Aller au contenu

Photo

Why can't we have a real Open-World?


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
170 réponses à ce sujet

#126
FINE HERE

FINE HERE
  • Members
  • 534 messages

Plaintiff wrote...

In Exile wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...
Like the DA2 npcs standing around in the same spot in kirkwall for 7 years? Never aging or never changing their clothes?

At least Skyrim`s population actually walk around abit.


Umm... what? I said that I prefer games that don't bother dressing up their complete failure to mimic human AI. The obvious implication is that I think all games are various degrees of suck on this point. So, yes, DA2 had lawn ornaments as NPCs. Skyrim had worker ants. I loathe worker ants more than lawn ornaments, because at least I don't have to chase the lawn ornaments around for quests. 

YMMV, of course.

Well I have good news for you! Check out this gameplay screenshot of the Val Royeaux marketplace!

Posted Image

I would play a game with characters like that. Looks colorful, and interesting.

But, back to the topic: Open world games are fine. I liked Skyrim. However, I don't want an open sandbox style world for every game. It's not necessary.

#127
CaptainBlackGold

CaptainBlackGold
  • Members
  • 475 messages
I love Bioware's games and would consider myself a dedicated fan. But I haven't played DAO or DA2 in months because after ten or twelve play-throughs, you have pretty much seen and done everything.

I am still playing Skyrim (embarrassment prevents me from saying how many hours I have invested), largely thanks to mods, but also because there is so much to do, I am still finding quests and areas almost every time I start a new character. And yeah, I have yet to actually finish the main quest line in any game I started - just not interested. But I still play the game all the time because I like playing around in Skyrim's sandbox.

So yeah, Skyrim lacks deep, rich characters, and entertaining companions but also provides for me incredible return on my limited game budget. DA2 and ME3 kind of deflated Bioware's claim to write rich and engaging stories - moments of brilliance padded out with hours of boring combat and cliché plotlines...

Of course, I only bought both games once - and the "suits" may not care whether I play it through once or a hundred times; either way they've already got my money. But I bought every piece of DLC for Skyrim and not one for ME3 (because of the ending).

So sure, a bigger game like Skyrim with a lot of things to do, with well developed character such as Dragon Age would be the best of all worlds for me.

I wonder though if the "closed world" feeling of previous DA titles was due to engine limitations and if the new Frostbite one might open things up a bit?

#128
Tenshi

Tenshi
  • Members
  • 361 messages

Enigmatick wrote...

Pretty much everyone from the Dead money DLC was amazing.


well even though you can like them, it doesnt change a fact that they are quite dull.

#129
Sjpelke

Sjpelke
  • Members
  • 11 205 messages
Am currently playing Two Worlds 2.

If even a fraction of freedom to roam certain parts of the world would be in DAI as they are in 2W2 that would be great. Being able to move around, not just walking on paths made on the map, being able to walk in a wider area as has been done in DAO and entering buildings in towns to make them more accessible and lively would add to my gaming experience.

Posted Image

#130
Sylvanpyxie

Sylvanpyxie
  • Members
  • 1 036 messages
I'm not a huge fan of sandbox worlds in RPGs, I've never actually been able to muster the interest to finish a single Elder Scrolls game. Something just doesn't click... The lack of direction leaves me aimlessly wandering around a landscape that is practically uninhabited, on the off chance I might finally stumble on a cave that has things in it.

It doesn't matter how pretty the landscape is, if I have to wander around aimlessly for hours to try and find something fun to do, then it's just not a game that I'm personally going to enjoy... I can understand that other people might find them fun, but it's just not my cup of tea.

Yeah, that's a pretty selfish opinion, sorry... I'll try to be more impartial:

The market for open world RPGs is currently dominated by Bethesda and I don't understand why Bioware would risk messing with their format, a format that has worked perfectly for them for years, in an attempt to take on one of the biggest names in modern development.

