just cash cows, with no new aspects to them

Gears 2 was pretty different from Gears 1.

Gears 3 was pretty different from both. It included all of the same features, but it also added a good amount of things as well. Weapons, enemy types, tech improvements, gameplay mechanics, etc.

[Biotic Sage]

68.39132%