27756 réponses à ce sujet

[Sartoz]

No loading times would be exciting, but we'll just have to see if it actually happens or not.

                                                                                                   <<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>

 

Yes, exciting, it would be. However, DA:I showed us a different picture. Game and save file load times are in the 25-40+ seconds. I suspect that ME:A won't improve over DA:I. Also, remember that the more texture files tha game needs to load and/or the size of these files all contribute to long load times. Imagine if you have texture files for 4K resolution.

 

Personally, I believe the game limitations is based on the console hardware, including load times.

[goishen]

Right, but as someone on here pointed out to me, they had to program that game for five platforms, XBone, PS4, PS3, XBox 360, and PC. This time they're going for 3 platforms, the newer consoles and PC's.

[rapscallioness]

I'm not really all that hung up on loading screen times, or seamless movement from here to there with no loading screens. It's nice, but not a real priority for me.

 

I mean, as long as they are not TW3 length loading times.

[ZipZap2000]

I never minded the ME2 load screens.

[Andrew Lucas]

<<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>
 
Yes, exciting, it would be. However, DA:I showed us a different picture. Game and save file load times are in the 25-40+ seconds. I suspect that ME:A won't improve over DA:I. Also, remember that the more texture files tha game needs to load and/or the size of these files all contribute to long load times. Imagine if you have texture files for 4K resolution.
 
Personally, I believe the game limitations is based on the console hardware, including load times.

FYI, the loadings on consoles don't take 25 - 45 seconds. I'm playing the game right and it's smooth as silk.

And if I reload, it takes less than 10 seconds to process everything.

[goishen]

FYI, the loadings on consoles don't take 25 - 45 seconds. I'm playing the game right and it's smooth as silk.

And if I reload, it takes less than 10 seconds to process everything.

 

 

Here's my thing with the game.  It took forever to load whenever I first started up the game or was going somewhere new.  After I had been playing it for about an hour, the loading times came down drastically.  And I'm on PC.

[Andrew Lucas]

Here's my thing with the game.  It took forever to load whenever I first started up the game or was going somewhere new.  After I had been playing it for about an hour, the loading times came down drastically.  And I'm on PC.

Oh well, I'm on Xbox One, and I've never had any loading screen issues, they first loading is the one that consumes most time - about 15 seconds, while reloading or changing the map is fairly quickly, almost 10 seconds at maximum.

I do use an external 1TB hardrive, so that might help. I know it did with TW3.

[pdusen]

Here's my thing with the game.  It took forever to load whenever I first started up the game or was going somewhere new.  After I had been playing it for about an hour, the loading times came down drastically.  And I'm on PC.

I hate to be that guy, but it does sound like something peculiar to your PC. Load times for me have been shortish and consistent.

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

Even if it's a good idea for the developers to take feedback from a random article on the internet, they have like... 8 or 9 months at best before the game needs to be finished and shipped, if it's not delayed. How could they possibly implement most of this stuff in that time?

I think it is a good thing that they should listen to critics rather than praises, that way they can grow as a company and to stay on top for years to come.

[clst]

I think it is a good thing that they should listen to critics rather than praises, that way they can grow as a company and to stay on top for years to come.

when i see this i think yes he is right but lol  because when you see franchise like call of duty  more the time pass more it's awfull and people buy it so . yes when you go to solo game  your politic is the right one but when you go to multi i want to say osef .

[Amplitudelol]

I'm not really all that hung up on loading screen times, or seamless movement from here to there with no loading screens. It's nice, but not a real priority for me.

 

I mean, as long as they are not TW3 length loading times.

 

Witcher 3 loading times lasted for seconds for me while i was waiting for minutes(!) for a DAI map to load. Still wouldnt have mattered if the game wasnt total garbage, you are right.

[ZipZap2000]

Witcher 3 loading times lasted for seconds for me while i was waiting for minutes(!) for a DAI map to load. Still wouldnt have mattered if the game wasnt total garbage, you are right.

Funny you should be having this conversation. I just switched from the witcher to new DA:I.

Its about the same.

[SNascimento]

As far as loading times goes, I think I spent more time in loading screen in 3 hours of DA:I than in 80 of The Witcher 3, and that is not an exaggeration. Even for quiting the game there were loading times in Inquisition. I play on the PC evidently. 

[ElitePinecone]

I think it is a good thing that they should listen to critics rather than praises, that way they can grow as a company and to stay on top for years to come.

 

Oh I agree with you, I'm just saying that there's not much point suggesting things now when the game's already been in development for years. Most of the stuff on that list would take far longer than 8 months to do, or it would need to be part of the fundamental design of the game from the start. Basically any feedback that we give at this point won't have any effect, because it's way too late to change the big stuff even if they wanted to.

 

I'm sure they listen to criticism. Casey Hudson has already talked about their routine when a game launches: they make an excel spreadsheet of every review and piece of feedback that they can find, and see what good and bad points are mentioned a lot. That's what led to the inventory and Mako changes between ME and ME2, for instance. I'm sure in the pre-production period of MEA they did the same thing, and part of that will be reflected in the game that we eventually get. 

 

It's also obvious that the devs can't possibly respond to every article and review that suggests things, because a lot of them contradict each other. At some point they just have to pick what they think needs to be added/changed/improved and do it. Whether players will like it or not is hard to tell, but they can only "use" feedback at very specific times in the development process. 

[KR96]

Here's my thing with the game. It took forever to load whenever I first started up the game or was going somewhere new. After I had been playing it for about an hour, the loading times came down drastically. And I'm on PC.

I have the same thing, interestingly.

