188 réponses à ce sujet

[goishen]

I truthfully hate to admit it, but I'll take my corridors too. 

 

I've got saved on my computer an entirely unfinished argument about open worlds.  On one hand, I hate them.   Skyrim, Borderlands, Far Cry, etc.  On the other, I love them...   Saints Row.  And the entire thing comes down to positional deployment.  In other words, if at Point A and need to get to point B (with no directional or story help) I quit.  If I'm at Point A and need to get to Point B but then also to C, D, E, F, G, etc (as in Borderlands).  I'll quit.

 

If, however, I'm at Point A and at any time can call on Point B (from where, say the game ends) and go immediately there, then it all works.  I know it sounds odd, but let me tell why it isn't.  If I'm having a little bit of trouble taking down a group, then I can say...   "Hey, ya know what?  Those guys were a little tough to take down.  Let's do some story missions."  If those guys are tough to take down, then I know to level up.

 

It's not, "You're screwed if you try and go into a level 48 dungeon at level 4 and you try a do story mission (that you had to travel halfway around the world for) that's designed for level 25 people (again, you're at level 4) so, basically you got the bonus plan!"   Because what you have to do then is travel halfway around the world (again) to get back the same spot.  And those types of missions are extremely far and few between in Saints Row.  It's just like they said, "Yah, we know there will be scammers out there...   But ehhhh, just stick with us guys."

 

I dunno.  If I were to tell you guys anything, it would be to make the open world just like Saints Row.  Not like Skyrim or, sorry, DA:I.

 

Just leave out the penetrators.

[Mcfly616]

I hope it's open world. But certainly not like DA:I. That's a very poor example of what an open world game is capable of. DA:I has very linear sections leading into the separate open areas of its game world it seems.

 

 

Seems many people that hate on some of the best open world games just want their hand held or want to be told where to go and what to do next. I love open world games because I can come and go and complete tasks at my own pace whenever I want. Skyrim may have a mediocre main story arc, but its lore is deeper than a fair amount of the video game industry.

[goishen]

Skyrim may have a mediocre main story arc, but its lore is deeper than a fair amount of the video game industry.

 

 

Yah, well, that's not saying much.   Having Mario being a center stage attraction at the video game awards shows that.

[Mcfly616]

Yah, well, that's not saying much.   Having Mario being a center stage attraction at the video game awards shows that.

We're talking about the video game industry as a whole. And lore-wise The Elder Scrolls outpaces most of it. It's saying a lot, actually. 

[Mcfly616]

  I know it sounds odd, but let me tell why it isn't.  If I'm having a little bit of trouble taking down a group, then I can say...   "Hey, ya know what?  Those guys were a little tough to take down.  Let's do some story missions."  If those guys are tough to take down, then I know to level up.

 And you can do exactly that in Skyrim....so, what exactly was your problem with it, again?

[goishen]

No, it's actually not. 

 

I mean, what video game do you think you know the most about?   Skyrim?  ME?  Fallout?  Far Cry?

 

I can guarantee you that you know the most about ME.  Why?  Well, because it's explained to you.  It's not left up to the individual player to decide.  This is a place where I think a lot games **** up too.   They just leave too much stuff unexplained and then think that it'll be covered by the "fog of war".

 

EDIT :  And this is plus about a gazillion Mario titles being brought out.  I still don't know a thing about the man except he's gotta save the princess.

 

 

 

 And you can do exactly that in Skyrim....so, what exactly was your problem with it, again?

 

 

You weren't given any directional or story support in the game.   Weren't you listening in the first post?

[Mcfly616]

No, it's actually not. 

 

I mean, what video game do you think you know the most about?   Skyrim?  ME?  Fallout?  Far Cry?

 

I can guarantee you that you know the most about ME.  Why?  Well, because it's explained to you.  It's not left up to the individual player to decide.  This is a place where I think a lot games **** up too.   They just leave too much stuff unexplained and then think that it'll be covered by the "fog of war".

 

 

 

 

You weren't given any directional or story support in the game.   Weren't you listening in the first post?

No, I wasn't listening. I was reading it. And nowhere in there did you clearly word what you just said. So you don't like that it doesn't hold your hand and tell you exactly where to go next. Got it.

 

 

Thing is, once you escape your execution, you're clearly told where to go. And then you're told to go to Whiterun, and then you speak to the Jarl of Whiterun, he gives you a task to complete and so on and so forth. Every quest you are given you can select it and it will put a marker on your map on where to go. How is that not "directional" support? 

