169 réponses à ce sujet

[Mcfly616]

To be honest: I dont care who you are. I do care for games with a good story. And there are reasons why games have a good story. That reason was something I wanted to make clearer. If you are not able to this rather simple input of mine cause you feel somehow attacked... sorry. I didnt want to harm you.

 

But the approach to write quests if you have a fully created universe is rather different thant the approach if you have to create a universe by yourself. CD projekt did NOT the same like Bioware did when they created the ME universe. Thats ist.

you're doing nothing but pointing out the fact that good questlines require good writing. That's as common as sense gets. You act as if the author of the Witcher novels wrote for the games (he didn't).

 

Drew and Casey and a plethora of other writers created the MEU. Bioware Montreal taking the fictional universe established by Bioware Edmonton and crafting their own story within it is no different than what  CDPR did with the novels. They are working off the foundation created by others. That doesn't take away from the quality within the final product. For you to suggest such a thing is laughable.

 

So what, the Witcher games had a head start in terms of world building and lore in comparison to Bioware did with ME. Guess what: it's been nearly a decade since each franchise debuted its first game. That excuse you're making for Bioware no longer applies. Their fictional universe is established. The possibilities are endless. 

[Mcfly616]

To be honest: I dont care who you are. 

Good, then don't make assertions as if you know me.

[StealthGamer92]

Oh no you don't.  It is one thing when Witcher worshipers try to bring it up in the DA forums. At least they are both medieval fantasy settings so comparisons can be made.  But this is Mass Effect.  The alpha male, the apex predator, witcher isn't even in ME's league.  Geralt's enemies threaten villages and hamlets.   Shepard's enemies threaten entire galaxies.  So what's Geralt going to do when Shepard, Garrus, and Wrex run wild on him?

Shepard is dead. Plus scale or era does not factor in this comparison.

[KotorEffect3]

If you want to do sidequests right just throw in ME 1's dialog, ME 2's level design, and ME 3's briefings and debriefings.  Mixed it all up and you got yourself some good ME sidequests.

[KotorEffect3]

Shepard is dead. Plus scale or era does not factor in this comparison.

Well first of all not all Shepard's are dead.  High EMS destroy Shepard seems to still be alive.  While control Shepard's body is dead their conciousness controls the reapers, shepard is in charge of the friggin reapers, and synthesis Shepard changed up the entire galaxy's dna.  Also the last time some dude with a sword tried to take on Shepard, Shepard broke that dude's sword in half and finished him off with his omni blade.  That's right I just compared Geralt to Kai Leng.  Bwahahahah

[Mcfly616]

Oh no you don't.  It is one thing when Witcher worshipers try to bring it up in the DA forums. At least they are both medieval fantasy settings so comparisons can be made.  But this is Mass Effect.  The alpha male, the apex predator, witcher isn't even in ME's league.  Geralt's enemies threaten villages and hamlets.   Shepard's enemies threaten entire galaxies.  So what's Geralt going to do when Shepard, Garrus, and Wrex run wild on him?

 Mass Effect is my favorite game series and nothing comes close. But I'd be lying if I didn't say The Witcher 3 is far and away a better and more complete game than any of the ones offered in Bioware's trilogy.

[KotorEffect3]

Good, then don't make assertions as if you know me.

For some reason when I read that I used Martin Sheen's voice in my head.

[Booth]

So what, the Witcher games had a head start in terms of world building and lore in comparison to Bioware did with ME.

 

A "head start"? The witcher is not "just another stupid fantasy ****" like in any fantasy game. The author created 2 short-story books and a 5-book-series over a long time period of over 15 years. Its not just another freelancer stuff there.

 

 

Guess what: it's been nearly a decade since each franchise debuted its first game. That excuse you're making for Bioware no longer applies. Their fictional universe is established. The possibilities are endless.

 

Who is talking about "excuses". What are you talking about? If next ME is crap... well... thats a pity but thats all. Whats your point? Trying to compare a game which is now playable and has a great story but some bigger issues with gameplay and game-mechanics like loot and gui on the one hand... and a game nobody knows anything about yet and which will be available in maybe two years? There is no comparison possible.

