342 réponses à ce sujet

[Wulfram]

So "Priority" missions are the ones you need to do last

[kongenial]

Kakita Tatsumaru wrote...

Yep. You should die each time you get a bullet in the head. More lifelike too.

And break your bones if you fire the Widow or carry 5 different guns.

[xIREDEEMEDIx]

Sylvf wrote...

denouement1 wrote...

Sylvf wrote...

AlbinaTekla wrote...

O_O I'm so confused I wish someone would just set this all straight so i'm not paranoid anymore

We don't have an active timer that shuts off missions if you've been playing X amount of hours before completing them. There are, however, a few missions that will expire if you don't complete them before advancing the main plot/if you complete less urgent missions instead.

So you are tell us, basiclly, to do every side mission as soon as we get it so it doesn't get locked out?

If you want to play it that way to be safe, you can. There's not a lot of missions that get locked off, and we only did it when there was a good story reason for them to expire if you let time pass by doing other missions.

I am confused on when you can actually get some of the missions done. ex...getting the obolisk for the volus from the Shrike Abyssal. I picked that mission up in the beginning. But the Shrike Abyssal didn't show up to even go to for awhile....then it shows up but I can seem to find where to go to get the artifact without reapers chasing me out of the system.

[witlessrogue85]

My one question on this is; if you go and do a side mission, time doing that doesn't have a negative impact on the priority missions does it? Its just if you put off the side mission, said side mission might disappear?

I don't want to go and do a side mission and find out the main mission got worse because I decided to look at something else.

[greghorvath]

Kakita Tatsumaru wrote...

Yep. You should die each time you get a bullet in the head. More lifelike too.

True. That's why one of my primary goals is not to die in a game. I often start from the beginning after a death. And yes, I play on the hardest difficulties. Adds weight to trying to stay alive.

Modifié par greghorvath, 07 mars 2012 - 02:29 .

[Sidney]

Kakita Tatsumaru wrote...

Yep. You should die each time you get a bullet in the head. More lifelike too.

Games at least offer some reason why you don't die from a bullet - shields, armor and what not. There is no in game logic for why trying to stop Sovereign allows you to spend time wandering around UCW's looking for rocks and shooting pirates.

[The Enforcer OS]

Much of this still likes like speculation. I have only had a couple of minor missions time out by pursuing 'Priority' missions. At this point I cannot verify that anything of significance has 'timed out'

[Kakita Tatsumaru]

Sidney wrote...
Games at least offer some reason why you don't die from a bullet - shields, armor and what not. There is no in game logic for why trying to stop Sovereign allows you to spend time wandering around UCW's looking for rocks and shooting pirates.

Err, the game doesn't gives informations about Sovereign being in a hurry too. Besides, some Saren related plot involve him making research, and research takes time too.

On a more interesting note, it seems that realism/lore are less important than gameplay and game balance but more important that player comfort, which seems quite wrong.
It seemed like since ME2 the franchise choosed to take the "gameplay over lore" way, so taking it back only to nerf the player experience (In this I may be wrong, not having the game. Perhaps they made those fails at least interesting from a story point of view, like a father to which Shepard promised to save his son making him feeling guilty or trying to get revenge from him, but I don't thinks so: too much work.) seems strange to me.

[Sidney]

Kakita Tatsumaru wrote...

Err, the game doesn't gives informations about Sovereign being in a hurry too. Besides, some Saren related plot involve him making research, and research takes time too.

.

ME2 managed that because you were "waiting for an attack", "decrypting
info" or other things that explained the lag in action. ME1 offered no
good reason not to go from main plot to main plot point. While what Saren does takes time you have no idea how much time so mucking about on UCW's and planting bugs for journalists hardly seems like a good use of time. You get the same effect in DAO where the Horde is on the march and you are off searching for lost carvans and delivering death notices to mercs widows.

I have no issue with a leisurely pacing but in case designers want that sort of pacing they need to work their plots in a way that the pacing doesn't seem so jarringly at odds with the plot.

[Fenris_13]

I love this idea! This is war, and it should feel like it!

[kongenial]

Fenris_13 wrote...

I love hate this idea! This is war a game, and it should feel like it!

Corrected that 

Modifié par kongenial, 07 mars 2012 - 04:58 .

[DiegoRaphael]

I think this type of thing takes a lot of the replayability of the game.

Because now, everytime we start a new a game, we will always have play the quests on the same order so they don't expire.

I don't like this...

[zherok]

witlessrogue85 wrote...

My one question on this is; if you go and do a side mission, time doing that doesn't have a negative impact on the priority missions does it? Its just if you put off the side mission, said side mission might disappear?

I don't want to go and do a side mission and find out the main mission got worse because I decided to look at something else.

So far as I've seen that's how it works out. I'm not really sure it's even a timer so much as it might just be connected to Priority mission progress. At least, the game hasn't failed any mission yet for me. I've been free to collect doodads and finish sidequests without anything going wrong.

DiegoRaphael wrote...

I think this type of thing takes a lot of the replayability of the game.

