26 réponses à ce sujet

[Tim van Beek]

Since Skyrim many devs seem to believe that RPGs need to be "open world" in a similar sense, with big maps and free exploration, but obviously it does not always work out well (ugh, DA:I and fetch quests). Just finished "The Witcher 3" (I hope I don't get into trouble mentioning that on a BioWare forum ) and it has a very interesting quest structure:

 

1. Obviously there are the main quests that tell the main story line, which makes up a big portion of the game (depending on how much time one spends exploring, maybe 30%?). Those are basically linear, with the only choice being the order in which the player completes the ones that can be unlocked concurrently. The strong and engaging main quest is IMHO a strong improvement over the rather lame one in Skyrim, which quite a few players did never finish, it would seem (including some who really liked the game and spent 100+ hours with it).

 

2. There are optional side quests that are connected to important NPCs, which influence the main quest and the story arc of the related NPC. Obviously there is a default for each that kicks in if the player does not finish the quest.

 

3. There are optional side quests that tell little stories about the world and its people, but without linking back to the main story line. Completing them may or may not unlock later events and quests.

 

4. There are special quests (special to the universe of the game) that are bascially little stories that lead to a special boss fight as a climax.

 

5. Then there is of course the open world with random encounters and fights. 

 

6. There is an entirely optional mini game (a card game) which is quite interesting, which the player can enrich by finding new cards during exploration and quests.

 

There are a few concepts that I like, which I would like to find in ME:Andromeda:

 

a) Categories 1-3 are similar to ME1 and ME2, which I liked. Category 2 was missing in ME3 and category 3 was pretty boring, compared to the main quests. 

 

b I don't know if category 4 could make it into a ME game, but knowing that these (optional) quests lead to interesting boss fights will certainly interest some players. ME3 basically skips the boss fight concept entirely, which I am pretty neutral about, but others are probably not.

 

c) Category 5 is the least interesting part, IMHO, although it is really nicely done in the game I am referring to (some reviewers say it is one of the best). But story-free, interaction-free, running around with random fights does not appeal to me (I'm sure others will disagree). The armax arena in the Citadel DLC in ME3 did a fantastic job of enabling lots of interesting fights for those interested in this. No open world needed. Comparing the amount of work and money that has to be invested in this category, the ROI seems doubtful.

 

d) I don't like minigames, especially when they disrupt the action and flow of a mission (I'm shooting and running to get to...oh, wait, I first have to solve a little minigame to get some credits from a wall safe, thanx ME2). This is not a problem when the mini game is optional and does not need to be done during quests/missions.

 

Finally: There are no fetch quests. None. No, really. No planet scanning either.

 

I hope some employees at BioWare have the time (and their bosse's approval, if necessary) to play that game, to make up their own mind, and that it is not too late for ME:Andromeda to incorporate some of the aspects that really work well. What do you think?

[Oldren Shepard]

Of course they'll improve in many ways and they're having feed back from some people.

https://twitter.com/...598036782292992

https://twitter.com/...922529877557248

https://twitter.com/...613872450895872

[Indigenous]

I hope some employees at BioWare have the time (and their bosse's approval, if necessary) to play that game, to make up their own mind, and that it is not too late for ME:Andromeda to incorporate some of the aspects that really work well. What do you think?

I know you were explaining the Witcher III's quest structure but it could so easily be Inquisition's. Most games have an objectively similar structure some just do it better than others.

 

I always find it awkward when fans try to give technical advice on a subject they apparently know next to nothing about.

 

I don't think you truly understand what fetch quests are. People just hate the word it seems.

[Boost32]

Category 2 was absent in ME3? We had a lot of side-quests with important npc, like the Rachni with Grunt or the Cerberus scientists with Jacob.

[Tim van Beek]

I know you were explaining the Witcher III's quest structure but it could so easily be Inquisition's. Most games have an objectively similar structure some just do it better than others.

Right, maybe that's not a good starting point, and I should have simply pointed out more precisely what I did not like about, say, what I would call "fetch quests" in ME3: Listening to a conversation, traveling to a star system, scanning a planet, travelling back, having a conversation, earning EMS: boring.

 

 

I always find it awkward when fans try to give technical advice on a subject they apparently know next to nothing about. 

Sure, but I'm not trying to give technical advice (not sure we agree on the meaning of "technical" here), but feedback from the POV of a player.

 

 

I don't think you truly understand what fetch quests are. People just hate the word it seems.

 Probably I don't, and it will stay that way unless someone enlightens me 

[Tim van Beek]

 

 

Of course they'll improve in many ways and they're having feed back from some people.

Sure, and they did that for the previous ME games, too, and still had some unneccessary content that bored at least some players (or many, or all, I hope BioWare's marketing department has better statistics about that then me), like planet scanning in ME2.