 

Or do you want to compare EXISTING games? That would be a good thing. If you didnt notce.... this is the ME-forum. Fine... lets compare Witcher1-3-story with ME1-3-story of the first trilogy. They both contain some really great stuff and some really stupid plots. Of couse... they are BOTH well written fictional universes.

 

And the ONE universe was created by a bioware team led by Drew Karpyshyn - the other universe was created by Andrei Sapkowski - who by the way didnt like the fact very much that his story was taken by a game developer. At least he disliked it in the first years after witcher 1 was created. Maybe he changed his opinion.

 

To take such a well written existing universe like the witcher universe is a real good deal for a developer. Of course you have to manage it with lot of hard work to create a good story focused game. Fortunately CD projekt managed it. They did it. That does not make ME1-3 worse. And what it does mean to NextME? Well... I would like to see that they notice that a coverage shooter in an open world scenario isnt the best idea... throw away the mako-stuff... and start creating further great shooter with great story ... but of course open world is stil the hype train of industry. We'll see what bioware will create...

[Mcfly616]

A "head start"? The witcher is not "just another stupid fantasy ****" like in any fantasy game. The author created 2 short-story books and a 5-book-series over a long time period of over 15 years. Its not just another freelancer stuff there.

 

 

Who is talking about "excuses". What are you talking about? If next ME is crap... well... thats a pity but thats all. Whats your point? Trying to compare a game which is now playable and has a great story but some bigger issues with gameplay and game-mechanics like loot and gui on the one hand... and a game nobody knows anything about yet and which will be available in maybe two years? There is no comparison possible.

 

Or do you want to compare EXISTING games? That would be a good thing. If you didnt notce.... this is the ME-forum. Fine... lets compare Witcher1-3-story with ME1-3-story of the first trilogy. They both contain some really great stuff and some really stupid plots. Of couse... they are BOTH well written fictional universes.

 

And the ONE universe was created by a bioware team led by Drew Karpyshyn - the other universe was created by Andrei Sapkowski - who by the way didnt like the fact very much that his story was taken by a game developer. At least he disliked it in the first years after witcher 1 was created. Maybe he changed his opinion.

I'm well aware of the number of novels within the series. And I'll continue to say the same thing: So what? 

 

For the games they serve as nothing more than source material for the characters the lore and the setting.  Just as the established Mass Effect Universe will be a good foundation to build upon for the next game in that respective series.

 

 

This thread is about how Bioware could learn some things from CDPR's approach to side quests in TW3. You're the one coming in here with excuses as to why Witcher quests are better than Mass Effects due to its source material. Which is not true at all. 

 

This thread is about the future. You can continue to dwell on the trilogy and make some pointless comparison between it and TW3. But everyone else, we're talking about ME Next. Not the trilogy.

 

By the way, Drew K is an author by profession as well. Excuses excuses.

[Booth]

I'm well aware of the number of novels within the series. And I'll continue to say the same thing: So what? 

 

Uhm - do I have to repeat? This is a very big issue in explaining why the story of Witcher 3 is good. You dont care WHY a product is good or bad? Fine... so... how is the weather?

 

 

For the games they serve as nothing more than source material for the characters the lore and the setting.

 

And several plots. And now throw away the "nothing more" part and we are telling same stuff.

 

 

 

This thread is about how Bioware could learn some things from CDPR's approach to side quests in TW3. You're the one coming in here with excuses as to why Witcher quests are better than Mass Effects due to its source material. Which is not true at all.

 

You interpreted me absoutely wrong. I dont want to excuse ANYTHING - especially that anything of the witcher 3 story would be BETTER than in Mass Effect 1-3. I strongly doubt that I will come to THAT conclusion when I someday play witcher 3. One reason for aht: ALL characters of the witcher books didnt catch me so deeply like the characters of ME2. And I already read several gamer-feedback of witcher 3. Some say "the best I ever played" - lots say "very good, but not that overwhelming" - some say "uh - ok... but not more" and some even say "boring".

