39 réponses à ce sujet

[Sartoz]

                                                                                            <<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>

 

The studio received 26k responses from a survey on its MP maps and published the results in May, 2013.

You can go here: http://blog.bioware..../mass-effect-3/ , for a lookee see.

 

Bio analyzed the results and now have a good idea what players liked, disliked and some of their concerns. Most popular are : Firebase White, Ghost and Giant. Some were fun or easy and others were too open, too hard or the extraction point was too low and open. Some like Glacier was too small while others liked the Reactor interactive map.

 

Armed with this info, how do you want the maps to be designed? How do you think Bio will design them with the FB3 engine?

 

 

[Nitrocuban]

White was best for credit farming on Gold, Giant gave pretty easy over cover grabs in the upper room. Dunno if that says much about what makes good MP maps.

But in general I'd say we want  bigger maps with more enemies (more mooks increasing he need for crowd control) and super bosses like a gunship instead of boss spam. Also more ineractive maps like Hazard Reactor and stuff.

[Shinobu]

I hope Bioware keeps the variety of maps and doesn't design them all to be like Ghost/Giant/White. Having some hard maps isn't a bad thing, and I enjoyed the different challenges posed by having both tiny maps (Glacier) and large maps (London, Hydra, Dagger). There's nothing like being dropped into Hydra with a CQC character and trying to figure out what to do about it. Having crappy cover also isn't necessarily a bad thing as it's realistic. If every EZ is a fortress it will just be boring. After having played MP for >2000 hours I can say that the popular maps from the survey are no longer my favorites because they are too similar and less challenging.

 

I'd like more hazard versions (a Haestrom-like planet would be interesting) and more interactive maps (e.g. Cerby shield generators).

[Sartoz]

White was best for credit farming on Gold, Giant gave pretty easy over cover grabs in the upper room. Dunno if that says much about what makes good MP maps.

But in general I'd say we want  bigger maps with more enemies (more mooks increasing he need for crowd control) and super bosses like a gunship instead of boss spam. Also more ineractive maps like Hazard Reactor and stuff.

 

                                                                                                        <<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>

 

Bigger maps are usually good for sniping.. Hydra, for example.

 

A mix of maps is good since I would mix my play style and the variable weather add an extra level of difficulty and something "new".

 

One good thing about ME3MP is it allows me to use my thumb for Power attacks, with my multi button mouse.

[Sartoz]

                                                                                                <<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>

 

I wonder if the studio thought about designing some maps with environmental destruction features.

 

One can block a path or create a choke point. A medium size map could then, say, become a long range affair and a missle or two can also clear a path, blow doors down... etc.

[Wulfram]

The fact that people liked easy maps is one reason to treat those results carefully. It shows that a lot of people aren't really assessing what makes good gameplay.

[Nitrocuban]

White and Ghost also where part of the demo, Ghost Hazard was an exeptional beautiful map.

I wouldn't read to much into that numbers.

[Xaijin]

The fact that people liked easy maps is one reason to treat those results carefully. It shows that a lot of people aren't really assessing what makes good gameplay.

Frustration at having face your shot off from across the map isn't even a kind of good gameplay. All due respect to the certain gentleman who designed it, cause he's a really nice guy but Condor is a complete clusterfuck and so is London. All three top maps were both defensible and aesthetically on track, as a game designer myself seeing a great concept with giant gaps in its flow is never a good thing, because you'll inevitably get people picking it based on things that have nothing to do with the playspace.

They are objectively terrible, and Goddess isn't much better.

ME:A will likely be 30 fps on the XB1, but I bet 100 bux it won't be without delta timed attacks and cooldowns, so be very very careful what you wish for.