 

 

And you're right, I know more lore of Mass Effect than I do of Skyrim. But that's hardly because the game "explained" it to me, which it really doesn't do much of at all, really. It's because I read the Codex top to bottom multiple times. I did the same thing with Skyrim, only instead of a codex, its lore is contained in the hundreds of books you can find throughout the world. Part of the reason more ME lore is committed to my memory than of Skyrim's, is because there's so much more in Skyrim. 

[goishen]

Right, so...   It all comes down to the word "so"?

 

 

 

Part of the reason more ME lore is committed to my memory than of Skyrim's, is because there's so much more in Skyrim.

 

Bolded for emphasis.

How much more is there?  What's the ratio?  1:2?  1:3?  1:4? 1:10?  And how much of that is left up to your imagination?  Or the "fog of war"?

[Mcfly616]

Right, so...   It all comes down to the word "so"?

 

 

 

 

Bolded for emphasis.

How much more is there?  What's the ratio?  1:2?  1:3?  1:4? 1:10?  And how much of that is left up to your imagination?  Or the "fog of war"?

Really, that's your counter argument? That's what you want to focus on? 

 

 

Not the rest of it, where I prove that your assertion of  "no directional support" is b.s., or the part where I said that most of the lore of Mass Effect is learned through the Codex and not through the main campaign that barely scratches the surface of it, much the same way as Skyrim does except with books? You want to boil down to the semantics of a single word. Clearly you're out of your depth. Carry on...

[goishen]

Look, I've played Morrowind in my younger days.  Enjoyed it (even though it was a ****** to get into and to stay into). 

 

I'm not gonna go through that hassle again with Skyrim.  I bought it because it was on sale for like $5.74 on Steam.  Played, I think, 38 minutes of it.  I've owned it for about six months.

 

You can say whatever you wanna about Skyrim.   You can say that it's the best thing since sliced bread.  You can say that it shows you how, in fact, to slice bread.  You can say that it's the baby jesus for all I care. 

 

As a matter of fact, that's what you're all starting to sound like.  Evangelistic preachers in a church on a Sunday morning.

 

 

"Skyrim is the WOOOOOOOORD!!!!!!!!   Skyrim is the TRUTH!   SKYRIM IS ABSOLUTE!"

 

Yah, dude, not eveyone believes the same way you do dude.

 

EDIT : 

 

Not the rest of it, where I prove that your assertion of  "no directional support" is b.s., or the part where I said that most of the lore of Mass Effect is learned through the Codex and not through the main campaign that barely scratches the surface of it, much the same way as Skyrim does except with books? You want to boil down to the semantics of a single word. Clearly you're out of your depth. Carry on...

 

No, dude, I'm just not gonna get into it with you.  You clearly wanna fight with someone.  And most often, it's with yourself.

[Mcfly616]

Look, I've played Morrowind in my younger days.  Enjoyed it (even though it was a ****** to get into and to stay into). 

 

I'm not gonna go through that hassle again with Skyrim.  I bought it because it was on sale for like $5.74 on Steam.  Played, I think, 38 minutes of it.  I've owned it for about six months.

 

You can say whatever you wanna about Skyrim.   You can say that it's the best thing since sliced bread.  You can say that it shows you how, in fact, to slice bread.  You can say that it's the baby jesus for all I care. 

 

As a matter of fact, that's what you're all starting to sound like.  Evangelistic preachers in a church on a Sunday morning.

 

 

"Skyrim is the WOOOOOOOORD!!!!!!!!   Skyrim is the TRUTH!   SKYRIM IS ABSOLUTE!"

 

Yah, dude, not eveyone believes the same way you do dude.

Uhh riiiight. I debunk your ridiculous claims about the game and you think I have a hard on for it. 

 

You played 38 minutes of it. Explains a lot. Every point you made is moot. 

 

 

I'm glad you enjoyed Marrowind. I actually could never get into that one. Skyrim is much more streamlined for the casuals such as yourself. You should really try to get a few hours in before completely swearing it off. But I know you won't. And that's fine. Some people like it more than others and I'm certainly not going to praise it as the best game ever. But you go ahead get mad all because you have no idea what you're talking about and I made it a point to call you out on it. It's actually really funny. I haven't had a good laugh today up until now.

[goishen]

Uhh riiiight. I debunk your ridiculous claims about the game and you think I have a hard on for it. 

 

You played 38 minutes of it. Explains a lot. Every point you made is moot. 