 

That YOU think that witcher 3 story is better than ME-story in 1-3... thats something I assumed and now you made that clear. I hope that bioware really "learns" from witcher 3 that building an open world with a deep story is nothing that is necessary to build a good mass effect. They could leave ME rather linear. Unfortunately they already made the Mako to a "big deal". Maybe they will change. We will see.

 

 

By the way, Drew K is an author by profession as well. Excuses excuses.

 

Why should I "excuse" that I like the Mass Effect books even more than the witcher books? Where is the point? I would like to excuse that Karpyshyn didnt write more ME-books. But... no... I wont excuse that

 

 

This thread is about the future. You can continue to dwell on the trilogy and make some pointless comparison between it and TW3. But everyone else, we're talking about ME Next. Not the trilogy.

 Then the discussion must fail. We dont have enough information to discuss anything about next ME. Well... OK... we could compare the witchers horse with the Mako. Thats one reason why I hope Bioware will kill the mako and say the mako show was just a bad nightmare or so. A vehicle in a future setting that is almost so slow as a horse in the witcher... OK... that really IS a point for the witcher. I admit. One reason why an open world in scifi is much difficulter. Its absolute ridiculous to create "planets" that have the size of a few square kilometers. No... ridiculous is even to nice for that stupidity.

[Mcfly616]

 This is a very big issue in explaining why the story of Witcher 3 is good. 

 

No. It's not. We'll just have to agree to disagree. The games are inspired by the novels. Not based on their every word. While the source material is epic, saying it's a "very big reason why TW3 is such a great game" is an exaggeration to say the least. 

 

 

What you're doing, it's like saying: "a really big reason the Avenger movies are so good is because of those great comic books they were introduced in half a century ago." OR "Goldeneye was one of the greatest shooters ever because it was based on the movie." 

 

That logic doesn't hold any water.

[Mcfly616]

 

That YOU think that witcher 3 story is better than ME-story in 1-3... thats something I assumed and now you made that clear. I hope that bioware really "learns" from witcher 3 that building an open world with a deep story is nothing that is necessary to build a good mass effect. They could leave ME rather linear. Unfortunately they already made the Mako to a "big deal". Maybe they will change. We will see.

 No. I never made any comparisons between the stories told by either game. I stated that The Witcher 3 is a better game than any of the games in the Mass Effect trilogy. Meaning everything that comes with the gaming experience. Overall it is better. 

 

I hope that Bioware learns from the Witcher 3 that the stigma that big non-linear game worlds can't have well-crafted quality narratives is utter hogwash.

 

Fortunately, they're bringing back the Mako in a big way. 

[Booth]

No. It's not..

 

 Yes. It is

 

 

We'll just have to agree to disagree. The games are inspired by the novels. Not based on their every word.

 

 You see the little range between the term "inspired" and the term "bases on every word"? I would say the range is about some billion light years?!

 

 

While the source material is epic, saying it's a "very big reason why TW3 is such a great game" is an exaggeration to say the least.

 

It is - especially because its their third try to manage it to create a real good story by the books. The first two tries have been not bad. Even good. But... with lots of not so well written stuff in there.

 

By the way... I saw a feedback a few minutes ago of witcher 3 by a gamer who said that a LOT side quests are REALLY CLOSE to plots in witcher books. I cannot decide if its true. But it would underline my statement IF it is true. I can say in about 4-6 weeks if its true.

 

 

 

What you're doing, it's like saying: "a really big reason the Avenger movies are so good is because of those great comic books they were introduced in half a century ago." OR "Goldeneye was one of the greatest shooters ever because it was based on the movie."

 

No - I cant say that. Because neither I think that avenger movies are good nor do I think that the comic books are. And... of yourse... a shooter mechanic has nothing to do with a movie. By the way... I dont know that shooter... and I doubt stringly that this a one of the "greates shooters ever".

 

And yes - i repeat: Taking over story-parts (and whole background, whole characters and whole universe) from a book-series is a very good explanation why a game has a good story. But... to show compromise I add: FOR ME! Ok?

