129 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

BrysonC wrote...
It really is a baffling change in design philosophy. Makes me wonder what their internal reasoning was.

It's just regression to the mean. Bio's never really believed in free exploration. ME1 was an outlier for them.

[Wulfram]

The lack of exploration is one thing ME3 should be congratulated on. Exploration should have little place in most story based RPGs.

Just a shame they felt the need to include the planet scanning.

[Cainne Chapel]

abaris wrote...

Cainne Chapel wrote...

AS for RPG elements, ME3 had more than ME2 which people complained about, and roughly as much as ME1.  But then the ME series has NEVER been a heavy RPG series, it's ALWAYS been a Action-RPG.  All the RPG elements in ME1 ALL revolved around combat as theyd o in ME3.  So other than the way they went about it, I dont see much different.  Other than the fact we dont hack lock boxes for credits anymore... we just open salvage.

Depends on what you call RPG elements.

Obviously not the same as me. When I talk about RPG elements I mean character interaction, not technical character buildup. I mean choices in storyline and conversation and not weapon choices.

If you look at it from that kind of angle, ME3 certainly comes in second compared to the others of the series.

Bottom line is RPG elements mean different things to different people. 

That argument willr age for eternity.  Not all RPGs even have choices in storyline or conversation, nor character interaction in a meaningful way other than exposition.  Still those games are classified as RPGs.  No one seems to be able to agree what "RPG ELEMENTS" even means anymore so I think that, in and of itself, is an exercise in futility.


AS far as choices in storyline and conversation, there was still plentyt there, and a LOT of it had to do with what you did in past games so you're seeing the culmination of all your previous choices.  Heck in the 5  different games i've run, depending on past choices, the characters interactions with Shepard can change quite a bit.

Take Wrex for instance, in one case, he's a good friend and admirer of yours, in another he's not trusting of you at all and questions your motivations.

I think ME3 did a great job in that department, certainly more interaction with characters due to past choices than ME2 or even ME1 had.  As characters whole demeanors can change towards shepard due to his past choices in ME3, cant say we really got a LOT of that in the previous games.

I mean heck you could even argue that ME1 didn't really have "Characters" so much as walking species encyclopedia's except possible LIs.

We could go back and forth all day on this matter though. in the end, none of the me's were "perfect" (except to me they all were freaking awesome and i'd never give up either of the 3) and they were all riddled with flaws, imperfections, bugs, gameplay missteps and the like.

But at the end of the day they were all amazing games that captured our (collectively, I mean the BSN) attention and struck a chord with each and everyone of us.

Do I wish I could go back and change some things in the series? Sure Do, but at the end of the day I'm happy and will greedily take more ME from bioware if offered.  (Except for IOS games... I have a general loathing of that platform)

[Cainne Chapel]

AlanC9 wrote...

BrysonC wrote...
It really is a baffling change in design philosophy. Makes me wonder what their internal reasoning was.

It's just regression to the mean. Bio's never really believed in free exploration. ME1 was an outlier for them.

I still dont consider ME1 as Free exploration.  Not really much to explore when the ONLY time you can land somewhere there's strangely something to do on said barren wasteland.

Really the only difference in ME1 and 2/3 is scope of tractable environment.  ME1 had big open, blank spaces for the most part, so one felt as if there was much exploring.  Even if most of the assets were identical.

ME 2 and 3 favored closer mor intimate, but more detailed, environments.  Closer ranges, more detailed background etc (Especially in 3, always tend to have a LOT going on in the background if you look, Menae being one of my favorites to just stop and watch, even earth).

Granted I dont much care for games with free exploration like skyrim.  BUT I would be interested in seeing of a dev can pull off something grand and explorative in scope like Skyrim, but with a great story narrative like a bioware game... it would be interesting to see.

[Spherea]

Exploration in ME1 was pretty fun, then again I'm one of the few people who actually likes the Mako.
The problem as stated before was the lack of things to actually find. The only interesting things that come to mind is the Prothean beacon and the shifty space cow. Maybe space monkeys.

[Cainne Chapel]

AlanC9 wrote...

Pedrak wrote...

Oddly, ME3 felt small for a sci-fi RPG.

Whenever someone says this, I always have to ask... did KotOR feel small, too?

Well in the greater scheme of things ALL the me games felt...relatively "small". 