 

 

I'm glad you enjoyed Marrowind. I actually could never get into that one. Skyrim is much more streamlined for the casuals such as yourself. You should really try to get a few hours in before completely swearing it off. But I know you won't. And that's fine. Some people like it more than others and I'm certainly not going to praise it as the best game ever. But you go ahead get mad all because you have no idea what you're talking about and I made it a point to call you out on it. It's actually really funny. I haven't had a good laugh today up until now.

 

Okay, I'm sitting here drunk as skunk on a Saturday night. 

 

Debunk?  Ehhhhh.   No, I really think you didn't.  But if you think so, good for you.

 

No, wait, really. 

[Mcfly616]

Okay, I'm sitting here drunk as skunk on a Saturday night. 

 

 

 Also explains a lot. 

[Vazgen]

TES lore is much more extensive than Dragon Age or Mass Effect. It is also a mess. There are conflicting sources on the same thing, biased and unreliable sources, sources that are debunked in other games... Mass Effect and Dragon Age approach the issue with codex which features solid theories on most big questions in the universe.
I loved Skyrim and played it for over two years. It has fun gameplay and freedom that allows the player to do almost anything he wants. It lacks reactivity though and such an issue will be a problem for ME game. DA developers confirmed that Blood Magic was not in the game because it would've required extensive reactivity which they could not deliver. I'd much rather prefer small but reactive world where your choices matter to the large unresponsive world you can't affect.

[Mcfly616]

TES lore is much more extensive than Dragon Age or Mass Effect. It is also a mess. There are conflicting sources on the same thing, biased and unreliable sources, sources that are debunked in other games... Mass Effect and Dragon Age approach the issue with codex which features solid theories on most big questions in the universe.
I loved Skyrim and played it for over two years. It has fun gameplay and freedom that allows the player to do almost anything he wants. It lacks reactivity though and such an issue will be a problem for ME game. DA developers confirmed that Blood Magic was not in the game because it would've required extensive reactivity which they could not deliver. I'd much rather prefer small but reactive world where your choices matter to the large unresponsive world you can't affect.

Trust me, I love Mass Effect's approach to its lore just fine. I don't want them to take any influence from TES in that regard. 

 

However, I'm fairly certain a lot sources debunking themselves is the point. They're books written by different authors, telling the stories from different perspectives. Also, the fact that Bethesda didn't create TES. Their first game in the franchise was Marrowind. So there's also a disconnect there. 

 

 

I've never been of the mind that the bigger the world is, the less effect you have. Mass Effect Trilogy was quite linear, and the game worlds were quite static.

 

Depending on who you support in Skyrim's civil war, Jarls are unseated, kings are overthrown, the make-up of a town is changed. You can murder the population of a whole village and it'll be a ghost town for some time (admittedly, I have no idea for how long) And when Witcher 3 comes out I'm willing to bet they throw that logic right out the window. That world is going to make Skyrim look like an actual sandbox for kiddies. And knowing CDPR, the choices will result in a drastically branching narrative and world states.

 

 

 

I'm not looking for the next Mass Effect to provide the amount of freedom that TES does. But they need to make it so choices change the narrative of the game in a way that 40 hours into a game, my experience isn't even remotely the same as it would be had I made the exact opposite choices. And going on what Bioware devs were saying early on in development, Skyrim has certain influences on the next Mass Effect from a game world perspective (not narrative)

[Maniccc]

DA:I is not open world....  It's Bioware's old Hub system.  The hubs are generally large and open, as opposed to ME's corridor shooter design, though.

[RoboticWater]

DA:I is not open world....  It's Bioware's old Hub system.  The hubs are generally large and open, as opposed to ME's corridor shooter design, though.

Whether or not DA:I is technically "open world," is irrelevant. The problem lies in the fact that these hubs are too big for their own good. DA:I might not be the perfectly seamless open world we're used to, but it does succumb to the tropes of the genre: lame quests, inconsistent narrative, and a general lack of depth.

 

While I don't fully endorse ME2-3's linearity, the tighter quarters allowed for more focused combat design. I don't think anyone wants MENext to be on rails, but you can't deny the effectiveness of a tighter scope. Hopefully BioWare can maintain a proper balance between freedom of movement and solid shooting; however, I would prefer BioWare err on the side of linearity.

[SNascimento]

Whether or not DA:I is technically "open world," is irrelevant. The problem lies in the fact that these hubs are too big for their own good. DA:I might not be the perfectly seamless open world we're used to, but it does succumb to the tropes of the genre: lame quests, inconsistent narrative, and a general lack of depth.

