402 réponses à ce sujet

[Lazengan]

J. Reezy wrote...

Lazengan wrote...

The sad Truth is that Skyrim is a terrible, repetitive, buggy game, with no actual gameplay.

Stopped reading right here. You cray

Yay I hit things with my sword until it dies. If I take damage, I spam potions because there is no cooldown

There is no reason to use any other spell or weapon because my sword does the max DPS. There is no choice to use anything else. None of the spells have any other uses other than damage, there is ZERO reason to use them over the best sword in the game

I don't even need to position, The enemy will just hit me anyway. The Blocking mechanics are a joke

Gold becomes worthless after 2 hours. There is nothing organic about the gameplay.

>gameplay

This isn't gameplay, gameplay is making choices not whacking a pinata

Modifié par Lazengan, 02 décembre 2013 - 06:13 .

[AlexMBrennan]

This isn't gameplay, gameplay is making choices not whacking a pinata

Feel free to redefine any words you don't like, and remember that it's everyone else's fault for not magically living in your made up world.

[Dean_the_Young]

Guanxii wrote...

StreetMagic wrote...

Bioware had bits of emergence in their games before though. Like a mix of script and openness that was just great. Not quite open world, but little things made it personal depending on quest order, differing squad banter in quests, consequences of multiple choices, etc.. Not as much anymore though. 

I think it's down to a number of factors. Mass Effect 3 and DA2 were obviously rushed out of the gate, their collective priorities have changed under EA and the nature of the plot of ME3 didn't really allow much wiggle-room for deviating too far from the main plot.

I don't think that's the reason why. DAO and
ME1 and ME2 and SWTOR and Jade Empire also severely lacked in emergent gameplay and were linear stories,
in part because they were mostly based on scripted encounters and lacked
the world-type concerns that bring in emergent surprises.

With ME4 bioware are free do whatever they want. They can either revert back to the original premise and promise of the series or they can continue their current trajectory and make another bland frostbite 3 corridor shooter. BioWare should play to their strengths and let go of the idea of trying to be everything to all people.

This begs the question of what the original premise and promise of the series was. ME1 and ME2 were pretty bland and linear corridor shooters if you want to look at level design. ME3 did the favor of introducing far more tactical variety and flexibility- if anything, it should be praised for bringing more RPG elements and tradeoffs back into combat, and seriously helping the combat of the game.

If you're talking tone, I'd argue that ME1 and ME3 were closer in narrative style than ME1 and ME2. ME3 was, if anything, a return back to the premise of sci fi soap opera with nations and great powers at play, confronting and overcoming unavoidable defeats, and generally not letting everything be resolved in an ideal fashion by going pure Paragon while ignorring the main plot for 80% of the game's content.

[Texhnolyze101]

Because Bethesda supports mods while Bioware doesn't but says they do in order to make you think that they aren't nickle and diming you with DLC like alternate skin packs and weapon packs *looks at DA2 and ME3*

Modifié par 101ezylonhxeT, 02 décembre 2013 - 06:20 .

[happy_daiz]

Personal preference.

/thread

[cap and gown]

Pointing to mods as THE selling point does not accord with the facts at all. Here are the sales figures for Skyrim:

Xbox: 7.43 million
PS3: 4.91 million
PC: 3.15 million

source: http://www.vgchartz....s=0&results=200

[PMC65]

cap and gown wrote...

I see the idea of exploration coming up in a number of posts here. And it is true. I love poking around Skyrim and stumbling across stuff the designers have seeded the landscape with. (Plus Skyrim is beautiful, and the music is fantastic.) I have also seen ME1 fans (which I am not) talk quite a bit about landing on a planet and exploring as one reason they love that title. I suppose. It never did much for me. Not as many oddities to find as you might in Skyrim. Then they ramped that exploration bit down in ME2. You could still stumble across quests by scanning planets, but it certainly wasn't the same as roving around a planet. Then you get to ME3 and there is no real exploration at all. Instead of stumbling across quests, they are just shoved down your throat. In the context of the story, that made sense, but it took away the exploration aspects.

So one thing BW could do, it would seem, would be to rethink the exploration parts of ME.

I was one of those that loved driving around planets in the mako. I had hoped that ME2 would have expanded on it adding more jewels/quests hidden on them.

I enjoy what Bioware and Bethesda put out as a rule and each feeds a different gaming need. Bioware has great characters (Sandal ) and Bethesda has amazing worlds to explore (tbh, I even find I love some of their characters - Mr. House).  

*Not a Rockstar fan, but I bet they don't lose sleep over it ... they at least sucked me into Red Dead Redemption. I could ride around for hours on a horse, hunting and fighting cougars with a knife. Makes me wish that Bioware would try their hand at a western.