 

 

Fortunately, they're bringing back the Mako in a big way.

 How can you say "fortunately" if they fail to do it good? In ME1 the mako was like riding a horse. Over "planets" of not even some square kilometers. The earth has no-water-ground of about 150 million square kilometers. This is ONE planet. And I want a mako that has speed of some dozen km/h - maybe some hundred. THAT would be "open world" in space. DRIVING in a properly speed over HUGE planet grounds. Everything what is put in most sci-fi-games is just ridiculous. Thats ONE reason why I prefer a linear scifi-shooter-setting.

[Mcfly616]

Why should I "excuse" that I like the Mass Effect books even more than the witcher books? Where is the point? I would like to excuse that Karpyshyn didnt write more ME-books. But... no... I wont excuse that

 

 Then the discussion must fail. We dont have enough information to discuss anything about next ME. Well... OK... we could compare the witchers horse with the Mako. Thats one reason why I hope Bioware will kill the mako and say the mako show was just a bad nightmare or so. A vehicle in a future setting that is almost so slow as a horse in the witcher... OK... that really IS a point for the witcher. I admit. One reason why an open world in scifi is much difficulter. Its absolute ridiculous to create "planets" that have the size of a few square kilometers. No... ridiculous is even to nice for that stupidity.

 I have no idea what you're going on about in the above posts. First off, you say the Witcher books are a big reason the new game is so good. Well, CDPR crafted their own vision within an already established fictional universe. Drew was an author and creator of the MEU, yet he also was the lead writer of the first two games. If you're going to honestly compare the circumstances of the two, note the advantage of having the creator of the source material on the development team, writing the narrative of the game. CDPR didn't have that luxury. As I said: "Excuses".

 

The books are not the reason the game is so good.

 

 

 

And be sure to pass whatever you were smoking before typing up that last bit. You're clearly still missing the point of the thread. Yup, we don't know anything about the next Mass Effect. Uh huh, we're not comparing it to anything. This thread is a discussion of what Bioware can learn from TW3's approach to side quests. Get it? Got it? Good...

[Mcfly616]

 

No - I cant say that. Because neither I think that avenger movies are good nor do I think that the comic books are. And... of yourse... a shooter mechanic has nothing to do with a movie. By the way... I dont know that shooter... and I doubt stringly that this a one of the "greates shooters ever".

 

And yes - i repeat: Taking over story-parts (and whole background, whole characters and whole universe) from a book-series is a very good explanation why a game has a good story. But... to show compromise I add: FOR ME! Ok?

 

 How can you say "fortunately" if they fail to do it good? In ME1 the mako was like riding a horse. Over "planets" of not even some square kilometers. The earth has no-water-ground of about 150 million square kilometers. This is ONE planet. And I want a mako that has speed of some dozen km/h - maybe some hundred. THAT would be "open world" in space. DRIVING in a properly speed over HUGE planet grounds. Everything what is put in most sci-fi-games is just ridiculous. Thats ONE reason why I prefer a linear scifi-shooter-setting.

Opinions, opinions and more opinions. Clearly you have yours and I have mine and we won't change one another's. You're not getting anywhere. 

 

You're missing points left and right. Such as the topic of discussion for this thread and the analogy I made regarding the crap Avengers films or Goldeneye. And for you having no knowledge of the latter or its place in the pantheon of shooters, you're not worth my time. Everything seems to be going right over your head. 

 

 

When the games story isn't the same as the books, then no, the books aren't to thank for the games quality. Thats the work of CDPR. Not the author of the books.

 

How can I? Easily. Because I like the Mako.