Because now, everytime we start a new a game, we will always have play the quests on the same order so they don't expire.

I don't like this...

Replayability is doing every mission in slightly different orders? You're still going to do all of them.

Also, the game doesn't appear to care what side missions you do first. So you're still free to vary those up. Just don't expect to blitz through the main story and then finish all the side quests just before the final battle.

[DarthCaine]

Somebody should start making a list...

[Devbo22]

My experience has been that "timed" quests have been fetch an item side quests. A couple of them I am not able to travel to system and one I have the item but guy isnt on citadel to give item to. These may or may not open later as I progress in the main quest.

[LoneSpektre]

Damn...Better get on those then.

[Papito208]

In most rpgs sidequests are open until a certain point in the story that's never clearly stated for you. Thankfully this game showsbyou exactly what to do. So long as you continue to find/do every side mission before continuing ANY priority mission to further the story then you should have enough of a time frame for any sidequests. Some of them have a shorter time frame than others so the best bet would be to do the sidequests as soon as you hear them before you unlock another.

[WaffleCrab]

brunomalta wrote...

Kristofer1 wrote...

I dislike it because I have already changed disks twice on my xbox... once is ok, twice annoying when you arent even a 6th of the way through the game!

Be glad you are not playing Final Fantasy 7 lol

thats a stupid analogy, in FF7 you progress in order, he means he has to swap discs back and forth.

[FedericoV]

Kakita Tatsumaru wrote...

FedericoV wrote...

In Fallout the main quest had a timer. The M-A-I-N Q-U-E-S-T.

If the presence of the timer make sense it's not an issue. You have just to be organized and to use some logic. I know, unforgivable and hardcore difficulty for today's gaming standard....

Well, good luck to fail the quest in fallout because of that. I did everything without problems, the timer is just here to punish you if you try to abuse the game with infinite health, just use healing items instead and you will be just fine.

Were you part of the FO dev team? I mean, how do you know why they used that feature? I believe that they have used the timer to solve a long standing issue of CRPG: it make no sense to wander around doing unimportant stuff if you have to save the world. A timer, even a very forgiving one, is a good compromise to balance that.

The timer in ME3 (I guess) is there to give a sense of urgency to the concept that you are saving the galaxy. It asks you to priorize and to focus wich is pretty in charachter for Sheppard at that time. Imho, it's a decision that goes in the right direction even if I will make a mess of my playthrough because of it (but I've yet to see how it works in detail before I give made a judgement).

[sackyhack]

So basically I'll be fine as long as I complete any sidequest I find before moving forward with priority missions, right? I can explore, collect, and complete side missions as much as I want as long as I don't trigger any main plot advancement?

Modifié par sackyhack, 07 mars 2012 - 07:53 .

[The Enforcer OS]

DiegoRaphael wrote...

I think this type of thing takes a lot of the replayability of the game.

Because now, everytime we start a new a game, we will always have play the quests on the same order so they don't expire.

I don't like this...

That's your personal preference.  If a game is designed to offer different experiences during consecutive playthroughs why shouldn't missions be available / unavailable based on choices.

Hello? The Virmire Survivor changes gameplay based on choice.  You can't save Ash and then Kaiden because you will it to happen.  Different choices yield different gameplay paths.

[FedericoV]

kongenial wrote...

Yeah, but to me it was a stupid decision back then and it is now. I play for entertainment, not to plan my whole playtrough in advance just to avoid hitting time-limits.

But no one is forcing you to play in some way or the other. Look, the best possible ending is a reward and it make sense that a reward asks a bit of focus and dedication. It's not meant to be the average ending otherwise it would not be "the best" anymore. You do not want to work for the best ending? Perfect! Accept the normal endings and enjoy the flight (choice and consequeces!).

I mean, you have just to work a bit and use your logic between shooting things dead to reach a goal. If you dedicate yourself to it, it will be all the sweeter and you will even feel some pride in what you achieved. Otherwise, wait less than a week for the inevitable walktrhough and you will be able to play as relaxed as you wish achieving the best possible outcome no matter what. Or if you do not want to wait, buy the Prima Guide.

Kinda remind me of "I miss the old days where you had to remember to drink water and it took 5 hours realtime to fly somewhere!"  

Those were the days! Oh, those youngster, they do not have respect anymore for the true values of hardcore gaming . Just joking, but I still hold dear the memories of the Ultimas and the Golden Box. Do not even try to make a comparison between those games and ME in term of difficulty and required work/grind/dedication because it would turn out ridiculous. Even the orginal Fallout has not a lot to do with those games since it focused mostly on story and branching.

[Travie]

Wow. The very last thing that players wanted.

Thanks Bioware.

[Daft Quaver]

i think this is an immense idea and something i really wanted in the game. hated that msv-arrow endlessly 'crashing' into a planet . think this is very good! adds incentive to do it, urgency and adds to the atmosphere the game's trying to achieve!

[Maria Caliban]

Wulfram wrote...

So "Priority" missions are the ones you need to do last

That's classic video game logic.