Innovation is good and all, but attempting to take on a Goliath like Bethesda on their own turf is less of an innovation and more of a suicidal imitation.

'Course, that's just my selfish opinion and less selfish view point.

Modifié par Sylvanpyxie, 04 mai 2013 - 09:48 .


#131
esper

esper
  • Members
  • 4 193 messages
Not all of us likes open worlds. I have yet to find an sandbox world, I find immersive.

Heck, in some situations I don't even like exploration, mostly because it is not as much exploration, but pointless wandering, even more pointless fighting and all for the price of a +5 sword, which I don't care about.

Basically Skyrim and oblivion bored me so much that I am properly never touching a besheda game again in my life. (Doubly so because Skyrim was so full of game breaking bugs.)

#132
Maverick827

Maverick827
  • Members
  • 3 193 messages
I don't hate Skyrim, but my major gripes are (and these apply to Oblivion, too; I haven't played any other Elder Scrolls game):

1. Lack of compelling characters. Most characters you encounter in an Elder Scrolls game may as well be a Quest Board from DA:O. They'll have one of the same ~seven voices, no unique mannerisms or characteristics, shallow motivations, etc. If followers did not fall into this category then it might be forgivable, but TES games never feel alive because the characters that inhabit them have no souls.

2. Lack of compelling plots. The only decent plot in both games is Oblivion's Dark Brotherood plot. Everything else is very straight forward. The game does not inspire the player to invest any emotion in the game because the plots (and, again, the characters) are by-the-numbers fantasy. Some of the better "plots" in the game are just very small scenes you find on your own.

For instance, I found an abandoned mine with a journal which told the story of two friends who got a gold mine together. They unfortunately did not find any ore veins, and one day one of the friends simply disappeared. The author assumed it was because the mine venture failed. If you jump up to a branch of the mine that's not easily accessible and follow it for a bit, you come to a small room with a skeleton crushed by rocks and a gold vein.

It really doesn't help that they prop your character up to god-like proportions. There's no suspense or tension. At no point do I feel like my character isn't going to hack-and-slash his way to victory. This brings us to...

3. Almost insultingly grandiose. Most fantasy games have you become some major world figure. DA2 deconstructed this by having Hawke turn out to be just an ancillary character in the story of Anders, but that's a rarity today. TES games take things to a whole new height, however, having the player interact with gods, and kill god-like beings (with only 1,000 slashes of a regular sword, too!), and become the leader of every faction in the area by doing a handful of quests. It is fairly impossible to play a normal person in an Elder Scrolls game.

In Skyrim, for instance, if you want to join the Empire in the Civil War, you talk to the general who is leading the whole thing. Regardless of your rank (though you get promoted with each quest you do), right off the bat you're in the war council with the general and his most trusted advisers.

After doing two quests for the Companions, you're inducted into their exclusive inner council. After only one quest at the Mage's College, you're wrapped up in some ancient magical conflict that only you (and none of the other 20 college members) can solve. It's cheesy, but it's also stupidly predictable. I'm currently going through the Dark Brotherhood quest for the first time right now, and I would be shocked if I'm not leading this whole outfit by the end.

4. Lack of cinematic quality. In Mass Effect, when I talk to an NPC, the camera takes over (either when I initiate the conversation or even when I open a door or get close to said NPC). The camera follows my character's advancement, perhaps showing the reactions of other characters in the background. Eventually I reach my destination and I choose to say something to this NPC. Perhaps my character is chastising this NPC for something, so he points his fingers accusingly. Perhaps my character is threatening this NPC, so he draws his weapon, and the NPC cowers. My character can push people out of windows or punch them in the face. If my character is speaking to a room, he'll look around as if giving a speech, and make gestures to the audience.

In Skyrim, I run up to an NPC, and the camera zooms in slightly, but remains fixed. My character and the NPC remain motionless for the entirety of the conversation.

