54 réponses à ce sujet

[Fixers0]

ME1's exploration served it's purpose in that it was primarily a world building/narrative mechanic rather a pure gameplay, it helped establishing the vastsness of  the galaxy by pitting your tiny Mako against a huge and mostly empty enviroment it obviously was far from perfect and it was mostly hampered by technical constraints, but stylisticly it was fine IMO. It's worth nothing though that exploration in ME1 never actually involved pioneering uncharted worlds and recovering assets, well, the collection quests do, but the main assingment always involved some plot that tied in with the greater setting, unlike ME2, were the N7 were mostly disconnected from the narrative.

[Golden_Persona]

ME1's exploration served it's purpose in that it was primarily a world building/narrative mechanic rather a pure gameplay, it helped establishing the vastsness of  the galaxy by pitting your tiny Mako against a huge and mostly empty enviroment it obviously was far from perfect and it was mostly hampered by technical constraints, but stylisticly it was fine IMO. It's worth nothing though that exploration in ME1 never actually involved pioneering uncharted worlds and recovering assets, well, the collection quests do, but the main assingment always involved some plot that tied in with the greater setting, unlike ME2, were the N7 were mostly disconnected from the narrative.

ME2's side missions perfectly displayed how dangerous the Terminus systems were. Every mission had a merc band or Geth trying to carry out some evil plan to trick people or overall ruin their lives. It was a perfect display that there is life that goes on outside of Shepard's mission. For however important Shepard's mission is, most of the galaxy actually doesn't give a damn and continues on regardless of whether Shepard is alive or not. It really helps it feel like a real universe. Not to mention each mission took you to a unique location. Perhaps a good demonstration is the mission where Batarians are planning on launching missiles on a colony as an act of terrorism. It's optional, there's no story showed by a cinematic conversation, but can you imagine what transpires if you don't do that mission? A lot of dead, innocent people. The galaxy moves on, and is alive, crap is happening whether Shepard is there or not.

 

Overall I think both games had side content that served their purposes well. It's just that ME1 made you drive to those UNC missions on boring, empty terrain and the missions themselves were really short and took you to the same few copy-pasted space stations. It really sucks out the fun during multiple playthroughs.

[mickey111]

that depends. have the sales for shallow large open world type games gone down at all since Mass Effect 3?

[Booth]

a huge and mostly empty enviroment

 

 

These little planet maps are huge in your opinion? Then what is small? A 20 squaremeter garden? The only reason why somone has the feeling these maps are huge is that he does not notice how slow the mako is. You can almost ride faster with a bicycle than what the mako did. Of course... if you walk through your garden with the speed of a slug, you could think it is huge

 

And I didnt mention how boring the maps were. The only environments that could astonish me was the planets of the main quests. I can accept that people like walking-speed- or horse-riding-speed in a mediaeval setting. But in a scifi-setting its really strange. Almost as strange as player who get the feeling of "vastness" by a mako that drives with about 20mph over a dozen of 2 squarekilometer maps.

[Linkenski]

I liked how ME1's design felt like BIoware had been scrambling and just adding in the things they kinda liked without really being sure if it made the pacing work or if it was "good gameplay". I know, and I swear this is something the game won't surprise me with, that ME:A's exploration will, fetch quest or not, be like DA:I in the sense that it's too "designed" to have proper gameplay objectives and it's more concerned with that than building good atmosphere or putting story before level design or gameplay.

 

I do love fun games but BW games back when I liked them were always good because they had story, characters, dialogue first, and then passable gameplay on top of that. I never played Mass Effect for shooting and became increasingly confused as ME2 and ME3 started advertising themselves as compelling Gears of War-tier shooters.

 

Kind of win-win that ME3 became a fun game to play, and now I am sold on the idea of ME as a shooter, but with less interactive conversations and less freedom it felt too alienating and DA:I on the other hand added that back in but traded off the "story-first" for exploratory content.

 

I still overall prefer what ME1 did when it comes to emphasis on exploration. It was crap level design, passable gameplay and repetitive environments. You know what? Sounds like KOTOR to me and I had no problem with that game playing it for the first time last year. It reminded me why I wish Bioware had just stuck to their guns and kept doing it their own way instead of mimicking other games like Gears for gunplay in Mass Effect or Assassin's Creed or WoW for quests in DA:I.

 

When Bioware just did things their own way, their games were better off IMO.