[Linkenski]

Because there's still a bigger audience of gamers who play games for "the gamey stuff" and I actually know a dozen who tried ME1 or ME2 but were turned off because "uuuh, the game pauses constantly and I have to roleplay" and because ME is more cinematic it could also be a turnoff for people who just want to skip all cutscenes and get to the gameplay.

Bear in mind that Skyrim is always seen from the player's POV and some people especially in the younger audiences think there's enough fun sometimes in just exploring without talking to NPCs at all.

overall I think it's just because there's more freedom of exploration and less cinematic stuff.

[dreamgazer]

Huh. Sounds like tons of games I've played actually had no "gameplay".

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

I've always assumed that it has to do with taking the time to make huge, compelling games, that can be played for hundreds of hours.

I can remember spending 60-70$ on games that I finished in twenty hours or less. After that, I didn't buy those companies' games until I had read many reviews for them (and often not until they had come down in price.)

[Ledgend1221]

It makes you wonder how Skyrim managed to pass as an RPG...

[PMC65]

Linkenski wrote...

Because there's still a bigger audience of gamers who play games for "the gamey stuff" and I actually know a dozen who tried ME1 or ME2 but were turned off because "uuuh, the game pauses constantly and I have to roleplay" and because ME is more cinematic it could also be a turnoff for people who just want to skip all cutscenes and get to the gameplay.

Bear in mind that Skyrim is always seen from the player's POV and some people especially in the younger audiences think there's enough fun sometimes in just exploring without talking to NPCs at all.

overall I think it's just because there's more freedom of exploration and less cinematic stuff.

I'm not a young person but I do enjoy spending hours with my Nordic male warrior just roaming the land. With Skyrim it feels as if I'm not only given a greater freedom but that Bethesda has just kicked me into the world vs Bioware's hand holding method.

Skyrim is absolute freedom; you can play the main mission or sidequests ... or just roam all day, hunting or fishing or exploring on land or sea or just picking flowers if you so desire.

Bioware focuses more on characters and story so there is no getting in a cruiser and just flying off from the Normandy to explore some world. Finding some odd settlement where Shepard plays cards or hunts a local beast and uses their skin to strengthen his armor.

I like both types of games but if I could only buy one, Bethesda would get the $$$ because the game has more choices in it. Thankfully I can support both at the moment.

[TheProtheans]

spirosz wrote...

LESS STORY = MORE CASUALS?

Mass effect has a story?
Nah mass effect is more like the medal of honor of shooters.

[dreamgazer]

Ledgend1221 wrote...

It makes you wonder how Skyrim managed to pass as an RPG...

Pretty much any game where you can build your own character, upgrade your skills through experience, and make choices in how to tackle battles and strategic situations (stealth, magic, brute force, dialogue checks) gets a pass for being an "RPG", simply for its freedom to LARP however you feel.  And I'm not exactly in disagreement with that idea. 

[Han Shot First]

TheProtheans wrote...

spirosz wrote...

LESS STORY = MORE CASUALS?

Mass effect has a story?
Nah mass effect is more like the medal of honor of shooters.

You might not like the story but that doesn't mean it doesn't have one.

All three Mass Effect games have much more of a story than any Elder Scrolls game, and more meaningful character interaction.

In an Elder Scrolls game the protagonist has practically no backstory at all, no personality, and NPCs primarily serve as info dumps and quest dispensers. There is no meaningful character interaction/development at all.

[PMC65]

Han Shot First wrote...

*snip*

In an Elder Scrolls game the protagonist has practically no backstory at all, no personality, and NPCs primarily serve as info dumps and quest dispensers. There is no meaningful character interaction/development at all.

I almost cried when the Riverwood blacksmith (Alvor) died during a dragon battle. Everytime I went back to the town his empty shop, his wife and daughter telling me that they missed him ...  I had to reload. There was no one that little girl was going to grow up without her father.

I think that Bethesda is also going to add layers as they go on. Pre-Skyrim release there were posters on their site asking if they could get married in the upcoming game. They were ridiculed by other posters with "This isn't Fable" ... I would have loved to see those naysayers faces when they found out that you can get married.

Developers will keep pushing what they can do, if they have a base that supports them financially and by given constructive feedback.

[cap and gown]

StreetMagic wrote...

They should stop listening to all input. I think they're better on their own, and they'll still get good sales doing so. Nothing like GTA or Skyrim sales, but still.

I hope so. I want them to be profitable enough to keep delivering more games like ME. And to afford the costs of producing a game like ME3 with its wonderful cinematics and high quality acting.

Modifié par cap and gown, 02 décembre 2013 - 07:31 .