327 réponses à ce sujet

[Steppenwolf]

Sounds like a lot of resources that could have gone to more important parts of the game, or even to making less maps but better.

Yeah, Inquisition proved that more is not always better. Lots of big maps, nothing interesting to do in most of them.

[SofaJockey]

Yeah, Inquisition proved that more is not always better. Lots of big maps, nothing interesting to do in most of them.

 

Sweeping generalisation, there were interesting things to do in all the regions,

admittedly alongside some less interesting things to do in some of them.

[wolfhowwl]

There's a tradeoff between quantity and the amount of individual dev time spent on each environment, surely.

 

I vastly preferred ME1's approach of having many more environments that were individually unique, open and with a sense of wonder. In a way the "uncharted worlds" of ME2 and ME3 felt too small and too artificial, like they were built as a videogame level rather than something which would actually occur in space. 

 

Mass Effect 1's uncharted worlds were terrible.

 

Once the novelty of pretty skyboxes wore off you realized that you were in a clumsily generated wasteland littered with filler trash like prospecting for metals and collecting League medallions with the occasional thresher maw fight and copy-paste dungeon.

 

They were the considered quite the disappointment in 2007 and are a good example of developer overreach.

 

Given this history hearing things like over a hundred planets being procedurally generated doesn't sound very encouraging.

[MrFob]

Mass Effect 1's uncharted worlds were terrible.

 

Once the novelty of pretty skyboxes wore off you realized that you were in a clumsily generated wasteland littered with filler trash like prospecting for metals and collecting League medallions with the occasional thresher maw fight and copy-paste dungeon.

 

They were the considered quite the disappointment in 2007 and are a good example of developer overreach.

 

Given this history hearing things like over a hundred planets being procedurally generated doesn't sound very encouraging.

 

To be fair though, I think the shortcoming in ME1 there were mainly a budged problem. The art design of the levels in DA:I for example was fantastic, despite the really huge scope of the game. They had problems, filling it with good gameplay but visually, and in terms of level design it was gorgeous and there were no repetitions in the level design either. If they can keep that level of quality and just improve on the gameplay content, I'd be more than happy.

 

Personally, I do hope they vary the sizes of the planets though. In ME1, we only had the large ones, in ME2, we only had the really tiny ones and in ME3, it was very strictly divided in N7 (recycled MP maps) or story relevant side missions.

I'd like if they'd surprise us more. If you fly into a system and you never know if you'll end up with a huge planet to drive around on or just a small starship to explore with a very tight knit mission, that would be ideal IMO.

[Legenlorn]

I just hope they fully use the possibilities that come with ME and new gen. Like in ME1 we explored the surface of planets. I hope they thought of underwater exploration as well. It should be possible to even spend some time on vulcanic planets with the tech we have.

[Revan Reborn]

Because if you receive EA emails, you're already in a target market where they expect you to purchase a game.  EA doesn't need to sell the product to you, and marketing the game to you is a waste of money because you're clearly already going to buy it.

 

They want to find out how to market the game to people who aren't on EA emailing lists and figure out how to expand their customer base and target other demographics.  You keep saying the "right" demographic.  Guess what, corporate money men want to hit more than just the loyal demographic, they want to hit others.

 

They don't care about selling the game to 25 year old single males with disposable income.  They want to figure out how to get moms to buy it for their children, siblings to buy it for other siblings, grandparents to buy it for their grandsons.

 

I don't think you appreciate how much of the industry is still people who don't play games going in to stores and asking "I need to buy a game for X, what's the hottest game right now?"

 

Why do you think that you're asked to sign up for email offers from X, Y and Z when you're only buying something from company A?  Because even though you're not shopping at X, Y and Z and not in their "target demographic" they still want you to see their products and become their customers.

 

Not only does it make "remote sense" it actually makes perfect sense and is 100% what corporations do.

Except you are making a vast wealth of assumptions and fallacious reasoning to come to this conclusion. EA isn't trying to sell Mass Effect, of all things, to little children. It's an "M" rated game with sexually suggestive content, graphic violence, and the kind of experience mothers would not want their children to have. If you actually read the survey, you would also realize it is phrased in such a way as if you know what Mass Effect is. If you aren't a gamer and you've never played Mass Effect, it's just going to be gibberish. Again, this survey and it's supposed non-gamer demographic does not make sense.

[Revan Reborn]

Mass Effect 1's uncharted worlds were terrible.

 

Once the novelty of pretty skyboxes wore off you realized that you were in a clumsily generated wasteland littered with filler trash like prospecting for metals and collecting League medallions with the occasional thresher maw fight and copy-paste dungeon.