So I can see why SOME people would say ME3 felt small.  All of them can in a sense when you pick them apart.  You never really do get to see a viewpoint outside of Shepards.

[masterthehero]

I'm not sure why you would be encouraging exploration when the Reapers are in the process of destroying your home.

"Hey Shepard, the Reapers are about to completely wipe out the planet, where are you?"

"Oh... I'm exploring the galaxy, don't worry I'll come back at some point."

[AlanC9]

Wulfram wrote...

The lack of exploration is one thing ME3 should be congratulated on. Exploration should have little place in most story based RPGs.

Just a shame they felt the need to include the planet scanning.

Heh. For once I restrain myself from taking a stand against exploration, and then you do it in the very next post. 

[PaddlePop]

ME3 does feel small. Just check out the Citadel. If there wasn't such an outcry over DA2's re-use of game assets, then I'm pretty sure Bioware would have made every SINGLE freaking base look the same. It's all about cost-cutting and maximising profits now. Their new mantra is "Screw the gamer, the doctors need to go to Barbados".

Makes me so freaking mad! ME3 could have been 2012s Game of the Year, They could have hit it out of the park, instead ME3 is this pathetic pile of linear crap, with **** endings, and zero replayibility. I can't even stand looking at the game's disk any more. ****!

[masterthehero]

Umm, I actually liked the Citadel's from 2 and 3 and hated the one from 1. The one from 1 felt boring in its scope and the visuals were not that impressive. 2 and 3 made them much more alive and vibrant, way better than what the original had done.

[Fireblader70]

masterthehero wrote...

I'm not sure why you would be encouraging exploration when the Reapers are in the process of destroying your home.

"Hey Shepard, the Reapers are about to completely wipe out the planet, where are you?"

"Oh... I'm exploring the galaxy, don't worry I'll come back at some point."

This is exactly why I don't mind the lack of exploration compared to the others. It makes more sense to be full steam ahead against the Reapers, not taking a vacation on Ilium.

[SKiLLYWiLLY2]

Lack of vehicle exploration is because so many people complained about it in ME1, just like the elevators.

[BiancoAngelo7]

I still don't understand why Bioware has this track record of completely eliminating something instead of improving upon it whenever someone has criticisms about it...

ME1 planet exploration had sooooooooooooo much potential, and on PC the Mako was great, I understand those who hated it on 360 because of the lousy "look where you go" controls...


Why not improve upon that instead of gradually and gradually remove any kind of exploration until all we're left with is running by people having conversations so we can later go shoot a probe at a planet?

[SKiLLYWiLLY2]

masterthehero wrote...

I'm not sure why you would be encouraging exploration when the Reapers are in the process of destroying your home.

"Hey Shepard, the Reapers are about to completely wipe out the planet, where are you?"

"Oh... I'm exploring the galaxy, don't worry I'll come back at some point."

And it was ok to explore the galaxy when Saren was finding the conduit? And it was ok to explore the galaxy in ME2 when the collectors are attacking human colonies and abducting people?

I suppose no one should be shopping on the citadel in ME3 either because the reapers are reaping dude. No time to waste!!

You're arguement is invalid.

[abaris]

BiancoAngelo7 wrote...

ME1 planet exploration had sooooooooooooo much potential, and on PC the Mako was great, I understand those who hated it on 360 because of the lousy "look where you go" controls...

It wasn't that much fun on the PC either. Constantly trying to look for that one opening in the mountain range to get to your destination could get quite a chore.

Yet, exploration didn't need total elimination. It only needed more balanced maps.

[Cainne Chapel]

PaddlePop wrote...

ME3 does feel small. Just check out the Citadel. If there wasn't such an outcry over DA2's re-use of game assets, then I'm pretty sure Bioware would have made every SINGLE freaking base look the same. It's all about cost-cutting and maximising profits now. Their new mantra is "Screw the gamer, the doctors need to go to Barbados".

Makes me so freaking mad! ME3 could have been 2012s Game of the Year, They could have hit it out of the park, instead ME3 is this pathetic pile of linear crap, with **** endings, and zero replayibility. I can't even stand looking at the game's disk any more. ****!

Well ME1 reused game assets for almost every base outside of plot specific missions.  ME2 and 3 actually BROKE the mold ME1 started.

In fact while not as vocal as DA2's crowd, that was one of the issues with ME1.