5. Bugs and poor planning. I actually don't care too much about bugs, especially because the community can fix most of them. What annoys me most are things like The Dark Brotherhood having you kill quest givers, making those quests unable to be started. Why? The Dark Brotherhood radiant quests can even lock you out of getting an entire Hearthfire home. There's a radiant quest to find various books all over the map, but if you find one of them before you get the quest, then you can't complete it. This is a casualty of the sandbox, of throwing a ton of rubber balls into a box and hoping none of them collide as they bounce around randomly.

6. Poor gameplay, lack of balance. I'm currently (trying) to play a Bow/Sneak character right now. Any given dungeon typically involves me one or two shotting bandits as I make my way through it, which is fine. But every once in a while my arrow-to-the-face will only bring down a random bandit's health by 1/20th. Then I either have to switch to one-handed weapons (and likely get two shot) or kite for ten minutes, pumping dozens of arrows into what should just be a mortal person. If I turn the difficulty down, then I one shot that same enemy and my sneezes kill the rest.

On the other hand, if I use Blacksmithing and Enchanting, even without abusing Alchemy, my character becomes unstoppable. I one-shot dragons and my health barely drops when I'm hit by a giant. If I turn the difficulty up, then we're back to square one, what with the dozens of arrows nonsense.

Dragon Age: Origins could be trivialized with Blood Wound and some other spells, but for the most part it was at least consistent on any difficulty. Mass Effect 2 on Nightmare is probably the most balanced RPG in recent memory. Even when playing a Mattock Soldier, it still took the right team build and strategy to do well.

All of that said, I'm going to go play Skyrim right now. I've just yet to make it to even level 50 on any character, and I don't see it happening this time, either.

#133
Guest_simfamUP_*

Guest_simfamUP_*
  • Guests
Because they take years to make and BioWare barley have enough time to do their own games now.

What is the point of having a smaller jaw inside your jaw?

Edit: I can see the point of having a detatchable jaw (like a Goblin Shark) but why the extra pointless teeth?


Because it looks ****ing awesome? Its' Demon's Souls, things don't have to make sense.

#134
Tenshi

Tenshi
  • Members
  • 361 messages
Response of Maverick827, is pretty much /thread. i bothered to read it all ;-D

#135
Monica21

Monica21
  • Members
  • 5 603 messages

Maverick827 wrote...

*accurate description of the problems with open world games and Bethesda in particular*

You win the internet today.

#136
Twisted Path

Twisted Path
  • Members
  • 604 messages
One thing about this compelling plot and characters stuff: I really don't think Dragon Age 2 had compelling characters, and the plot was a horrible mess. Just because compelling characters, plot and dialogue is the centerpiece of your game doesn't guarantee that that stuff will be any good. Skyrim had the advantage of that stuff not being the centerpiece of the game.

I really don't think there's compelling proof that you can't make a sandbox game that also has a great story and characters and branching choices and stuff. The next Witcher game might prove it too (or it might be terrible and a big step down from previous games because they bit off more than they can chew.)

#137
Monica21

Monica21
  • Members
  • 5 603 messages

Twisted Path wrote...

One thing about this compelling plot and characters stuff: I really don't think Dragon Age 2 had compelling characters, and the plot was a horrible mess. Just because compelling characters, plot and dialogue is the centerpiece of your game doesn't guarantee that that stuff will be any good. Skyrim had the advantage of that stuff not being the centerpiece of the game.

I really don't think there's compelling proof that you can't make a sandbox game that also has a great story and characters and branching choices and stuff. The next Witcher game might prove it too (or it might be terrible and a big step down from previous games because they bit off more than they can chew.)

Oh, I agree that DA2 had a multitude of problems that have nothing to do with whether it was an open world or not. Those have been discussed ad nauseum. I also agree that there is no evidence that a sandbox game can't have what you described. Except, the OP brought up Skyrim as an example of a well-constructed open world game, and many players have given reasons why they don't think that's true. I do believe that Bethesda can do better, but they don't want to because their formula sells. Morrowind sold better than expected and Oblivion and Skyrim have likely both added on to that success. As I've said before, they are clearly a profitable game company, but I don't think they're a very good game company.