 

While I don't fully endorse ME2-3's linearity, the tighter quarters allowed for more focused combat design. I don't think anyone wants MENext to be on rails, but you can't deny the effectiveness of a tighter scope. Hopefully BioWare can maintain a proper balance between freedom of movement and solid shooting; however, I would prefer BioWare err on the side of linearity.

DAI does suffer from problems that stem from its open world nature, but it's also important to note it has some brilliant side quests. In particular the "The Tomb of Fairel" is a masterful example of how to use open world to create an interesting quest that is both superb in itself but that also contributes both to the main narrative and to the lore of the world. That is the stuff Mass Effect should focus, and not "go find my missing ring". 

About linear x open world and its effect in combat, I agree. Pick GTAV for example, it has a TPS mechanic and its a open world, yet most of the major firefights occur in confined space that are not that different from a ME3 level. I believe Kojima said he doesn't even consider GTAV open because of that. Or something in those lines.

But the point I wanted to make is that you can have both. NME can have both big planets to explore and tigh focused gameplay. That's why I'm hoping for. ME3 showed a great evolution in level design. Omega in particular had some great firefights, so it's reasonable to expect that for the next game. And when we are exploring? Maybe they focus on vehicle combat, or little combat out doors. 

[Mcfly616]

Is somebody suggesting that every single side-quest should have to tie into the main narrative? Because that'd be a terrible idea.

[L. Han]

^Not unless they are actually relevant to the characters. Or at least makes some sense. Having the Inquisitor running around gathering ram meat and marking quarries just seems a bit naff.

[Mcfly616]

^Not unless they are actually relevant to the characters. Or at least makes some sense. Having the Inquisitor running around gathering ram meat and marking quarries just seems a bit naff.

 I couldn't care less about DA. I'm talking about games in general. It's foolish to think every Npc in a game world has ties to the protagonists main quest. If an npc is in need, I should be able to help them if I choose. If there's some ancient alien monument, that may contain some secret that interests me, I should be able to explore it regardless if it has nothing to do with the main plot.

 

 

Tying everything back to the main plot just makes the world feel like it's that much smaller, just as running into the same dozen people made the galaxy feel ridiculously small during the Shepard trilogy. Trillions of people and millions of worlds. Not everybody has the same story or the same problems.

[SNascimento]

Not everything has to be connected to the main storyline. And it's certainly not a must for a side quest to be good. What they need is to be meaningful, and there are a lot of ways to do that. But the most important thing is that the mission has to be GOOD. 

[Han Shot First]

If ME:Next goes partially open world I think they need to trim the fat in comparison to DA:I.

 

DA:I provided a lot of open world maps with lots to do, some of them very large...the problem is that much of was fetch quests or collectibles that aren't all that interesting. And there were so many of them that if you're a bit of completionist, the more interesting main quests or more story-driven side quests, and the companion stories, sort of feel spread out and overshadowed by the more shallow content and busy work.

 

Don't get me wrong, I like DA:I and think it is a good game. And it is a vast improvement over DA2. But I don't think Bioware's first foray into a partially open-world approach was entirely successful, and the story did seem to suffer for it. It did leave me wondering whether it is even possible to craft a game with a story as engaging as DA:O or the Mass Effect games combined with a partially open world approach. I guess I'll have to see how The Witcher 3 turns out compared to TW2, but if it ends up feeling a bit like DA:I I'm going to be solidly against a partially open world approach for the next ME game.

[Lee T]

Also, the fact that Bethesda didn't create TES. Their first game in the franchise was Marrowind. So there's also a disconnect there.

Todd howard first work at Bethesda Softworks was on Elder Scroll Arena, then Dagerfall, then Redguard, then Morrowind, then Oblivion, then Skyrim, then... The only TES project the core Bethesda team hasn't been on is Elder Scroll Online.

[goishen]

Well, I think this is fairly well documented in the previous games, but I just want to state it to be sure.  The companions side missions in ME, make them stand out. 

 

In other words, in DA (all three games) the companion side missions were always...   I don't wanna say hidden, but not that easy to find.  I mean, I have so many missions on the table right now I don't know one way from the other.  I have one main story mission and about seven companion mission.  How do I tell who's is who's?   And, I just completed a quest last night, Caer Darrow, which I think didn't even have a quest in my journal.

 

ME, on the other hand, while it didn't always have clear companion missions it made them clear at the end of the game.  Especially in ME2.  Plus, there were always little hints at what each of them wanted to do.  I'm in no way trying to belittle DA here, nor am I trying to pump up ME.  Just simply trying to point out to you there has always been a line between the two games.  

 

Or maybe I'm just seeing **** that isn't there.