So was ME1 made for cost cutting and maximizing profits too? .

How is ME3 anymore linear than ME1 and ME2?  Other than choosing WHEN you go on certain missions ALL the ME games were linear in everything except illusion of choice.  But thats not a problem to me, I dont play ME to play an open ended sandbox game like Skyrim, I play ME because I like the characters and story and gameplay.

If anything have you actually LOOKED at the worlds and backgrounds in ME3? Some of the most dynamic in the series. Even the citadel I felt was better this time around, You got to see the presidium AND the wards again and it was just a big vast empty space that you NEEDED to take taxicabs to get to anywhere efficiently.

I honestly thought the citadel in ME3 was awesome.

[SKiLLYWiLLY2]

BiancoAngelo7 wrote...

I still don't understand why Bioware has this track record of completely eliminating something instead of improving upon it whenever someone has criticisms about it...

ME1 planet exploration had sooooooooooooo much potential, and on PC the Mako was great, I understand those who hated it on 360 because of the lousy "look where you go" controls...


Why not improve upon that instead of gradually and gradually remove any kind of exploration until all we're left with is running by people having conversations so we can later go shoot a probe at a planet?

Sure, it had a ton of potential but no one gave Bioware that impression. Literally everyone complained about ME1's exploration and elevators. The community gave the impression they wanted those features gone and not improved upon. Look at ME2's reception. A lot of people complained about the loading screens so Bioware decided to improve them without going back to elevators. Unfortunately, not many people seemed to miss planet exploration and the mako.

[masterthehero]

SKiLLYWiLLY2 wrote...

And it was ok to explore the galaxy when Saren was finding the conduit? And it was ok to explore the galaxy in ME2 when the collectors are attacking human colonies and abducting people?

I suppose no one should be shopping on the citadel in ME3 either because the reapers are reaping dude. No time to waste!!

You're arguement is invalid.

Um, no there's a big difference here. With ME 1 you don't necessarily know where Saren is, although you're given leads to follow up, it is a huge mystery as to where Saren is. So exploration is encouraged so that you could find clues to point you to where Saren is, so you're actually racing around trying to find him since there is no clear cut path to Saren.

As for ME2, that's also different because as soon as a Collector ship is found or an attack is emminent you are FORCED to take the mission to engage the collector's. So you could be in the middle of exploring when the Illusive man calls you up and tells you that you need to hit the Collector's because they're coming.

So yes, you can still "explore" but once that lead hits you have no choice but to engage.  This does not invalidate my argument in anyway.

[Cainne Chapel]

I do wish there were more "overlord" stylemissions where you got a large map and several objectives to accomplish.

But at the end of the day thats still not "exploration" to me. I personally dont think exploration fits in ME as its really at its best in ME1 been nothing more than giant sky boxes with random geometry.

Now if they made a different type of ME game, where you're not shepard and you were charting out an uncharted planet or the like, THEN you could have some opportunity for real exploration, finding lost prothean relics, etc etc.

IN ME1 it seemed odd to me that youd have pirates and slavers within the same couple hundred yard range as ancient relics and they were left undisturbed... yes suspension of disbelief I know, but when i can snipe someone from a lost "relic" it loses its luster... Dont these guys explore around before they set up camp?

[abaris]

SKiLLYWiLLY2 wrote...

Unfortunately, not many people seemed to miss planet exploration and the mako.

But there was exploration, yet not the mako kind.

[AlanC9]

SKiLLYWiLLY2 wrote...

masterthehero wrote...

I'm not sure why you would be encouraging exploration when the Reapers are in the process of destroying your home.

"Hey Shepard, the Reapers are about to completely wipe out the planet, where are you?"

"Oh... I'm exploring the galaxy, don't worry I'll come back at some point."

And it was ok to explore the galaxy when Saren was finding the conduit? And it was ok to explore the galaxy in ME2 when the collectors are attacking human colonies and abducting people?

It wasn't OK in ME1. The argument is that exploration was a problem with the design. (Or my argument, anyway... masterthehero's mileage may vary)

ME2 is better set up for exploration, because Shepard has no way to get at the Collectors for most of the game. And when he actually does get a chance to get at the Collectors, further delay will result in people dying. My only problem with the ME2 design is that Shepard shouldn't be allowed to delay the Reaper IFF mission indefinitely.