[goishen]

I think it's because the first time we load up the game that it's just loading all of the textures into the game. 

 

I've been told that one of the major differences between the XBox 360 and the One is a major memory upgrade.  Same on the Sony side.

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

Oh I agree with you, I'm just saying that there's not much point suggesting things now when the game's already been in development for years. Most of the stuff on that list would take far longer than 8 months to do, or it would need to be part of the fundamental design of the game from the start. Basically any feedback that we give at this point won't have any effect, because it's way too late to change the big stuff even if they wanted to.

I'm sure they listen to criticism. Casey Hudson has already talked about their routine when a game launches: they make an excel spreadsheet of every review and piece of feedback that they can find, and see what good and bad points are mentioned a lot. That's what led to the inventory and Mako changes between ME and ME2, for instance. I'm sure in the pre-production period of MEA they did the same thing, and part of that will be reflected in the game that we eventually get.

It's also obvious that the devs can't possibly respond to every article and review that suggests things, because a lot of them contradict each other. At some point they just have to pick what they think needs to be added/changed/improved and do it. Whether players will like it or not is hard to tell, but they can only "use" feedback at very specific times in the development process.

Thank you for that bit of information, it's a good thing that BioWare is taking into consideration some suggestions from their fans. I look forward to play future games from BioWare.

[Elhanan]

If they have been listening to critics, they would've made their games better than before, instead of being repetitive on every game they make, and to fix where they need to improve such as combat design, animations, navigation and level designs to stay in balance instead of focusing just storytelling and character development and leave everything sub par. If I were them I pay attention to feedback from fans and critics to see what they can do to improve their formula of making games, and to keep up with competitors of what they can learn from. But we'll see when they demonstrate ME: A this year on E3 to see how it turns out.

And then again, Bioware receives criticism for DA2 not being anything like DAO, DAI not being like DA2 or DAO, ME2 & ME3 not being like ME1, etc. Not a Win - Win situation at all....

[clst]

look for fall out 4 the game sell very verry well but the game is 12/20  a middle game story and caracter are non exitent  that don't decourage besthesda if tommorow they say they release fall out 5  the same people will buy it >>>sheep ^^ . So the point is when the next mass effect 4 will comme out most of people will buy it ( it's bioware it's sure value). For that now i wait for the release and one week after  i buy the game . only buy witcher 3 on preorder last year  ( i read all the book  ect ect so  must have to )  and on this day i don't buy fall out 4 perhaps when it come to 15 dollar not before

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

And then again, Bioware receives criticism for DA2 not being anything like DAO, DAI not being like DA2 or DAO, ME2 & ME3 not being like ME1, etc. Not a Win - Win situation at all....

Oh you may ignore my quote, I didn't write it right. I just changed it.

[SwobyJ]

On subject of loading screens for DAI, when I put Mantle on, the loading was very long, but after all these patches and moving  back to DX11, all loading is within half a minute.

 

Definitely plenty of technical issues with that game (even if not as outright broken as DAO/its expansions were at times imo).

[Ajensis]

look for fall out 4 the game sell very verry well but the game is 12/20  a middle game story and caracter are non exitent  that don't decourage besthesda if tommorow they say they release fall out 5  the same people will buy it >>>sheep ^^ .

 

That's not really fair; you mention story and characters as if that's all there is to a game. A Bethesda fan could post almost the same thing:

 

"Look at Mass Effect 3. The game sold very well, but the game is 12/20: lots of class restrictions with few abilities to level up and levels are very linear. That won't discourage Bioware. If tomorrow they said they're releasing Mass Effect 4, the same people will buy it... Sheep!"

 

Fallout 4 offers a lot of different things than Mass Effect does. That doesn't automatically make it worse - or better. Let's not be the kind of fans that call other fans 'sheep' for liking a different experience

[Sartoz]

FYI, the loadings on consoles don't take 25 - 45 seconds. I'm playing the game right and it's smooth as silk.

And if I reload, it takes less than 10 seconds to process everything.

                                                                                                  <<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>

 

LOL!

Glad to hear that. Though, Forum entries in the DA:I Threads tell quite a different story.  The poor Old Gen consoles suffered the most. There are tales and tales of these Loooong load times.

To be clear I'm talking about DA:I with the FB3 engine as the rest of the games use a different one.

[Sartoz]

look for fall out 4 the game sell very verry well but the game is 12/20  a middle game story and caracter are non exitent  that don't decourage besthesda if tommorow they say they release fall out 5  the same people will buy it >>>sheep ^^ . So the point is when the next mass effect 4 will comme out most of people will buy it ( it's bioware it's sure value). For that now i wait for the release and one week after  i buy the game . only buy witcher 3 on preorder last year  ( i read all the book  ect ect so  must have to )  and on this day i don't buy fall out 4 perhaps when it come to 15 dollar not before

                                                                                                   <<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>

True. Most Mass Effect fans will buy the game.

 

However, the reputation of the development studio is also at stake. Andromeda must kick azz!

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

That's not really fair; you mention story and characters as if that's all there is to a game. A Bethesda fan could post almost the same thing:

"Look at Mass Effect 3. The game sold very well, but the game is 12/20: lots of class restrictions with few abilities to level up and levels are very linear. That won't discourage Bioware. If tomorrow they said they're releasing Mass Effect 4, the same people will buy it... Sheep!"

Fallout 4 offers a lot of different things than Mass Effect does. That doesn't automatically make it worse - or better. Let's not be the kind of fans that call other fans 'sheep' for liking a different experience

I agree wholeheartedly. Different strokes.