The main plot doesn't need to be 100% stellar perfect - diva looking goodness, if there's a beautiful and living open world along with a great cast and solid plot with some flaws like any other game, I'm happy.
BTW, MGS5's story is terrific.
no more of this camera thingy DAI had, when you speak to companions or a NPC. You know, the one when there's no cutscene.
Am I the only one that kind of liked that.
Am I the only one that kind of liked that.
Nope. But we're probably a lot quieter than the people who feel that repetitive, canned animations and close up Bioware Face = "Immersion."
Though I'm easy either way. I like free camera dialogue, and I'm used to the "cinematic" approach at this point, so whatevz.
From what I've heard, isn't TW3's main story worse than TW1 & 2 but the side quests are good for an open world rpg?
I cant believe it, do I actually see others saying that Bioware should look to TW3 as a reference for creating narrative in an open world and better integrated side quest?
Yes. And rightfully so.
From what I've heard, isn't TW3's main story worse than TW1 & 2 but the side quests are good for an open world rpg?
I liked everything about it better than its predecessors.
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
Yes. My primary concern.
With the Mako returning, a new galaxy, the protag being called The Pathfinder, and developers pointing to having a strong emphasis on exploration again, all signs are pointing towards another Open World experience, much like DA:I was.Please for the love of god no.I love having plenty of content in a game and feeling like I got my money's worth, but I'm sick of seeing pacing and storytelling take a back seat. DA:I's pacing and storytelling took a huge hit because of this. I just finished playing MGSV. Great gameplay for sure, but oh my god was it's story the worst in the series. There's also been no word that ME:A will be the start of a new Trilogy. I feel as if it's going to have this very self contained story, with a huge emphasis on exploration and side questing. Okay that's awesome for games like Fallout or TES, but I play Mass Effect for the story.
To be completely honest the Metal Gear series has always had pretty bad story telling, I think the convoluted nature of the storytelling gives some players the impression that there is more to the story telling and they just nod along as if they don't notice the emperor's floppy wang hanging out, but in reality the Metal Gear series has always been pretty corny, like a bad military soap opera with the styling of Japanese GI Joe.
While it is true that some of the stories and writing does hit the occasional high note most of it is pretty corny.
I called it over a year ago that it will be a Destiny clone
I still stand by that prediction
Yeah I must admit that is my fear as well.
Destiny? Really? Considering it literally has zero context to its story and plot, and the fact that it's an mmo, ME:A will be nothing like it whatsoever.
It's rather baffling where the whole "open worlds have bad stories" movement came from. But it certainly seems like the cool belief to subscribe to nowadays.
The thing about The Witcher 3 is, even the pacing in that game wasn't the greatest. In Act 2 and Act 3? Oh for sure the pacing and narrative were both great. Excellent imo. But Act 1? Act 1 is where the majority of the game takes place, and the entire story and pacing of Act 1 consists of this:
(though to be fair, all the busy work in Act 1 was well written, it just felt for 30 hours straight you were getting nowhere.)
The funny thing is even though ME2 and ME3 wasn't open world, the environments and level design were beautiful as ALL living hell. I just don't see this need to turn all these Triple A franchises into Skyrim. Dragon Age is a franchise that may be a good fit for Open World sure, but they tried that, and in many people's opinions, they failed. It's still a good game, but it didn't benefit from being Open World.
Let Mass Effect be Mass Effect. We don't need miles upon miles of terrain to explore, wasting tens of hours hunting for collectibles. Give us something with substance is what I say. Everytime I landed on a new planet in Mass Effect 2 and 3, I didn't need to go "Ooooh there's a mountain over there. I wanna climb it!" to feel a sense of awe. The level designs were great as they were, and the designs were gorgeous! Quality over quantity as they say.
Bottom line, when I do a 100% playthrough of Mass Effect: Andromeda, I want to feel like every hour was well spent.
The funny thing is even though ME2 and ME3 wasn't open world, the environments and level design were beautiful as ALL living hell.
Hmm to each there own. They felt linear as all hell.