 

I intended this thread to be about learning from other games, which BioWare certainly does, too, although I don't expect them to twitter about it 

 

I can certainly understand that this is also a topic that fans on this forum do not like to talk about, in which case we can just let it die in peace 

[Tim van Beek]

Category 2 was absent in ME3? We had a lot of side-quests with important npc, like the Rachni with Grunt or the Cerberus scientists with Jacob.

The difference is that in ME3 those quests did not link back to the main story line at all (except for an EMS rating) and did not change the fate of the NPC in any way, and were about NPCs that made a very short cameo instead of NPCs that played a major role in the main story  (like your squad mates).

[Dean_the_Young]

The difference is that in ME3 those quests did not link back to the main story line at all (except for an EMS rating) and did not change the fate of the NPC in any way, and were about NPCs that made a very short cameo instead of NPCs that played a major role in the main story  (like your squad mates).

 

'Reapers are breeding an army of Rachni' and 'Cerberus is trying to crush a rogue division' don't tie into a main story of the Reaper War and rogue Cerberus?

 

And somehow the survival of the Rachni Queen and/or Jacob and the scientists doesn't change their fates vis-a-vis the alternative?

 

And Grunt and Jacob weren't like squad mates?

 

 

Don't get me wrong- I fully agree that ME2's squadmates were basically irrelevant to the ME2 plot- but Jacob Taylor had more plot relevance in ME2 than Garrus Vakarian did across the entire trilogy because Jacob wasn't effectively optional across all three games. Heck, he was practically the official meeter-and-greeter of welcoming new squadmates aboard the Normandy. He leads a group of scientists who provide foreshadowing on what Cerberus's gameplan in ME3 is, which is definitely related to the plot, and his fate is one of the more variable in the series.

 

How many mental loops do you have to jump through for him to NOT qualify?

[Boost32]

The difference is that in ME3 those quests did not link back to the main story line at all (except for an EMS rating) and did not change the fate of the NPC in any way, and were about NPCs that made a very short cameo instead of NPCs that played a major role in the main story  (like your squad mates).

Jack could become a Cerberus Phantom if you did not help her and her quest connect with the Cerberus history.

The monastery shows us why there are few banshees and Samara fate can change in this Mission.

The side missions on Tuchanka determine the fate of Bakara.

The side missions in Rannoch shows us the Geth side of the Morning war and you can save a Admiral who later might help you to achieve piece between the Geth and the Quarians.

Sorry, but excluding the MP maps, the ME3 side missions were the best in the trilogy.

[Tim van Beek]

@Boost32: Alright, I stand corrected 

[PhroXenGold]

Personally, I feel the most important aspect to side quests, exploration etc, particularly in an open world or quasi-open world setting, is to ensure that doing them makes sense in the context of the main plot. That doesn't neccesarily mean they have to tie in with said plot, but that there should be a good justification for your character to complete those quests, or explore that area, instead of just rushing to get the plot done. If the world (or universe) is about to end, you shouldn't have the time to go check out the view in some remote location.

 

ME1 for example, did this extremely badly. You're in a race against time to stop Saren. If you fail, galactic civilisation is doomed. You always have a good lead on where to go next. So how can anyone possibly justify going to any of the uncharted planets? The side quests that you do while completing the main plot - for example, the guy that asks you to collect the data from his computer on Feros - are fine, but given the time constraints implied by the main story (though obviously, not implemented into the game), going out of your way the way many of the sidequests and all of the exploration requires, simply doesn't make any sense.

 

ME2 conversely, did much better. There were significant periods in the game where you didn't have any leads on the Collectors, thus giving you the time to do sidequests. Strengthening your team was a major goal in and of itself. There weren't tight time contraints implied by the plot - the Collectors needed to be stopped, but it wasn't a matter of "do it ASAP or we're all ******" the way ME1 was. And when something happened which the plot implied needed to be done immediately (e.g. Horizon) you had to do it immediately. (ideally, it would be optional, but if you didn't do it ASAP, then you lost the chance to, and suffered the consequences, but that's getting close to branching stories which ain't happening [sadly])

 

DA:I was mixed on this. While there was certainly justification for doing some content other than the central plot, as gathering resources and strengthening the Inquistion was an important part of winning (both story wise and gameplay with the power system), the main plot did still imply a degree of time contraint which should have prevented you doing nearly as much as you can. Checking out the major locations in a region, stopping the big problems in that area? Recruiting significant groups to your cause? Ok. Visting every nook and cranny in the Hinterlands? Uhhh...guys...the world is falling apart, demons are all over the place, and a crazy darkspawn magister is trying to become a god. Don't quite think we've got the time here, especially as you always knew where Cory's next big move was going to be. There was far too much content for the story being told, and there were no breaks in the story where actually going and spending a lot of time exploring that content made sense. It needed so times when you didn't know what Cory was up to, and you had to go out into the world and find out, rather than always handing the next main plot quest to you on a plate after completing the previous one.