 

They were the considered quite the disappointment in 2007 and are a good example of developer overreach.

 

Given this history hearing things like over a hundred planets being procedurally generated doesn't sound very encouraging.

Speak for yourself. In 2007, what ME1 actually achieved in terms of exploration was quite impressive for the time. The main issue was a lack of content and poor Mako controls that derailed the feature to the point of removal. With a larger budget, more resources, and a much larger staff, I could see BioWare rectifying many issues ME1 was plagued with.

[Revan Reborn]

I just hope they fully use the possibilities that come with ME and new gen. Like in ME1 we explored the surface of planets. I hope they thought of underwater exploration as well. It should be possible to even spend some time on vulcanic planets with the tech we have.

"New gen" isn't nearly as powerful as you think. The biggest advantage to the new gen consoles is they actually have a decent amount of RAM, unlike their predecessors. However, in terms of CPU and GPU power, consoles are still extensively crippled. We'll definitely see some improvements, but not anything near as much as many would likely expect. These aren't PCs.

[Steppenwolf]

"New gen" isn't nearly as powerful as you think. The biggest advantage to the new gen consoles is they actually have a decent amount of RAM, unlike their predecessors. However, in terms of CPU and GPU power, consoles are still extensively crippled. We'll definitely see some improvements, but not anything near as much as many would likely expect. These aren't PCs.

 

The new consoles are exactly PCs. They're just inside smaller cases, aren't upgradable and use different operating systems. 

[Revan Reborn]

The new consoles are exactly PCs. They're just inside smaller cases, aren't upgradable and use different operating systems. 

You misconstrue what I meant by "PCs." Yes, they are stripped PCs with at best medium-range specs for a gaming PC. What I was alluding to is that consoles are not nearly as powerful or flexible as the best high-end machines to date. It is because of these obvious limitations that game development will continue to be crippled as the biggest advancement so far between last generation and this generation is 1080p for PS4 and 900p for Xbox One with slightly better visuals. Their frame rates are still atrocious, there lack of power is still embarrassing, I just hope BioWare is able to do something meaningful with it.

 

We saw the results of trying to take a game that was built for PC (Battlefield 4) and give "next gen" consoles the same exact experience. It didn't work. The hardware wasn't adequate and it broke down. That's why Star Wars Battlefront is scaling back destruction and having 40 player matches instead of 64. This is also why the "Tempest" seamlessly going from space to a planet with no load screens is laughable because it's not possible on console hardware. At best, people can expect a slightly prettier game with bigger environments and some new features. The next Mass Effect isn't going to be nearly as revolutionary as it could be thanks to the limitations of "new gen" hardware. Again, more reason to suggest this "survey" is nonsense.

[CronoDragoon]

You are strong with the Straw Man. Recognize the limitations of new gen consoles or don't, what that survey indicates (specifically the seamless flight with no load screens) is not possible on an X1 or PS4.

 

Depends how they do it. Elevators made ME1's Citadel "seamless" because they were masked loading screens. Might be something similar here.

[Revan Reborn]

Depends how they do it. Elevators made ME1's Citadel "seamless" because they were masked loading screens. Might be something similar here.

That's not what the survey suggested, however. It explicitly states that there were "no load screens" and that the travel was "seamless." That requires an immense amount of power and memory to process all those transitions at once without the need of a loading screen. Just from looking at DAI and BF4, which are also running on Frostbite 3, those games are littered with load screens. I seriously doubt the next Mass Effect will be changing that direction.

[CronoDragoon]

That's not what the survey suggested, however. It explicitly states that there were "no load screens" and that the travel was "seamless." That requires an immense amount of power and memory to process all those transitions at once without the need of a loading screen. Just from looking at DAI and BF4, which are also running on Frostbite 3, those games are littered with load screens. I seriously doubt the next Mass Effect will be changing that direction.

 

The elevator isn't a loading screen, though. It's a masked loading screen. Characters talk during it, etc. It's purpose is to load areas, of course, but it functions as a real-time depiction of the move. Entering the atmosphere of a planet could be handled similarly. Aesthetically it would indeed be seamless.

[Nitrocuban]

Depends how they do it. Elevators made ME1's Citadel "seamless" because they were masked loading screens. Might be something similar here.

I rather watch some landing animation than a loading-pls-wait.jpg screen

[CronoDragoon]

I rather watch some landing animation than a loading-pls-wait.jpg screen

 

Real loading screens have their use, like letting me know I can go refill my beer without missing anything.