[StealthGamer92]

Well first of all not all Shepard's are dead.  High EMS destroy Shepard seems to still be alive.  While control Shepard's body is dead their conciousness controls the reapers, shepard is in charge of the friggin reapers, and synthesis Shepard changed up the entire galaxy's dna.  Also the last time some dude with a sword tried to take on Shepard, Shepard broke that dude's sword in half and finished him off with his omni blade.  That's right I just compared Geralt to Kai Leng.  Bwahahahah

So? Shepard will not be in MENext, thus dead in a sense even if you went High EMS Destroy or Controll. Pluss all examples you gave are main story not the sid quests this thread is about. PLUS of corse tech beats sword why do you think Samurai were practically wiped out, or Medievil Knight's the penicle of the sword era was eventually useless? We're not comparing the player character, the tech, the scale of the conflict, or the era here so your objections were pointless and I pointed it out. This thread is for those who hate point and shoot mission's that a braindead monkey could beat and want change. I want an actual challenge because point & shoot is never hard just annoying sometimes. Others(most all) want better story in the mission, which I would enjoy but I hate the current "go in shoot everything then you won" setup more than the lack of story. I really hate what gaming seems to be becoming and the "let's go for quantity, screw quality" mentallity in AAA games(graphics do not count towards quality but quantity before anyone brings up that). 

[Booth]

In one sentence: You want to say that CDPR built in Witcher 3 their OWN stories in an existing universe - I do doubt that.

 

For Witcher 1 and 2 I know that it is wrong. Although they tried some own stuff, in my opinion most of CDPR-stuff in witcher 1 and 2 which is not REALLY CLOSE to the books is crap.

 

I do accept, you like witcher 3 story more than ME-trilogy. Thats OK. I do doubt that I will feel the same.

 

 

This thread is a discussion of what Bioware can learn from TW3's approach to side quests.

 

Yes - and my answer again: They should find a good author and should NOT look to much to "open world" medieval-games.

 

They should NOT try to put another fantasy-horse-riding "open world" idea in a scifi-setting with a horse-speed-mako on little-medieval-village-size "worlds" (which only have a few square kilometers AT ALL). And they should NOT put a dice game in it. And they should NOT let walk my avatar a few meters here and their and speak to some village idiots to kill some monsters for money, find a missing child or husband, kill a neighbour, search an old book or watch, etc etc.

I also dont want to see dozen loot containers in the world and let me crawl in bins (wasnt it Conrad Verner who persiflaged this supidity of all RPG games?).

 

I want my own SHIP - not an own car with the speed of an horse. I want my own crew. I want to talk with my crew. I want to make real MISSIONS (not quests) with my crew which should be placed within a war, within politics or within the destiny of my crew members. I want to get to know my crew members better and better by making missions with them. And of yourse I want to see some new SPECIES - with thousand years of background stuff. And surely I dont want to gamble around a world. I want clear missions with focus on clear goals I have to accomplish as a soldier.

 

In other words: For a next ME I really dont think that very much could be learned from Witcher 3. That was another reason why I started to react here. Technology setting DOES matter. Coverage Shooter DOES matter. Soldier avatar DOES matter. A real crew with own lifes and background DOES matter.

 

But to do all the gambling-around-in-a-medieval-world-setting-and-steal-from-bins-player a favor: I leave this thread and will not come back. Do have fun with witcher 3.

 

But in this forum I am looking foward for an Next Mass Effect.

[StealthGamer92]

In one sentence: You want to say that CDPR built in Witcher 3 their OWN stories in an existing universe - I do doubt that.

 

For Witcher 1 and 2 I know that it is wrong. Although they tried some own stuff, in my opinion most of CDPR-stuff in witcher 1 and 2 which is not REALLY CLOSE to the books is crap.

 

I do accept, you like witcher 3 story more than ME-trilogy. Thats OK. I do doubt that I will feel the same.

 

 

Yes - and my answer again: They should find a good author and should NOT look to much to "open world" medieval-games.

 

They should NOT try to put another fantasy-horse-riding "open world" idea in a scifi-setting with a horse-speed-mako on little-medieval-village-size "worlds" (which only have a few square kilometers AT ALL). And they should NOT put a dice game in it. And they should NOT let walk my avatar a few meters here and their and speak to some village idiots to kill some monsters for money, find a missing child or husband, kill a neighbour, search an old book or watch, etc etc.