[kajtarp]

for me:

 

absolutely dislike glacier. i think its a too small and boring map.

same for reactor and vancouver. absolutely boring maps for me.

giant is ok, but the layout allows people to camp in the landing zone area. resulting in extremely boring and narrow games. if people doesn't camp its actually good.

hydra is ok, but again, people can camp in the computer room resulting in boring games.

rio is ok, IF people doesnt camp at one end near the ammo box.

jade is ok, but sometimes enemy spawn zones are too close to objectives.

condor is ok, but not my favourite map. 

london is one of my favourite. i feel its a little bit harder to play there then on usual maps, and i certainly appreciate that. 

white ok.

 

favourite maps are dagger and ghost for me. followed by hydra/london/rio/jade. glacier reactor giant i absolutely dislike. condor and vancouver are so-so.

 

Overall i think most of the maps could have been improved in many ways, not to allow the team to camp in the very same room in almost the entire game. Plus many maps are a little bit too small. 

[KainD]

Overall i think most of the maps could have been improved in many ways, not to allow the team to camp in the very same room in almost the entire game. 

 

People stop camping themselves when they get good at the game. When me and some friends and people from the forums played MP religiously some time ago, we didn't care about just completing levels anymore, we only cared about how fast we did it and how good our score is compared to others. Adrenaline module was the only correct armor bonus you could take, and people ran to all 4 corners of the map hunting for enemies, stayed together only on some particular missions to make sure those are done fast. When it was time to go to LZ people ran around trying to kill as many enemies as possible before running to LZ in last 5 seconds. 

[kajtarp]

...

 

maybe thats true with you and your buddies. but i ran quite often into giant landing zone / extraction area campers. Hydra computer room campers, sometimes even into Rio ammo room campers. Can't say i enjoy such games.

[Sartoz]

Frustration at having face your shot off from across the map isn't even a kind of good gameplay. All due respect to the certain gentleman who designed it, cause he's a really nice guy but Condor is a complete clusterfuck and so is London. All three top maps were both defensible and aesthetically on track, as a game designer myself seeing a great concept with giant gaps in its flow is never a good thing, because you'll inevitably get people picking it based on things that have nothing to do with the playspace.

They are objectively terrible, and Goddess isn't much better.

ME:A will likely be 30 fps on the XB1, but I bet 100 bux it won't be without delta timed attacks and cooldowns, so be very very careful what you wish for.

 

                                                                                                  <<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>

 

What else is there?

 

The current ones that I'm famliar are:

 

1. Assassination 

2. Retrieval

3. Devices

4. Hacking

5. Escort

 

Devices and Hacking are timed missions. Assassination is when you kill the four designated targets in sequence.

 

There may be other ideas out there but I'm not a MMO type gamer, so Guild membership or Horde mode attacks is not "my thing".

 

Map designs must have some objective(s) in mind. So, what's your idea(s) on a good map and the type of fighting?

[CHRrOME]

I did take the survey back then and I'm glad to see that they are admitting their mistakes on some of the map layouts. I'm sure this will help them to make more fun and less aggravating maps in the future game.

[q5tyhj]

More small maps (like Glacier), and less maps that destroy my playstation (like Goddess, London, Jade, and every hazard map). 

[Ahglock]

I like all the maps. Some are more challenging than others, but that is a good thing. And q5tyhj reminds me that i hope tehy don't shrink the maps so they work on consoles better.  I haven't found a single map that is even remotly too big in ME3 multiplayer.  I'd like some even bigger ones, and more environmental disruptions and traps while we are at it. 

[spinachdiaper]

MEAMP only needs to build on what ME3MP did, while throwing everything DAIMP does out an airlock.

[kajtarp]

More small maps (like Glacier), and less maps that destroy my playstation (like Goddess, London, Jade, and every hazard map). 

 

yeah so because your rig is not good enough lets screw everyone else?

 

Glacier platinum for example is bollocks. There are more enemies sometimes then room in the map. One boss has a size of half the corridors in Glacier. it's way too small. Sometimes you have no room to manouver because the bosses block physically every route. terrible gameplay.