#138
Sanunes

Sanunes
  • Members
  • 4 392 messages

Twisted Path wrote...

One thing about this compelling plot and characters stuff: I really don't think Dragon Age 2 had compelling characters, and the plot was a horrible mess. Just because compelling characters, plot and dialogue is the centerpiece of your game doesn't guarantee that that stuff will be any good. Skyrim had the advantage of that stuff not being the centerpiece of the game.

I really don't think there's compelling proof that you can't make a sandbox game that also has a great story and characters and branching choices and stuff. The next Witcher game might prove it too (or it might be terrible and a big step down from previous games because they bit off more than they can chew.)


I don't think people are saying that Dragon Age 2 was done well, but what they are trying to say Skyrim isn't the greatest game ever made either which has been some of the arguements used around the BSN have tried to say, its also the same with The Witcher 2.

To me it boils down to enjoyability and really I did get frustrated with Dragon Age 2 and it did have a "rushed feel" but at the end of the day I have beaten Dragon Age 2 twice and haven't finished Skyrim yet, now part of that is Bethesda's fault for I don't want to start over again since the first 40 to 60 hours I have spent in the game is just gone, but that is a rant for another time.

#139
Maverick827

Maverick827
  • Members
  • 3 193 messages

Twisted Path wrote...

One thing about this compelling plot and characters stuff: I really don't think Dragon Age 2 had compelling characters, and the plot was a horrible mess. Just because compelling characters, plot and dialogue is the centerpiece of your game doesn't guarantee that that stuff will be any good. Skyrim had the advantage of that stuff not being the centerpiece of the game.

That's probably a better way to put it.  Any character or plot is going to be subject to opinion, but Bathesda doesn't even try in that area.  Which is fine for them, and fine for me (I still find the game fun).  But I've finished BioWare games many times each and I have never finished Oblivion or Skyrim.  Eventually running around in the sandbox just gets boring when I don't care about the story, my companions, or even my own, silent, stoic character.

I really don't think there's compelling proof that you can't make a sandbox game that also has a great story and characters and branching choices and stuff. The next Witcher game might prove it too (or it might be terrible and a big step down from previous games because they bit off more than they can chew.)

I'm not saying that it's not possible, I'm just saying that no sandbox game I've played has done it yet.  I also wouldn't count whatever TW3 does in this category because of the fixed protagonist.

#140
Sjpelke

Sjpelke
  • Members
  • 11 205 messages
I still have the opinion that if BW had more time (or finances to hire more people to get the job done in lesser time) to polish things regarding story, characters and quests they would have delivered a more complete game.

Things have been left hanging after being introduced or have been cut out partionally which gives the unfinished, sometimes messy feel to the game for me. I did enjoy the game though and liked that it was situated in one town over the given timespan. It could have been a gem but something happened along the way that left the stone unpolished and the game not very rememrable for me except for some characters that have been introduced.

#141
AlanC9

AlanC9
  • Members
  • 35 804 messages
There are some things you can't do in a sandbox. OTOH, people who like sandbox RPGs probably wouldn't like, say, a feeling of urgency.

#142
UnderlAlDyingSun

UnderlAlDyingSun
  • Members
  • 348 messages
How can Skyrim be spoken of so critically, it offers something that no other RPG does? I wouldn't trade any of those well crafted open world elements for anything, improved story or otherwise. I generally find the mainplots to be engaging, but TBH I only exhaust that route when I'm really out of my explorer phase. Having said that, Fallout 3 is my favorite RPG, and for however thin some people interpret these storylines you really get out of it what you put into it.

#143
Maverick827

Maverick827
  • Members
  • 3 193 messages

AlanC9 wrote...

There are some things you can't do in a sandbox. OTOH, people who like sandbox RPGs probably wouldn't like, say, a feeling of urgency.