I also dont want to see dozen loot containers in the world and let me crawl in bins (wasnt it Conrad Verner who persiflaged this supidity of all RPG games?).

 

I want my own SHIP - not an own car with the speed of an horse. I want my own crew. I want to talk with my crew. I want to make real MISSIONS (not quests) with my crew which should be placed within a war, within politics or within the destiny of my crew members. I want to get to know my crew members better and better by making missions with them. And of yourse I want to see some new SPECIES - with thousand years of background stuff. And surely I dont want to gamble around a world. I want clear missions with focus on clear goals I have to accomplish as a soldier.

 

In other words: For a next ME I really dont think that very much could be learned from Witcher 3. That was another reason why I started to react here. Technology setting DOES matter. Coverage Shooter DOES matter. Soldier avatar DOES matter. A real crew with own lifes and background DOES matter.

 

But to do all the gambling-around-in-a-medieval-world-setting-and-steal-from-bins-player a favor: I leave this thread and will not come back. Do have fun with witcher 3.

 

But in this forum I am looking foward for an Next Mass Effect.

Nice use of scare tactics & labeling. Nobody want's the gameplay to be mirrored, you are either trying to start an argument(I'm a horrible target for that) or not comprehending the subject at hand. Or you could just be trying to keep a pointless conversation going for some reason, I don't really know.

[KotorEffect3]

So? Shepard will not be in MENext, thus dead in a sense even if you went High EMS Destroy or Controll. Pluss all examples you gave are main story not the sid quests this thread is about. PLUS of corse tech beats sword why do you think Samurai were practically wiped out, or Medievil Knight's the penicle of the sword era was eventually useless? We're not comparing the player character, the tech, the scale of the conflict, or the era here so your objections were pointless and I pointed it out. This thread is for those who hate point and shoot mission's that a braindead monkey could beat and want change. I want an actual challenge because point & shoot is never hard just annoying sometimes. Others(most all) want better story in the mission, which I would enjoy but I hate the current "go in shoot everything then you won" setup more than the lack of story. I really hate what gaming seems to be becoming and the "let's go for quantity, screw quality" mentallity in AAA games(graphics do not count towards quality but quantity before anyone brings up that). 

I already told you what needs to be done in ME next.  It just needs to look at the games from the original trilogy and implement  their different aspects.  ME 1 had the mission dialog, ME 2 had the level design (and many of it's sidequests were not point and shoot), ME 3 had mission briefing and debriefings.  Now take those elements from the first three games put them in a pot cook it and you got yourself some good sidequests.  No need to look at outside help.  The best formula is already in house just needs to be balanced correctly.

[KotorEffect3]

So? Shepard will not be in MENext, thus dead in a sense even if you went High EMS Destroy or Controll. Pluss all examples you gave are main story not the sid quests this thread is about. PLUS of corse tech beats sword why do you think Samurai were practically wiped out, or Medievil Knight's the penicle of the sword era was eventually useless? We're not comparing the player character, the tech, the scale of the conflict, or the era here so your objections were pointless and I pointed it out. This thread is for those who hate point and shoot mission's that a braindead monkey could beat and want change. I want an actual challenge because point & shoot is never hard just annoying sometimes. Others(most all) want better story in the mission, which I would enjoy but I hate the current "go in shoot everything then you won" setup more than the lack of story. I really hate what gaming seems to be becoming and the "let's go for quantity, screw quality" mentallity in AAA games(graphics do not count towards quality but quantity before anyone brings up that). 

 

 

Then why are you playing a TPS?  Mass Effect is as much a TPS as it is an RPG.  People that play a Mass Effect game go in knowing and accepting that they are playing a shooter.  Sure it is more than just a shooter but it is still a shooter.  It's like playing a medieval fantasy rpg and saying you don't like swords and magic. 

[Torgette]

 Some examples? My statement was pretty self explanatory. The side quests in The Witcher 3 have more content than a good deal of main story missions from the Mass Effect trilogy.

 

 

Maybe you could provide some examples of the "same types of side quests" seen throughout TW3. As of now I'm 60 hours in and find your assertion can't be any further from the truth.

