5 réponses à ce sujet

[N7recruit]

So far Bioware have shown us a lot of the organic gameplay in DA:I where the player is left to their own devices to explore the vast open levels for secrets while killing all sorts of creatures along the way. But we haven't seen a mission play out from beginning to end yet.

 

My question is how big a portion of the open world  are quests going to use?

 

One of the beefs I have with games like GTA 5 (Especially the Multiplayer) & Watch dogs is that the open world just feels like a mission select tool for extremely small & linear missions.

 

Watch Dogs was at it's best when the player was in hand crafted linear missions, where the hacking & stealth mechanics shined. Here it felt like a good Deus Ex game. Where as the open world felt like a poor man's GTA clone with Bad driving & shooting mechanics. 

 

Like for gods sake GTA 5 has a "Mission select" list in the pause menu. While this feature is really fuckin awesome, it kinda says it all about the mission structure. 

 

That the Open world is fun to **** around in, but missions have to be heavily scripted & linear.

 

I get that missions have to have some structure but why make a game open world if you aren't going to use it for anything other than a playground for the player to mess around in? If your game is at it's best in linear corridors, then maybe you shouldn't have made an open world game. 

 

So how do you guys think DA:I will handle quests? Will they be in linear spaces isolated from the open world or will they make use of the huge play spaces Bioware have created?

[Samahl]

Probably both.

[N7recruit]

A mix would help keep things fresh I guess. One would wonder though what if the linear quests are a lot better than the open world ones? Now that would be quite the bit of feed back that might throw a wrench in the Open world direction Bioware is heading in. 

[Sidney]

I don't understand the open world, Bioware is at their best telling a story. The worst part of ME1 was that stupid mako and loads of empty space. Bethesda gets away with the open world because frankly there is no story worth caring about so wandering around randomly killing things for no reason is all there is in those games. I don't want to see a loss of focus in favor of me just blundering about the countryside committing acts that would make PETA weep.

[Deflagratio]

So far Bioware have shown us a lot of the organic gameplay in DA:I where the player is left to their own devices to explore the vast open levels for secrets while killing all sorts of creatures along the way. But we haven't seen a mission play out from beginning to end yet.

 

My question is how big a portion of the open world  are quests going to use?

 

One of the beefs I have with games like GTA 5 (Especially the Multiplayer) & Watch dogs is that the open world just feels like a mission select tool for extremely small & linear missions.

 

Watch Dogs was at it's best when the player was in hand crafted linear missions, where the hacking & stealth mechanics shined. Here it felt like a good Deus Ex game. Where as the open world felt like a poor man's GTA clone with Bad driving & shooting mechanics. 

 

Like for gods sake GTA 5 has a "Mission select" list in the pause menu. While this feature is really fuckin awesome, it kinda says it all about the mission structure. 

 

That the Open world is fun to **** around in, but missions have to be heavily scripted & linear.

 

I get that missions have to have some structure but why make a game open world if you aren't going to use it for anything other than a playground for the player to mess around in? If your game is at it's best in linear corridors, then maybe you shouldn't have made an open world game. 

 

So how do you guys think DA:I will handle quests? Will they be in linear spaces isolated from the open world or will they make use of the huge play spaces Bioware have created?

 

 

The closest analogy I can think of, if you're familiar with D&D and the Pen & Paper scene is that Dragon Age: Inquisition is built as a Linear campaign comprised of Open campaign Modules. Each "Area" (IE: Hinterlands, Crestwood, etc) represents a Module, with a story that may tie into the overall campaign, but also exists on its own terms. While an arc probably exists that some may interpret as "Linear" I think linearity is more gradient than that. Just going off my own hunches and what little I know about the "Power" system for the Inquisition, in each Area/Module you have opportunities to earn power in really whatever way you see fit, and to advance major plot points your Inquisition needs a certain degree of said "power". This gives a linear story some flexibility, making Act's 1 and 2 of a module open, building up toward the major conflict (Climax) of the region.

 

For example, in the Hinterlands, you may choose to assist a Refugee camp to gain the support needed to launch an assault on Redcliffe Castle, or you may instead kill the dragon to, close some rifts or a combination of those tasks, but everything in the area eventually trickles down to the region objective in some way. IE: End the Mage/Templar war. So to answer your question, it's a little bit of both, when you enter an area and decide to work at it, you're effectively "Selecting a Mission" but then that entire play space is occupied with opportunities that lead to the final objective.

 

I have a feeling that description doesn't do much justice, but I think I was pretty conservative on elaboration actually, so it wouldn't surprise me if the game is more open-ended than I'm suggesting.

[HellaciousHutch]

I don't understand the open world, Bioware is at their best telling a story. The worst part of ME1 was that stupid mako and loads of empty space. Bethesda gets away with the open world because frankly there is no story worth caring about so wandering around randomly killing things for no reason is all there is in those games. I don't want to see a loss of focus in favor of me just blundering about the countryside committing acts that would make PETA weep.

 

Just because a game is open world doesn't mean the story will be poor. In fact, the trend of the next generation of gaming is leaning towards open-ended, open world experiences, because the hardware is becoming better to make games worlds bigger and more like our world; as opposed to making the game feel like a bunch of hallways.

 

You won't be losing solid, story-driven experiences just because open world is becoming bigger and bigger, and just because a game developer decides for the world of their game to be open and far more explorable.