167 réponses à ce sujet

[MrStoob]

Previous ME titles have been very much a plot A>B>C>D affair, for reasons of story telling (certain areas not even being accessible prior to a plot point being hit).  In open world, like we discovered in Skyrim, that structure is completely lost and for me 'de-values' the overall tale.  In Skyrim, despite it being part of the charm of the game, the ability to go anywhere and start any quest at any time made the story telling wishy-washy.  I'd prefer that the game 'forces' some direction to maintain a cohesive narrative so BW can play to their strengths.

[JeffZero]

I can't GOTY any game that delivers a story I end up disliking. Hence there are years the term doesn't enter my vocabulary.

I'm so niche. D:

[Lawrence0294]

 too bad the Mako 'fetching' was completely optional.

 

 

Cheers.

I always found this "it's optional so it's ok" statement to be a bit absurd.

 

It's not because content is optional that it forgives it for being bad. Why not have optional content that's good ?

[Catastrophy]

Previous ME titles have been very much a plot A>B>C>D affair, for reasons of story telling (certain areas not even being accessible prior to a plot point being hit).  In open world, like we discovered in Skyrim, that structure is completely lost and for me 'de-values' the overall tale.  In Skyrim, despite it being part of the charm of the game, the ability to go anywhere and start any quest at any time made the story telling wishy-washy.  I'd prefer that the game 'forces' some direction to maintain a cohesive narrative so BW can play to their strengths.

I think what you find lacking especially appealing in open world when they are designed well. For me the story is just an offer, a kind of "if you follow this path you'll get to see most of what this world has to offer", but you can just role play your own thing and admire the polar lights after after climbing the highest peak.

[Mcfly616]

I always found this "it's optional so it's ok" statement to be a bit absurd.

 

It's not because content is optional that it forgives it for being bad. Why not have optional content that's good ?

 Being good or bad is subjective. Secondly, the person I quoted said that the last thing they would want is another "Mako fetch game", to which my response was that it was optional. So, my point still stands: ME1 was never a mako fetch game, it was always optional, regardless of your opinion of its quality.

 

 Being upset over something entirely optional is absurd.

[Lawrence0294]

 Being good or bad is subjective. Secondly, the person I quoted said that the last thing they would want is another "Mako fetch game", to which my response was that it was optional. So, my point still stands: ME1 was never a mako fetch game, it was always optional, regardless of your opinion of its quality.

 

 Being upset over something entirely optional is absurd.

Well, I'll have to disagree with that.

 

Optional or not, it's still content in the game and therefore it's valid to criticize it if bad.

 

Most side quests are optional (kind of the point of a side quest) yet if they are bad, they very much deserve to be criticized. The "mako fecth game" was an aspect that was part of the game that simply wasn't very well executed. The game would have been better by having good optional content no ?

[Zekka]

 Being good or bad is subjective. Secondly, the person I quoted said that the last thing they would want is another "Mako fetch game", to which my response was that it was optional. So, my point still stands: ME1 was never a mako fetch game, it was always optional, regardless of your opinion of its quality.

 

 Being upset over something entirely optional is absurd.

I disagree, whether content is optional or not doesn't matter. As long as it exists in the game then it can be criticized and it should be better. ME1's mako exploration wasn't great but I wouldn't call it bad either. It can be improved greatly.

 

 

 

I bloody hope not.

I thought ME 1 was the worst in the series, nothing would bore me more than another Mako fetch game.

 

Cheers

this is why they are improving. So that the only places you can use the mako on aren't just unexplored barren copy pasted wastelands to something with more variety.

[Pasquale1234]

I think what you find lacking especially appealing in open world when they are designed well. For me the story is just an offer, a kind of "if you follow this path you'll get to see most of what this world has to offer", but you can just role play your own thing and admire the polar lights after after climbing the highest peak.

 

Nicely put.

 

For me, the story is still there and available if / when I want to explore it.

 

The open world allows me to create my own narrative in how I go about it.
 

[Mcfly616]

 The game would have been better by having good optional content no ?

 Sure. Good thing it was good for the time.

 

 

Opinions and all that....

[Mcfly616]

I disagree, whether content is optional or not doesn't matter. As long as it exists in the game then it can be criticized and it should be better. ME1's mako exploration wasn't great but I wouldn't call it bad either. It can be improved greatly.

 Agree to disagree then. I never said optional content shouldn't be criticized. I stated a fact, and the fact still remains, optional content doesn't "make" a game. Therefore, Mass Effect was never a " Mako Fetch Game". Mako exploration was one (optional) aspect of a game with many other aspects that weren't optional at all. 

 

 

Bottom line, calling ME1 a "Mako Fetch Game" is absurd. You never had to fetch anything if you didn't want to, and you can still complete the game. 

 

 

I agree, it can be improved upon. Which is what they should've done in the first place instead of throwing the baby out with the bathwater and going completely linear/corridor shooter with the sequels.

[Guitar-Hero]

Absolutely.

[Panda]

Nah. ME1 was the only entry in the series that had any magic to it. I hope they bring that feeling back, Mako jumping and all. I want them to drown us in uncharted planets.

 

 

The characters and the sidecontent are seriously the only thing about the whole series that everyone can agree on - seems like a more loose, open world and episodic main storyline coupled with a lot of companion content would be the way to go, at least to me. I don't even see why we need a central conflict.

 

Cause open world games suck compared to narrative games ^^

[Mcfly616]

Cause open world games suck compared to narrative games ^^

 The two aren't mutually exclusive.