Act 1 of TW3 isn't too much longer than Acts 2 or 3. The game just throws you into the biggest area in the game world and most of the side content is available from the jump. I admit, I spent more time in Act 1, but that's only because the side content is so fun, addicting and numerous. If I wanted to, I could space the side content out across all acts, or just whip through the story.
You say "Let Mass Effect be Mass Effect" in support of linear level design, you must be thinking of the sequels and forgetting about the original game that started it all. Where we would land on planets with the Mako and climb mountains and such. Sure, it was cookie cutter level design and sparsely populated. But that's what ME:A is attempting to rectify.
So your bottom line comes down to you wanting to 100% without be bothered to do things like "explore", even if that exploration isn't even required. Explains alot.
Destiny? Really? Considering it literally has zero context to its story and plot, and the fact that it's an mmo, ME:A will be nothing like it whatsoever.
It's rather baffling where the whole "open worlds have bad stories" movement came from. But it certainly seems like the cool belief to subscribe to nowadays.
I used to be in that camp.
Mainly it was from not enjoying Bethesda's approach to RPGs, and some disappointment with Dragon Age: Inquisition. DA:I left me with the impression that trying to mesh a strong focus on the characters populating with the game world with an open world approach would leave an RPG that was Jack of all trades but master of none.
TW3 changed my mind on that. I'd be a lot more pessimistic about ME:A if TW3 had suffered from the same problems as DA:I.
Ugh, I really wish I liked The Witcher series. TW3 sounds so good. ;_;
I thought Inquisition did a pretty good job with balancing story and exploration. I loved the Mako. I hated how TW3 added in all these characters that weren;t even mentioned in the first two games. Like Ciri, she was like a daughter to Geralt, but apparently was never brought up. ME and Dragon Age however likes to reuse characters. My favorite was Young Adult Connor.
The thing is, The Witcher is notoriously dense to fully get into -- one of the reasons I haven't been able to. All those characters were, I presume, from the novels. (Well, some of them, anyway.)
The thing is, The Witcher is notoriously dense to fully get into -- one of the reasons I haven't been able to. All those characters were, I presume, from the novels. (Well, some of them, anyway.)
The Witcher series is easy to get into. Each game tells it's own story, I went from Witcher 2 to Witcher 1 but Witcher 1 is better in many ways. CDPR really pulled a Mass Effect 2 with Witcher 2.
You just have to trudge through it's horrific combat and hope that you might like some of it's characters and not get annoyed by how the series uses sex because at times it is laughable or corny. Gotta catch all those sex cards.
Also, the series isn't as hardcore as the devs want to make you believe. They were stupid for having this poor design in TW2 of not being able to drink a potion when you wanted to.
I used to be in that camp.
Mainly it was from not enjoying Bethesda's approach to RPGs, and some disappointment with Dragon Age: Inquisition. DA:I left me with the impression that trying to mesh a strong focus on the characters populating with the game world with an open world approach would leave an RPG that was Jack of all trades but master of none.
TW3 changed my mind on that. I'd be a lot more pessimistic about ME:A if TW3 had suffered from the same problems as DA:I.
Bro, play Gothic and Gothic 2 Night of the Raven. Gothic 2 has aged better but not well enough, they are still great open world rpgs.
My main problem with Bethesda's games in general is how their focus on making their games open is their excuse for poor gameplay mechanics and glitches. You spend 2 decades making games with the same type of mechanics and yet you haven't mastered it.
Ugh, I really wish I liked The Witcher series. TW3 sounds so good. ;_;
The series isn't for everyone of course, but compared to DA:I the side quests are loaded with atmosphere and story.
Yeah. I want that in my BioWare. ;_;
;_; ;_; ;_;
Ugh, I really wish I liked The Witcher series. TW3 sounds so good. ;_;
In so many ways, I still kinda don't, and TW3 is really, really good. The setting has about an inch of depth, and it generally falls short in all the aspects of world building and lore coherence that Bioware really shines, but the characters and story are generally good. Geralt was a pleasant surprise, even if witchers are basically Wolverine Jedi James Bonds. End of the day, it's all so goddamn well-executed - like, I mean, perfectly executed, they made very, very few missteps - that it all works out. The design of the world really is a triumph. It's worth playing, certainly, though I'd recommend maybe not starting at the first game like I did. Reason being that the first game is one of the worst games that anyone's ever made. I didn't read the novels, either - there's plenty of background available in the game itself.