Modifié par AlanC9, 23 avril 2012 - 08:14 .

[SKiLLYWiLLY2]

masterthehero wrote...

SKiLLYWiLLY2 wrote...

And it was ok to explore the galaxy when Saren was finding the conduit? And it was ok to explore the galaxy in ME2 when the collectors are attacking human colonies and abducting people?

I suppose no one should be shopping on the citadel in ME3 either because the reapers are reaping dude. No time to waste!!

You're arguement is invalid.

Um, no there's a big difference here. With ME 1 you don't necessarily know where Saren is, although you're given leads to follow up, it is a huge mystery as to where Saren is. So exploration is encouraged so that you could find clues to point you to where Saren is, so you're actually racing around trying to find him since there is no clear cut path to Saren.

As for ME2, that's also different because as soon as a Collector ship is found or an attack is emminent you are FORCED to take the mission to engage the collector's. So you could be in the middle of exploring when the Illusive man calls you up and tells you that you need to hit the Collector's because they're coming.

So yes, you can still "explore" but once that lead hits you have no choice but to engage.  This does not invalidate my argument in anyway.

What? You don't know where Saren is so you spend time going to planets to do things for Hackett, which have absolutely nothing to do with locating Saren? Right, that makes a lot of sense. It's not like you're going to those planets to look for clues on Saren either. For most of them, you're specifically told by Hackett what the situation is.

I'll let ME2 slide for now, even though one could say Shepard could have done more productive things (in terms of stopping the collectors) than visiting planets to stop some mercs or check out an old crashed freighter lol.

My point is that people like to argue exploration (something non-linear to take a break from the main plot) has no place in ME3, due to what's unfolding in the plot, yet they don't mention that they really had no place in ME1 or ME2 either. And they worked in ME1 and ME2 so they can work in ME3 aswell.

And because ME3 has no exploration or barely any side-missions (6 dull and similar side missions is all there are), the game feels too linear and the gameworld too "small." Especially, when you consider that all of the main plot/priority missions take place on after another.

[DWH1982]

masterthehero wrote...

I'm not sure why you would be encouraging exploration when the Reapers are in the process of destroying your home.

"Hey Shepard, the Reapers are about to completely wipe out the planet, where are you?"

"Oh... I'm exploring the galaxy, don't worry I'll come back at some point."

"Hey, Shepard, the Reapers are about to completely wipe out the planet, where are you?"

"Oh... I'm scanning random planets to find a power grid upgrade for some nightclub on the Citadel. Even though I was never direclty asked to do so."

[Il Divo]

SKiLLYWiLLY2 wrote...

What? You don't know where Saren is so you spend time going to planets to do things for Hackett, which have absolutely nothing to do with locating Saren? Right, that makes a lot of sense. It's not like you're going to those planets to look for clues on Saren either. For most of them, you're specifically told by Hackett what the situation is.

I'll let ME2 slide for now, even though one could say Shepard could have done more productive things (in terms of stopping the collectors) than visiting planets to stop some mercs or check out an old crashed freighter lol.

My point is that people like to argue exploration (something non-linear to take a break from the main plot) has no place in ME3, due to what's unfolding in the plot, yet they don't mention that they really had no place in ME1 or ME2 either. And they worked in ME1 and ME2 so they can work in ME3 aswell.

And because ME3 has no exploration or barely any side-missions (6 dull and similar side missions is all there are), the game feels too linear and the gameworld too "small." Especially, when you consider that all of the main plot/priority missions take place on after another.

I've always criticized ME1 for its implementation of exploration. The premise is "Race against Time", which really doesn't work in the context of exploration. I once actually did two back to back playthroughs of ME1, one with all the sidequests and one without any of them. It's pretty amazing how much the flow of the game is improved by the removal of barren planets.

[Pedrak]

AlanC9 wrote...

Pedrak wrote...

Oddly, ME3 felt small for a sci-fi RPG.

Whenever someone says this, I always have to ask... did KotOR feel small, too?

Not to me, because the major freedom we were given in terms of exploration (where to go next, you could come back to locations you had already visited) didn't reduce it to a "series of level", but made it look more like a living, breathing universe in which the PC could journey.

Which was exactly my main point.

Modifié par Pedrak, 23 avril 2012 - 09:54 .