I'm not saying it's Not possible. I'm saying developing an open world isn't something Bioware was expert at, and they failed to find a good balance with the story content. What CDPR did isn't easy.Yeah but TW3 proves that its possible to have both (awesome side quests AND a great open world)
Its always how Bioware games have been like (story and character focused instead of something like Skyrim) and they should continue to do so
I didn't like the auto dialoge in ME3 since I wanted more dialogue options but apart from that the amount of cutscenes and dialogue was good (actually wanted even more)
I don't want something like Dark Souls or Skyrim where its basically just gameplay gameplay etc. I don't care for that at all
I need a good story and characters otherwise the game has failed for me
So I disagree with you
I think the best thing ME:Next could learn from the Witcher is to embrace some of the horror aspects of the setting
I think the best thing ME:Next could learn from the Witcher is to embrace some of the horror aspects of the setting
i dont know what horror aspects your talking about in either game geralt isnt afraid of anything nor is shepard unless your talking about the monster designs in W3 in which yes some of them were cool but they really rely mostly on uncanny valley
Witcher 3 had a terrible main plot in my opinion best side quests in the industry, but god that main plot was boring
I think the best thing ME:Next could learn from the Witcher is to embrace some of the horror aspects of the setting
Doesn't it though? There's plenty of horror themes in the ME universe, it even has its own version of zombies.
I'm not saying it's Not possible. I'm saying developing an open world isn't something Bioware was expert at, and they failed to find a good balance with the story content. What CDPR did isn't easy.
I hope Bioware improves on this aspect in their following games.
I don't think the problem is in that balance per se, but some design decisions.
From my POV, at first, a problem I see it's the feeling that DAI gives to you, it's confusing, in a sense overwhelming.
After a few hours you have 'tons' of missions on the roster without a clear hierarchy (may sound foolish but if you can see the main plot in yellow, in blue the secondary missions and in red the 'filler' ones -fetch quests-, everything would be easier) and on the same wagon goes the war table, no zoom, many banners..., so the interface is lacking some "obvious tips" that would make the life easier. OTOH, as a personal opinion, it's curious that some people is moaning about content that may be skipped.
2nd, the enemy mobs are excessively attached to a given and restricted area (sometimes would be good and logical but always and everywhere...), and the respawn ratio is a bit high therefore some areas seems overpopulated (dogs everywhere!!!).
3rd, the fade breaches should not feel like time sink elements, they should be treated more like a boss fight or so (something not that common), without 'cheapening' them and feeling like 'filler' content (probably less fade breaches had help).
I might add a few more, like the lack of freedom to customize the inquisitor (yep, in underwear, pijama, armor e.g. in Skyhold, etc) anywhere, anytime, but maybe are more a personal matter.
Sorry for going back to DAI but...
About the sidequests and TW3, I don't see really anything to add to DA or ME (as I said maybe more cinematics in the next DA). There are great, regular and bad ones in all of them.
There is a middle ground, yanno. I think DAO and ME1 (and perhaps DA2 to some extent) found that sweet spot.
When I want cinematic entertainment, I'll watch a film. I buy games to play them, not watch them.
Honestly a big appeal in ME1 and ME2 to me was it feeling like an intereactive movie, but I agree, they found a great middle-ground and should step back on the overly movie-like approach of ME3. Bioware themselves also said, back in 2011 that "ME3 is like THE movie of Mass Effect" so it was a very self-aware decision to go for such a cinematic feel.
There are quite well done sidequests in Witcher 3, but not all of them. Its pretty much the same as in DAI.
Freeing camps to get new merchants etc. But I still like Witcher 3 more. The PC menus are still pathetic in DAI.
Want to see how not to do alternate endings based on player choices? Look at the Witcher 3
I've often said that BioWare should embrace personal choices over increasingly ridiculous 'world ending' ones but JESUS TAP DANCING CHRIST was this poorly implemented in this game. There's bounds of reason, there's picking your ending out of a hat, and then there's what CDPR did. There's absolutely no agency in deciding your fate when the choices the game uses to define the ending to your story good, bad or indifferent are completely arbitrary and do not rise directly from the main plot. It's objectionably bad game design no matter how you look at it.