[Tim van Beek]

 

 

If the world (or universe) is about to end, you shouldn't have the time to go check out the view in some remote location.

Agreed, I also read this on other forums, like "how can you do any sidequests"? I think I even read about it 15 years ago, about Baldur's Gate 2, that players rushed to rescue Imoen because they worried about her (chapter 2 in that game could vary widely, as almost all side quests were availabe, but only some "small" amount of gold had to be earned to get to chapter 3).

 

 

 

ME2 conversely, did much better. There were significant periods in the game where you didn't have any leads on the Collectors, thus giving you the time to do sidequests. Strengthening your team was a major goal in and of itself.

Agreed again, it made sense for Shepard to continue to build the team while waiting for the next clue or before starting the suicide mission, because failing the mission is a higher risk than having the collectors attack another colony (ugh, cheating here, I supposed the game would not throw that into my face, like "Shepard, you waited to long, now so many people are dead because of this").

Although, this requirement may become a tall order for writers. It certainly is constraining possible plot progression. 

 

 

 

(ideally, it would be optional, but if you didn't do it ASAP, then you lost the chance to, and suffered the consequences, but that's getting close to branching stories which ain't happening [sadly])

I think the story variations of the Tuchanka mission in ME3 are awesome, partly because they were the result of player decisions based on moral dilemmas and  emotional bonding (or the lack thereof), like "do you trust the Krogans?", "Do you think Mordin has the secret wish to redeem himself by curing the genophage?" etc.

A branch based on "do you like to do this critical story mission in time?" seems to be less awesome to me  .

 

 

 There was far too much content for the story being told...

Agreed, I hate to think about all the work and creativitiy that went into the design of all the areas that are available later in the game, which I wasn't compelled to explore, because there just isn't enough interesting content. Putting "interesting content" into it is even more work, with the risk that most of it is never experienced by most players.

[Torgette]

I said this in the DAI feedback thread: Bethesda's strengths are not Bioware's strengths and vice versa, Bethesda is very good at creating a decentralized quest structure where the main quest itself is less important than the fact that it pushes the player along in the open world itself. Bioware on the other hand has always emphasized the main quest in the traditional storytelling sense, we're to be whisked away on an adventure. How you implement open world into something that is inherently better in a linear structure is an issue that DAI wanted to do but failed to execute. My idea was a quest structure in the form of a tree: you have roots that feed into the trunk, the trunk then branches out into smaller and smaller limbs. In an open world the player would see only the roots and the limbs - the roots being the important main quest missions and the limbs being side quests that feed off of the main quest itself but otherwise are independent. In this respect we're always interacting with the main quest even if in insignificant ways with branches or significant ways with the roots but never the trunk itself (at least not until the point of no return).

[exboomer]

Brought my 9yr old son to work today. He is playing the latest #MEAndromeda build and is giving me some brutally honest feedback. #toughlove

I'm sorry Chris but I don't want some 9 yr old determining how the next game should play out. There's nothing wrong with feedback but really, how much does a 9 yr old really know about ME? (preparing to get flamed for this).

[PhroXenGold]

I think the story variations of the Tuchanka mission in ME3 are awesome, partly because they were the result of player decisions based on moral dilemmas and  emotional bonding (or the lack thereof), like "do you trust the Krogans?", "Do you think Mordin has the secret wish to redeem himself by curing the genophage?" etc.

A branch based on "do you like to do this critical story mission in time?" seems to be less awesome to me  .

 

The story branch from not doing the main plot mission would be to put you on the route to the "bad end". You would be screwed in the long run, your failure to stop him means the big bad is going to win. But you get to see the world collapse around you. You get to struggle on till the bitter end. And you get to experience this knowing it was your faliure to act that lead to it. When I say I want the story to branch, I mean I want it to completely diverge, not just have one quest have multiple outcomes (though Tuchanka is indeed pretty awesome. Espeically without Wrex and/or Mordin)

[Apollexander]

Have you found that in the E3 trailer 'discovery' was what they emphasized? That could be good or bad.

[N7Jamaican]

I'd like for the questing to be similar to ME1

[Krymzon74]

Quests that start simply and snowball into something larger like the one in ME1 were the most memorable to me.

 

Started with Dr. Michel being blackmailed. Took care of her problem then find out about this Banes fellow. Ask Anderson about it and he sends me to Kahoku. Talk to Kahoku he sends me to find missing marines. Report to Kahoku mission complete, but not really. Hear from Kahoku about Cerberus, etc. Point is: something that seemed pretty insignificant was anything but.