[Revan Reborn]

The elevator isn't a loading screen, though. It's a masked loading screen. Characters talk during it, etc. It's purpose is to load areas, of course, but it functions as a real-time depiction of the move. Entering the atmosphere of a planet could be handled similarly. Aesthetically it would indeed be seamless.

That is a loading screen... That is the point. The survey explicitly says "no loading screen," which means nothing is being masked. It's all real-time and everything is being loaded at a rapid rate where a load screen is not necessary.

 

For something to be "seamless," that means there is no loading. If there is any sort of loading mechanism, then it's not seamless. It's merely a trick to give the impression of a seamless transition. Again, new gen consoles are not powerful enough to have seamless transitions.

[CronoDragoon]

If there is any sort of loading mechanism, then it's not seamless. It's merely a trick to give the impression of a seamless transition.

 

Which would make it seamless for the purpose of a marketing survey to consumers. Are you really doubting that they wouldn't call something seamless that gives the appearance of a seamless transition even if it's loading behind the scenes?

[BioWareMod03]

Hey everyone. Let's try to keep it civil and on topic. Thank you.

[Steppenwolf]

I could easily argue that the elevators in ME1 were not loading screens and that they seamlessly got us from one area to another.

[ElitePinecone]

That's not what the survey suggested, however. It explicitly states that there were "no load screens" and that the travel was "seamless." That requires an immense amount of power and memory to process all those transitions at once without the need of a loading screen. Just from looking at DAI and BF4, which are also running on Frostbite 3, those games are littered with load screens. I seriously doubt the next Mass Effect will be changing that direction.

 

Destiny accomplishes something close to it on consoles with "loading tunnels" between major areas.

 

ME Next producer Mike Gamble even tweeted about them.

[Revan Reborn]

Destiny accomplishes something close to it on consoles with "loading tunnels" between major areas.

 

ME Next producer Mike Gamble even tweeted about them.

Not at all. I extensively beta tested Destiny in Closed Beta. The game is littered with load screens and having a "ship flying in space" is the exact same scenario of the elevator in ME1 hiding the load screen. What's worse about Destiny is that it's obviously a load screen and it's long... That was one of my biggest criticisms of the game, and it's something many others also criticized Bungie over.

 

What the survey suggests is something Star Citizen is planning on doing (no load screens, no masking or cutscenes, all seamless), which would only be possible on a high-end gaming PC. This is just a fact. The new gen hardware cannot support that kind of seamless transition. They just aren't powerful enough. Thus, this proves the survey is false in this regard because seamlessly going from space to land isn't possible, or it's merely embellishing actual facts by giving half-truths. Either way, we can dance around the issue, but being "seamless" means not needing load screens at all.

[CronoDragoon]

or it's merely embellishing actual facts by giving half-truths.

 

Exactly.

[wolfhowwl]

Speak for yourself. In 2007, what ME1 actually achieved in terms of exploration was quite impressive for the time. The main issue was a lack of content and poor Mako controls that derailed the feature to the point of removal. With a larger budget, more resources, and a much larger staff, I could see BioWare rectifying many issues ME1 was plagued with.

What was so impressive about it?

[camphor]

 

What the survey suggests is something Star Citizen is planning on doing (no load screens, no masking or cutscenes, all seamless), which would only be possible on a high-end gaming PC. This is just a fact. The new gen hardware cannot support that kind of seamless transition. They just aren't powerful enough. Thus, this proves the survey is false in this regard because seamlessly going from space to land isn't possible, or it's merely embellishing actual facts by giving half-truths. Either way, we can dance around the issue, but being "seamless" means not needing load screens at all.

 

there is always masking for loading some are just done better then others, (zelda 64's opening of the chests was masking loading for instance) that said as someone who was in both customer service and pr, I can tell you are a person who gets Disappointed a lot and probably one of those who thinks businesses are always lying to you, But its OK i understand you take things as stated and then act superior when you think you found out a big secret, your right there will be masking of loading screens they never said there Wasent your taking your very very narrow vision of what seamless means and applying it to a businesses version of seamless, its marketing any anyone who reads that sentence thinks no black screen with loading spelled in the corner that is all it promised extrapolating more then that is applying your own beliefs to marketing speak, This isn't an insult, but you must be a really angry gamer if you take everything to its literal point

 

 

tl:dr. There is always masked loading screens its a basis of modern game design the better its done the less noticable it is

[Nitrocuban]

Big areas like in Fallout 3 with random encounters, hostile badguys,  friendly merchants, little sidequests etc.