Doesn't the Skyrim main quest already have that?

#144
In Exile

In Exile
  • Members
  • 28 738 messages

iiReaperZz wrote...

How can Skyrim be spoken of so critically, it offers something that no other RPG does? I wouldn't trade any of those well crafted open world elements for anything, improved story or otherwise. I generally find the mainplots to be engaging, but TBH I only exhaust that route when I'm really out of my explorer phase. Having said that, Fallout 3 is my favorite RPG, and for however thin some people interpret these storylines you really get out of it what you put into it.


Because some of us don't really enjoying wandering. If you take out walking around and being in awe of things, and if you don't like FPS style combat, Skyrim doesn't have very much to offer. It's still a good game, but it's not especially amazing. If you don't value those core features. Kind of how DA:O is not all that great if all the dialogue/story is annoying to people.

#145
Fishy

Fishy
  • Members
  • 5 819 messages
Dragon Age does not have to be a big open world like skyrim (Skyrim is not really full open world anyway). It's can learn from it. How to make better level design and give more freedom to your movement.  I dislike being unable to  Hop a fence because it's not where I am supposed to be going. I love that an INN is actually fully connected to the city hub and does not feel like another zone inside the city zone.

I love that character aren't just standing lifeless and waiting for you to trigger their quest and them having stuff to do on their own. I love night and day cycle and different weather. I love it when I have to meet a character at 13:00 PM. It's make the world feel more alive and not just existing for your character progression.

Those kind of stuff deepen my immersion in a game. In assassin creed 3 that snow was awesome. It's actually felt like snow ... and the landscape of Red Dead Redemption with wildlife running around you. It's does not feel like a tiny limited box only being used has a  quest trigger.

But DA does not have to be like those game. It can try something new. I am certain they could find a way to make the world feel big and alive and yet still remain with a strong narrative. The Witcher III is going for this and from what I have seen. If they do it right .. might become something that will change RPG.

BioWare's starting to lag behind the competition in rpg. Will see what happens.

#146
A Crusty Knight Of Colour

A Crusty Knight Of Colour
  • Members
  • 7 475 messages

BouncyFrag wrote...

CrustyBot wrote...

I thought Red Dead Redemption was fun.

Awesome and enjoyable game. But we can't have too many posts like this. It will get in the way of the mindless Skyrim vs Dragon Age bloviating since 'open world' only means Skyrim to some people. RPGz are serious business.
=]


Lol. You'd think the "Don't make DA3 like Skyrim" would have most of that and this one would have a broader discussion, but I guess Skyrim truly is the only open world sandbox game ever created. Like, ever.

#147
Chromie

Chromie
  • Members
  • 9 881 messages

CrustyBot wrote...

BouncyFrag wrote...

CrustyBot wrote...

I thought Red Dead Redemption was fun.

Awesome and enjoyable game. But we can't have too many posts like this. It will get in the way of the mindless Skyrim vs Dragon Age bloviating since 'open world' only means Skyrim to some people. RPGz are serious business.
=]


Lol. You'd think the "Don't make DA3 like Skyrim" would have most of that and this one would have a broader discussion, but I guess Skyrim truly is the only open world sandbox game ever created. Like, ever.


Before Elder Scrolls open world never existed! Nevermind that Wasteland, Fallout or Gothic stuff.

#148
Guest_krul2k_*

Guest_krul2k_*
  • Guests
 i still prefer SWG to all those :wub:

#149
Chromie

Chromie
  • Members
  • 9 881 messages

krul2k wrote...

 i still prefer SWG to all those :wub:


I think I love you. Posted Image

Who wants to buy some of my fine blasters?

#150
Guest_krul2k_*

Guest_krul2k_*
  • Guests
lol used to buy T-21 Rifles from a guy on tatooine, bugger used to stock some of the sweetest weapons, ahhh the memories,kryat hunting,architecture,creature handler.......good i really miss those days