[Panda]

 The two aren't mutually exclusive.

 

Alright. Open world games suck compared to linear narrative games.

[FKA_Servo]

I thought Mako exploration was terrific, personally. Uncharted worlds were one of most memorable parts of the first game for me. The only thing that would make it better is some beautification, though I wouldn't say no to more variance and a little bit more content density.

[FKA_Servo]

Alright. Open world games suck compared to linear narrative games.

 

What do they suck at, though? If it's telling a linear or detailed story - no, DAI wasn't the best, but there are plenty of examples of open world games that succeed at telling a great story.

 

If you don't like open world games - that's sort of an entirely different thing. Personally, the bigger and more open, the better for me. I hope MEA makes us cry.

[Panda]

What do they suck at, though? If it's telling a linear or detailed story - no, DAI wasn't the best, but there are plenty of examples of open world games that succeed at telling a great story.

 

If you don't like open world games - that's sort of an entirely different thing. Personally, the bigger and more open, the better for me. I hope MEA makes us cry.

 

Open worldness can be okay, Skyrim probably has done it best, but games with open world tend to lose those without. Usually these games become boringly running everywhere and trying to complete all side quests no matter how boring they are. When open-worldness goes badly it ends up making game MMORPG without other players.. In general linear games have better pacing and story is usually stronger as well when resources aren't used in unnecessary stuff.

[Pasquale1234]

Open worldness can be okay, Skyrim probably has done it best, but games with open world tend to lose those without. Usually these games become boringly running everywhere and trying to complete all side quests no matter how boring they are. When open-worldness goes badly it ends up making game MMORPG without other players.. In general linear games have better pacing and story is usually stronger as well when resources aren't used in unnecessary stuff.

 

The problem is that one person's "unnecessary stuff" is another person's primary reason for playing the game.

 

What you call "better pacing", I would call enforced pacing.  Control of pacing works very well in other types of fiction, but I really dislike it in games, since I prefer to play at my own pace.
 

[FKA_Servo]

Open worldness can be okay, Skyrim probably has done it best, but games with open world tend to lose those without. Usually these games become boringly running everywhere and trying to complete all side quests no matter how boring they are. When open-worldness goes badly it ends up making game MMORPG without other players.. In general linear games have better pacing and story is usually stronger as well when resources aren't used in unnecessary stuff.

 

I don't think having a linear, well-executed story has anything to do with the open world setting, though. I'm playing TW3, and as far as open worlds go, it's one of the best I've ever had the pleasure to run around in, but the story is super linear (and very well-told, as those things go). Same deal with any given GTA game, but those are really cited for lousy storytelling (emphatically not my favorite games, but they have focused, linear narratives).

 

Beth games are generally weak in this regard (subjective) but that's because Beth has just never been great at that anyway (subjective - I actually love the main storyline for Skyrim, myself).

[Innocent Bystander]

Agree to disagree then. I never said optional content shouldn't be criticized. I stated a fact, and the fact still remains, optional content doesn't "make" a game. Therefore, Mass Effect was never a " Mako Fetch Game". Mako exploration was one (optional) aspect of a game with many other aspects that weren't optional at all.

You forgot to mention that ~80% of Mako related content was simple achievement/easter egg/moar xp hunting and as such wasn't that bad.

[BiggyDX]

I thought a very sizable (or majority) of Mass Effect players like the concept of exploration in ME1, and wish they had seen more of it in ME2 and 3. So long as this game isn't coming out on the last gen consoles, I think there will be a greater degree of freedom when it comes to usable assets. On the other hand, with EA demanding many of it's big name games use the Frostbite engine, I'm worried there might be a lack of uniqueness; or possibly that the structure of it doesn't allow for great ideas.

 

I feel as though the lands in Dragon Age: Inquisition, by themselves, captured the setting very well; albeit the quests and denizens could have been better. Hopefully, Bioware will learn from its outing with DA:I and compose a better open world than before; though I'm imaging it will still likely be large hub worlds when venturing to different planets. Having only human protagonists should also help in keeping the narration consistent to a degree.

[AlanC9]

Well, there was a conceptual problem with putting exploration in a game with ME1's plot, but that's not quite the same thing as having a problem with the exploration concept itself.

Even if you didn't like ME1's exploration implementation, it wasn't likely that it really hurt your experience too much. You could blow off all of it without any repercussions, and it was so obviously a cheap implementation that you knew you weren't having tons of dev time directed to something that was worthless to you. ( I complained about ME1's exploration plenty, and I was glad it got yanked, but I don't think having it hurt the game.)

Oddly enough, I think DAI was hurt by being more integrated. Not only do you have to do a bit more exploration, but a lot of players seem to have been fooled into thinking that they have to do more of it than they actually have to.

[NKnight7]

Recent games like Metal Gear and Witcher were able to have good stories while being in an open world setting, they're not perfect but they did a decent enough job. I have faith Andromeda will have a good story while having a lot to do in the open world itself.

[Mcfly616]

You forgot to mention that ~80% of Mako related content was simple achievement/easter egg/moar xp hunting and as such wasn't that bad.

 pretty sure I mentioned (or implied) that I liked it in a previous post. I could be wrong.

[Savvie]

I just want Bioware to stick to doing a great story and strong characters, that is what attracts me to their games. If they want to include exploration and open world settings that's fine, but scale it back in size compared to what they tried to do in DAI. Do not sacrifice the main story for the sake of making a ton of large, open areas that lack good side quests and just feel empty.