The game takes 5 seemingly insignificant choices out of literally hundreds that might as well be completely random for how much bearing they have on the actual plot such as 'start a snow fight or not', 'accept a gold coin or not', 'trash a room or calm down', 'follow Ciri or not', etc. and then takes the results of 3/5 and this determines the ending you get without any rhyme or reason. Basing the ending to a 100+ hour game on completely artificially contrived choice mechanics like this ruined the Witcher for me and I now have absolutely no desire to replay hundreds of hours worth of content just to get to clearly the actual ending to the game and franchise. What the zookeeper said to the last male panda.
Guest_john_sheparrd_*
Want to see how not to do alternate endings based on player choices? Look at the Witcher 3
I've often said that BioWare should embrace personal choices over increasingly ridiculous 'world ending' ones but JESUS TAP DANCING CHRIST was this poorly implemented in this game. There's bounds of reason, there's picking your ending out of a hat, and then there's what CDPR did. There's absolutely no agency in deciding your fate when the choices the game uses to define the ending to your story good, bad or indifferent are completely arbitrary and do not rise directly from the main plot. It's objectionably bad game design no matter how you look at it.
The game takes 5 seemingly insignificant choices out of literally hundreds that might as well be completely random for how much bearing they have on the actual plot such as 'start a snow fight or not', 'accept a gold coin or not', 'trash a room or calm down', 'follow Ciri or not', etc. and then takes the results of 3/5 and this determines the ending you get without any rhyme or reason. Basing the ending to a game on completely artificially contrived choice mechanics like this ruined the Witcher for me and I now have absolutely no desire to replay hundreds of hours worth of content just to get to clearly the actual ending to the game and franchise. What the zookeeper said to the last male panda.
Guest_john_sheparrd_*
There are quite well done sidequests in Witcher 3, but not all of them. Its pretty much the same as in DAI.
Freeing camps to get new merchants etc. But I still like Witcher 3 more. The PC menus are still pathetic in DAI.
They don't need to look to Witcher 3, for five years ago Bioware already did side quests right with Mass Effect 2. Look to that game to see how to do non main story related content right.
ME1 and ME2 were well done in most cases. They could use a bit more dialog but combine the two styles and its perfect. Imagine stumbling upon a criminal syndicate on a barren planet then hunting down their leader for instance. That's what I wanna see.
Imagine stumbling upon a criminal syndicate on a barren planet then hunting down their leader for instance. That's what I wanna see.
Isn't that already almost every sidequest in all of ME2 in a nutshell?
Isn't that already almost every sidequest in all of ME2 in a nutshell?
If it was, it sucked.
I thought the side quests in ME2 were very good, at least the loyalty missions were. The only problem is that they didn't really tie together all that well into the primary mission, and had no bearing on the companions disposition or willingness to stick around. Like, Jack of all people I would easily see ditching you at the next port if you don't talk to her at all.
I differ with most when describing something as a side quest. As in, just because something is optional doesn't mean it is a side quest (imo). When I think of ME2 side quests, I don't think of Loyalty missions, because they tie into the main story. I'm thinking of all the bull**** distress signal missions with zero back-story or all the credit chit-type missions that go absolutely nowhere.
I think the best thing ME:Next could learn from the Witcher is to embrace some of the horror aspects of the setting
Meh. I never found anything that felt like proper horror in ME123. I wouldn't mind it but it's not gonna be done properly since it would just make some "consumers" stop playing the game.
I want Amnesia-levels of horror or I don't think it's horror.
Meh. I never found anything that felt like proper horror in ME123. I wouldn't mind it but it's not gonna be done properly since it would just make some "consumers" stop playing the game.
I want Amnesia-levels of horror or I don't think it's horror.
The thing about Amnesia-level horror is that it loses its impact when used episodically which is the only way I can see it being implemented. Example - new game from Amnesia devs:
I can see some elements of this in ME:Next, like the robot, for example. But it will not have the same impact if it was only for one mission or if done with squadmates. The horror elements in Mass Effect game will never come to the same level IMO.
If it was, it sucked.
It was, and it did start to suck after the first three times. That's why I'm surprised that someone wants this kind of mission back.
Retour en haut