[Sartoz]

for me:

 

absolutely dislike glacier. i think its a too small and boring map.

same for reactor and vancouver. absolutely boring maps for me.

giant is ok, but the layout allows people to camp in the landing zone area. resulting in extremely boring and narrow games. if people doesn't camp its actually good.

hydra is ok, but again, people can camp in the computer room resulting in boring games.

rio is ok, IF people doesnt camp at one end near the ammo box.

jade is ok, but sometimes enemy spawn zones are too close to objectives.

condor is ok, but not my favourite map. 

london is one of my favourite. i feel its a little bit harder to play there then on usual maps, and i certainly appreciate that. 

white ok.

 

favourite maps are dagger and ghost for me. followed by hydra/london/rio/jade. glacier reactor giant i absolutely dislike. condor and vancouver are so-so.

 

Overall i think most of the maps could have been improved in many ways, not to allow the team to camp in the very same room in almost the entire game. Plus many maps are a little bit too small. 

 

                                                                                              <<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>

 

Interesting

 

Map design criteria should be fun and fair, I think. The whole point in a MP map is for the team to survive. You need ammo boxes and take opportunities to control choke points. Perhaps a wrinkle is to add a risk/award factor such as getting access to a temporary  ??? box that rewards the player with a weapon ugrade or health buff or extra XP points.

[Catastrophy]

Mako racing track is mandatory. With Geth to run over.

[Sartoz]

yeah so because your rig is not good enough lets screw everyone else?

 

Glacier platinum for example is bollocks. There are more enemies sometimes then room in the map. One boss has a size of half the corridors in Glacier. it's way too small. Sometimes you have no room to manouver because the bosses block physically every route. terrible gameplay.

 

                                                                                                  <<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>

 

This looks more like poor planning or just throw more enemies at the enemies.

 

Platinum difficulty should be accompanied by some Platinum maps

[Chealec]

yeah so because your rig is not good enough lets screw everyone else?

 

Glacier platinum for example is bollocks. There are more enemies sometimes then room in the map. One boss has a size of half the corridors in Glacier. it's way too small. Sometimes you have no room to manouver because the bosses block physically every route. terrible gameplay.

 

Glacier was never designed for Praetorians... and it shows.

 

Don't like that map anyway, never did - and I hate the hazard version more.

 

 

FBW however went from being mediocre to one of the best maps in the game when they redesigned it; just adding that extra corridor and tweaking the layout a bit made a huge difference to the fun factor on that map. It's one of the best run-around-like-a-loony-Krogan-and-headbutt-all-the-things maps now... though the hazard version puts paid to that by instantly blinding you as soon as Rage kicks in :|

 

 

If they don't add more verticality into the MEA MP maps, especially if they give some units a jetpack, I'll be kinda disappointed.

[rashie]

More small maps (like Glacier), and less maps that destroy my playstation (like Goddess, London, Jade, and every hazard map). 

The game is not coming out on previous generations.

 

Id be extremely surprised if the PS4/XB1 can't handle maps similar to Goddess, London, Jade and hazard maps, although they shouldn't do maps like London for other reasons.

[kajtarp]

 although they shouldn't do maps like London for other reasons.

 

i think you shouldn't say such things. i dislike glacier but dont say there shouldnt be similar maps.

[Xaijin]

Glacier was never designed for Praetorians... and it shows.

 

Don't like that map anyway, never did - and I hate the hazard version more.

 

 

FBW however went from being mediocre to one of the best maps in the game when they redesigned it; just adding that extra corridor and tweaking the layout a bit made a huge difference to the fun factor on that map. It's one of the best run-around-like-a-loony-Krogan-and-headbutt-all-the-things maps now... though the hazard version puts paid to that by instantly blinding you as soon as Rage kicks in :|

 

 

If they don't add more verticality into the MEA MP maps, especially if they give some units a jetpack, I'll be kinda disappointed.

 

disable film grain

[Chealec]

disable film grain

 

Does that reduce the effect of the snowstorm on the Rage / Adrenaline Rush / Hunter Mode / Whatever overlay?