The Witcher series is easy to get into. Each game tells it's own story, I went from Witcher 2 to Witcher 1 but Witcher 1 is better in many ways. CDPR really pulled a Mass Effect 2 with Witcher 2.
You just have to trudge through it's horrific combat and hope that you might like some of it's characters and not get annoyed by how the series uses sex because at times it is laughable or corny. Gotta catch all those sex cards.
Also, the series isn't as hardcore as the devs want to make you believe. They were stupid for having this poor design in TW2 of not being able to drink a potion when you wanted to.
None of the games are really as game-changing as so many people seem to think, except for maybe TW3, but that's due to it just being really, really well-designed. TW2 had its neatly diverging second act, which was pretty cool. TW1 had the best dice poker to recommend it.... and that's it. I really don't think it has any redeeming qualities beyond that.
All that being said, I don't know what Bioware's takeaway from TW3 should be other than "make a good game" or "don't have boring sidequests" - which I don't think they need to be told, they know how to do it. Otherwise, we get into stuff TW does that I hope Bioware never does - like hop on the set protagonist bandwagon, ick. Hopefully though, MEA won't be subject to the weird things (engine change, old gen codevelopment) that inevitably resulted in the end product DAI being so uneven.
Metal Gear Solid V has the worst story of the series? Uh...sure...whatever you say...
In so many ways, I still kinda don't, and TW3 is really, really good. The setting has about an inch of depth, and it generally falls short in all the aspects of world building and lore coherence that Bioware really shines, but the characters and story are generally good. Geralt was a pleasant surprise, even if witchers are basically Wolverine Jedi James Bonds. End of the day, it's all so goddamn well-executed - like, I mean, perfectly executed, they made very, very few missteps - that it all works out. The design of the world really is a triumph. It's worth playing, certainly, though I'd recommend maybe not starting at the first game like I did. Reason being that the first game is one of the worst games that anyone's ever made.
None of the games are really as game-changing as so many people seem to think, except for maybe TW3, but that's due to it just being really, really well-designed. TW2 had its neatly diverging second act, which was pretty cool. TW1 had the best dice poker to recommend it.... and that's it. I really don't think it has any redeeming qualities beyond that.
All that being said, I don't know what Bioware's takeaway from TW3 should be other than "make a good game" or "don't have boring sidequests" - which I don't think they need to be told, they know how to do it. Otherwise, we get into stuff TW does that I hope Bioware never does - like hop on the set protagonist bandwagon, ick. Hopefully though, MEA won't be subject to the weird things (engine change, old gen codevelopment) that inevitably resulted in the end product DAI being so uneven.
Witcher 1 had great music and great quests but I really disliked the back tracking, plus the game had a terrible mac port that made chapter 3 unplayable. For a game that ran on Nevewinter Night's engine, it looks damn good. Graphics has always been a strong point of the series and I like that CDPR doesn't try to scale that back until they made TW3 and flip flopped on this part and made bad excuses.
The execution probably works well because there is a very large source material to back it, I want to see what CDPR can do with their own ip.
Metal Gear Solid's story didn't go bad by going open world, it was always bad. You just grew up.
Even the localizers were laughing at it.
Something Agness has been critical of is Kojima's writing ability, or rather his lack of it. Offering her free opportunity to speak, I asked what she felt, "I think he's very bad at character, and I think he's extremely conventional, as in non-creative, when it comes to plotting.
...
I don't think Kojima's a writer. The fact that he would even be considered one shows how low the standards are in the game industry. Nothing in MGS2 is above a fanfic level. He wouldn't last a morning in a network TV writers' room, and those aren't exactly turning out the Dark Tower series or The Wire."
LOL!
Retour en haut