 

I also like companion missions. Others may disagree but Samara's stands out to me because of the emotional connection. Miranda's showed she wasn't a total ice queen. These missions help define their characters.

 

I DO NOT want to gather 50 space rox to expand the biodome! Ever.

[PhroXenGold]

Started with Dr. Michel being blackmailed. Took care of her problem then find out about this Banes fellow. Ask Anderson about it and he sends me to Kahoku. Talk to Kahoku he sends me to find missing marines. Report to Kahoku mission complete, but not really. Hear from Kahoku about Cerberus, etc. Point is: something that seemed pretty insignificant was anything but.

 

Heh...it wasn't until about 10 plays of the game that I even discovered there was the connection from Michel to Kahoku. I'd always just spoken to the latter directly after I saw him standing around....

[Sully13]

75% fetch quests 35% Escort quests.

[Tim van Beek]

I said this in the DAI feedback thread:...

We have some overlap, sorry: I intendedt this thread to be about what ME:Andromeda could learn from "The Witcher III". But hey, this is a BioWare fan forum, not a political debate, so some digression is and should be tolerated 

 

 

My idea was a quest structure in the form of a tree:...

Alright, now that looks like an intersting and doable (although ambitious) idea. I like it.

[Tim van Beek]

 (preparing to get flamed for this).

Not by me, you won't. Given that the ME triology is rated "mature", I doubt that Chris will allow his son to play the final version, or that his primary intend was to get valuable fan feedback  It's kinda cute, though. Working in the IT industry, I would very much like to show kids what I'm working on like game developers can...

[Tim van Beek]

 

The story branch from not doing the main plot mission would be to put you on the route to the "bad end". You would be screwed in the long run, your failure to stop him means the big bad is going to win. But you get to see the world collapse around you. You get to struggle on till the bitter end. And you get to experience this knowing it was your faliure to act that lead to it.

Oh, okay. That would be something new, and cool, but it breaks the formula on a basic level, aleniating most of any fan base of any game, so I doubt any game developer will go with this. As likely as the death of a Tom Cruise character in the middle of his next actiopn/sci-fi movie. People pay money to see him prevail in the end. Most people don't pay money for a video game in order to be able to really screw up 

 

 

 

When I say I want the story to branch, I mean I want it to completely diverge, not just have one quest have multiple outcomes...

 

That, too, would be something new and cool, but in this case I just guess that it is too much of an investment for developers? If ME:Andromeda is intended to be the first of another series, you will run into major trouble if you do something like that to the main plot. Unless you let players import save games only if they achieved an ending within the canon, as BW did with the ME2 ending where Shepard dies,

 

BTW (off topic): Any news about if ME: Andromeda is intendet to be the start of a new series? 

[Krymzon74]

Heh...it wasn't until about 10 plays of the game that I even discovered there was the connection from Michel to Kahoku. I'd always just spoken to the latter directly after I saw him standing around....

Same here! Very easy to miss the connection since they want you in the council chamber early and he's easy to spot.

[PhroXenGold]

Oh, okay. That would be something new, and cool, but it breaks the formula on a basic level, aleniating most of any fan base of any game, so I doubt any game developer will go with this. As likely as the death of a Tom Cruise character in the middle of his next actiopn/sci-fi movie. People pay money to see him prevail in the end. Most people don't pay money for a video game in order to be able to really screw up 

 

 

That, too, would be something new and cool, but in this case I just guess that it is too much of an investment for developers? If ME:Andromeda is intended to be the first of another series, you will run into major trouble if you do something like that to the main plot. Unless you let players import save games only if they achieved an ending within the canon, as BW did with the ME2 ending where Shepard dies,

 

Oh yeah, it's completely unfeasible for a game like those BW have to contain a significant "bad" story. Some non-standard game overs perhaps, with a bit of content for them (hi Morinth...) but not hours of content along a route that involve you being doomed to failure. But one can always dream

 

That said, I do remember one game that had a branching storyline that could lead to a properly developed "bad end", and that was the original Wing Commander. It wasn't as story driven as its succesors (or BW type games), but there was a solid central plot. Where it differed from many games is that failing a mission wasn't a game over - instead, provided you survived, the game continued, with the plot branching into one of several paths at key points (usually every 3-4 missions IIRC). Depending on how successful you were over the course of the game, it lead to one of two finales, one where you were leading the attack on the last enemy force in the sector, one where you were fighting a desperate defense of your final base having watched humanity driven further and further back, in no small part due to your failure as a pilot.

 

That Wing Commander was the first video game I owned might've had somewhat of an influence of how I view games since, and what I want from them.