 

 

Mass Effect has "plenty of superb side quests".....Maybe to you it does. I guess everybody has a preference. I find Mass Effects side quests to be some of the most lacking parts of the trilogy. Especially ME2's. Those were beyond bland. New tiny claustrophobic area. Not much in the way of any backstory behind them.

 

Well quite a few side quests in both TW1 and TW2 were the variety where you helped a villager, businessman or nobleman either kill a monster on a contract or find somebody who was believed dead, and it turns out things are awkwardly not quite how the job was setup and you're stuck judging two sides of the same coin or a 3rd party was always involved. So far a yeah a lot of quests in TW3 are like that too. I haven't finished 3 yet, but figured you'd have some examples.

 

As for ME, the first game had quite a few great ones like the biotic cult, the akuze survivor, the exogeni experiments, the rogue AI, the crime syndicates, dr. saleon, jahleed & the keeper scanning, the paragon/rengade-based quests, etc. the only thing lacking was how cookie-cutter they were constructed. ME2 is sort of weird structurally in that technically all the loyalty quests are side quests and aren't required to beat the game, there are still interesting setups in ones like the missile launch crisis, the robot production facility, the rogue AI research station, conrad verner on illium, etc. ME3 had some good ones as well, ie: ex-cerberus scientists, citadel supplies, the ardat-yakshi monastery, grissom academy, etc. and quite a few of the main mission planets had optional side quests related to the main plot like saving the admiral on rannoch or the bomb on tuchanka. I don't know if dlc counts as side missions, but those were mostly all superb.

 

Anyways, again feel free to post examples.

[StealthGamer92]

I already told you what needs to be done in ME next.  It just needs to look at the games from the original trilogy and implement  their different aspects.  ME 1 had the mission dialog, ME 2 had the level design (and many of it's sidequests were not point and shoot), ME 3 had mission briefing and debriefings.  Now take those elements from the first three games put them in a pot cook it and you got yourself some good sidequests.  No need to look at outside help.  The best formula is already in house just needs to be balanced correctly.

When I say "point & shoot" I may be useing the wrong term for what I really mean. ME2, for me, had the worst level design. Every mission in ME2 felt like a 3rd person CoD/Halo game in that they were just way to guided/linear. I never had to think, just kill everything>move forward>repeat.

 

Then why are you playing a TPS?  Mass Effect is as much a TPS as it is an RPG.  People that play a Mass Effect game go in knowing and accepting that they are playing a shooter.  Sure it is more than just a shooter but it is still a shooter.  It's like playing a medieval fantasy rpg and saying you don't like swords and magic. 

As above I think I was useing the wrong termenology.

[Linkenski]

If you want to do sidequests right just throw in ME 1's dialog, ME 2's level design, and ME 3's briefings and debriefings.  Mixed it all up and you got yourself some good ME sidequests.

I actually prefer ME3's level design overall. If you're aiming for open-ness then I still think ME1 is the best though because every world actually felt like a "world" and not just an action level.

 

Or, well... I get what you mean. ME2 had unique locations for all the loyalty quests (though those were main-quests IMHO)

[Guanxii]

And why are most side quests in Witcher 3 well done? Because there are seven (!) books full of plots they could take as template. The most important thing for good side quests is good story writing. The most important thing for goot story writing is... writing ... you DO need an author who really wants to create a world or you should have a good template to take over lots of background and other stuff.

In past I had the feeling that the authors at bioware had LOTS of influence while they created their games. But... that seemed to change. Especially the story (or better stories) in SWTOR had a lot of boring stuff in there. There were some highlights (like the smuggler on tatooine or some agent parts, etc) but if you take all the classes and all the stories... it was far away from what was possible - even for an MMO.

And DA:I? I didnt play it, but it is obvious that they only focused the story on the main plot.

Witcher 3 definitely shows what is possible in games focussing on a deep story. But can this really be achieved without having a template that growed over years? The author of the witcher books didnt write all his stuff in 3 or 4 years. To fill 50 or even 100 hours of gameplay with a deep story you have to write a lot good stuff. This is NOT trivial. Especially when you see how many books are written... and there a ALSO lots of real bad plots in there. And these are "only" books - no gameplay and graphics to build up around it.
To get back to ME - I think why the story in ME1 or in ME2 is for some player so different has to do with the different story approach. In Mass Effect 1 the world plot was really amazing. To get to know this future fantasy story was really a lot of fun. But the characters (for me) felt rather thin. Wrex, Garrus, Ash, Kaidan... and especially Tali... I didnt create deep feelings for them. They were nice - yes. But the big thing in ME1 that catched me was the world plot. ME2 was/is vice versa. The opposite. The world plot is very thin although it is interesting to get closer to cerberus. But the real clue of ME2 are the crew members. For me they get almost alive in ME2. In ME1 they were nice staffage... but in ME2 I started to like them really. In ME3 it was a mixture. So there are obviously different approaches why a story can catch you. And of course not every approach works for every gamer.

What is my conclusion? A game developer has to FOCUS a lot on the story to really create a good one. You dont need to insist on names. There are several good authors - someone like Drew Karpyshyn IS replaceable. But you really have to try to replace him. You really have to find a good author. Put "anybody" there... and you do NOT get the same result.

I am rather optimistic that Bioware does still focus on story and do look foward for the next ME. But... I do see the possibility that they fail. Its not to hard to fail. Cause creating a deep story IS hard work.


edit:

Well - maybe you have different definitions for "side quests"? There are lots of player who would define all the loyal-missions for crew members as "side quest". Some define them as "main quest". I dont define them that way... I just define them as GOOD quests

In other words: I do like all the quests in ME1, 2 and 3. Especially the quests in ME2 i liked a LOT. With all story DLC I usually play about 50-55 hours for a run through ME2. 50 hours of good story is enough for me. Witcher 3 has obviously much more. Thats really nice. But most important for me is that story is a big part of the game and most story parts a good (for me). How the quests are defined in sort of theoretical discussions... I really do not care at all

I didnt play Witcher3 yet, but a noticed that lots of "side quests" do fit in the big world conflict issues. And of course your job as a witcher is to kill the monsters. But that mostly isnt that easy and often has consequences. CD projekt seemed to catch this most important part of the witcher books very good.

You've got to be kidding, ME1 had tons of great characterization between squad dialogue, banter and interaction on elevator rides and during briefing scenes... arguably much deeper and more expansive than ME2 due to the smaller more focused cast, narrative and more numerous investigate options. Garrus and Tali to an extent felt like background characters I would agree with that but Wrex's conversations were every bit as memorable to me as Mordin and Legion's.

Ashley's paragon romance and Kaidan's renegade romance arcs were absolutely amazing... Up there with Jack's romance arc IMO. Easy to miss out if you didn't spec for charm or intimidate. The only time in a game where I've ever felt like I've made a lasting impression on an NPC by completely changing their world view and perspective. Liara was also ruined by ME2.

Only a handful of the 12 or so characters in Me2 had any degree of depth to them, the other half were half baked and lacked meaningful or memorable conversational dialogue. On balance I prefer the ME1 squad and overall approach as did BioWare for ME3.

[Pasquale1234]

The question I have is if you want more cinematic side quests would you be willing to give up all the additional voices for the protagonist if that was something required to have the cinematic conversations back? For people were begging to have more voices for the protagonist and this was something that I thought would happen is a reduction in dialogue to get it all to work properly.

I think it impacts the overall cutscene budget more than the VA and word budget.

They reduced DAI's conversation cutscene workload by making some of the conversations ambient, which allowed them to apply their cutscene resources elsewhere. Had they insisted on making all conversations fully cinematic, I would expect there would have been fewer conversations available, and perhaps some other cutscenes that made it into the game would have been omitted.

It's always about applying the budgeted resources wherever you feel will bring the greatest benefit to the overall product.

Personally, I'd rather have ambient conversations if it means:
-- More conversations, period
-- More cutscenes in other areas