63 réponses à ce sujet

[Al Foley]

Anyways just finished the DLC and I had this thought just starting it, and Tresspassers bore it out.  Now in my opinion the 'Open World' nature of DA I was wildly successful.  DA I, the base vanilla game, is one of my favorite games of all time.  But after just finishing with Tresspassers, and the way I got invested in the story (via cut scenes no less) and then being sneakily sucked into when I was sobbing like a 2 year old who didn't get his favorite toy and screaming/ laughing like a crazy man because of ****** Solas.  I have to wonder...is this the best way forward?  

 

After all my other favorite BioWare game is ME 2, and that was about as linear as you can get.  And all the story sections in DA I were also linear in nature.  

 

You see there is a thing out there, the idea of which is that sometimes people work better with limited resources and in confinement.  Maybe there was literally too much space for them to work with and fill.  But with the tight narrative and areas of Tresspassers they didn't have room.  They gave us nearly...God I do not even know how long the DLC was...but chalked it nearly till the brim with companon/ character and story content.  Which subsequntly made it feel larger then most things in DA I proper.  

 

On the plus side though you do not have to lose the open feeling of the games.  The 'skyboxes' in Tresspassers was amazing.  The countryside around Halamshiral was gorgeous.  So was what was around the tower.  You can have the illusion of bigness without necessarily having any of the pitfalls. 

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

 

Timing!

[Al Foley]

 

Timing!

[Wulfram]

I've been ranting against open world since before the game was out, so I'm going to say no, it wasn't necessary.

Though this forum tends to be inhabited by story junkies who aren't necessarily representative of the wider audience Bioware targets with the base game.

[ZoliCs]

No it's not. At least not the way you put it. If story is the most important than a lot of things aren't necessary.

 

I wasn't fan of the open world, but only because it felt empty due to all the MMO quests. So if they can do it better I'm down for that.

[9TailsFox]

I've been ranting against open world since before the game was out, so I'm going to say no, it wasn't necessary.

Though this forum tends to be inhabited by story junkies who aren't necessarily representative of the wider audience Bioware targets with the base game.

Same. I think "open world" is what's most wrong with DA:I. I didn't want before it was announced and it was worse then I expected. Empty levels pointless running. Main story disconnected from world.

[Korva]

For me it was a case of "be careful what you ask for, you may get it". Since BG2, I missed the ability to roam a bit, especially since movement restrictions are more obvious in 3D games. I disliked the tiny zones in the games since, the frequent invisible walls, the complete lack of scenery. Not to mention the fact that a knee-high fence and similarly pathetic obstacles were unsurmountable to characters like a Jedi prodigy who could leap fifty feet from a standing start ... but only in combat. Looking back at Inquisition, though, at the sense that the main plot suffered because they crammed too much into the game, I'd rather go back to the older, smaller areas and a tight story focus everywhere -- but I would like to keep the ability to jump. 3D games in which my feet are nailed to the floor are just weird.

 

Though there is no "open world" anyway. Morrowind or Minecraft are open world, this is just a bunch of MMO-like zones scattered across a world map.

[Masque]

The open world was fun.. to an extent. I think perhaps BioWare was overcompensating for the flak they got due to DA2's regurgitation of the same areas over and over again, hence the reason we ended up with a lot of stunning areas but also dreary filler quests and collectibles.

 

Trespasser was great because while it had some little hidden gems to discover by a bit of exploration, it kept you motivated with lots of lore and story and didn't bombard you with needless fluff and filler. 

[TheRevanchist]

It CAN work, in theory. If they are given the time to actually fill out the Areas with real quests, not random tasks and collectibles. As much as I'm sick of people bringing it up, TW3 pulled off Open World with actual side quests. So we know it can be achieved. As a massive TES fan I like open spaces to explore, but I also like Story to go along with it. It can be balanced. It was their first attempt at it. I say give them one more chance to refine it.  

[Andraste_Reborn]

This is an area where I really hope the Dragon Age team doesn't demonstrate their tendency to over-correct. I think they could scale back on the size of the world a bit in order to put more stuff into it, but I don't want to see the exploration aspect go altogether. DAI is the first BioWare game to really pull that off since the first Baldur's Gate, and it would be nice to see them keep it up.

 

(In hindsight, I think DAI could have benefited from having eight exploration areas rather than ten - just cut the Exalted Plains and put the civil war stuff in the Emerald Graves instead, then get rid of the Forbidden Oasis and stick the Temple in the Hissing Wastes.)

[Knight of Dane]

I don't think it was successful at all. The big areas were devoid of fun beyond a certain extent and was clearly approved over proper story content. Emerald graves and Hissing wastes were the biggest offenders where it is almost exclusively scenery with long distance resources.

 

I hope the next dragon age follows the same kind of formula but tones down the size just a tad and uses more time on connecting gamepley to story through better side quests and more main plot content.

[Korva]

Yes, cut back on the number of zones, tie each zone's story to the main plot, and let us see our actions affect each zone as we play through it. A shame that was one of many dropped features, except in Crestwood.

[TheRevanchist]

This is an area where I really hope the Dragon Age team doesn't demonstrate their tendency to over-correct. I think they could scale back on the size of the world a bit in order to put more stuff into it, but I don't want to see the exploration aspect go altogether. DAI is the first BioWare game to really pull that off since the first Baldur's Gate, and it would be nice to see them keep it up.

 

(In hindsight, I think DAI could have benefited from having eight exploration areas rather than ten - just cut the Exalted Plains and put the civil war stuff in the Emerald Graves instead, then get rid of the Forbidden Oasis and stick the Temple in the Hissing Wastes.)

 

As much as I hated the god damn Hissing Wastes....I agree.

[Al Foley]

 

The open world was fun.. to an extent. I think perhaps BioWare was overcompensating for the flak they got due to DA2's regurgitation of the same areas over and over again, hence the reason we ended up with a lot of stunning areas but also dreary filler quests and collectibles.

 

Trespasser was great because while it had some little hidden gems to discover by a bit of exploration, it kept you motivated with lots of lore and story and didn't bombard you with needless fluff and filler. 

Indeed.  And indeed from Dragon Age Origins (and Witcher 3) I liked how each zone actually was directly tied into the main story.  Layering the story between each zone had main plot importance, and then each zone had its own plot, and then each zone had random stuff to do in it.  It is a much stronger way to tell story and the biggest part of DA I, for me, that was a mistake from a game design perspective was the segregation between Story Zones and Exploration Zones.  

 

It CAN work, in theory. If they are given the time to actually fill out the Areas with real quests, not random tasks and collectibles. As much as I'm sick of people bringing it up, TW3 pulled off Open World with actual side quests. So we know it can be achieved. As a massive TES fan I like open spaces to explore, but I also like Story to go along with it. It can be balanced. It was their first attempt at it. I say give them one more chance to refine it.  

 

Now see I think the Witcher 3 is the far worse offender here when it comes to this sort of thing.  Yes its true there were several amazing sidequests in the Witcher 3, and there were in DA I, there was also literally hundreds of minor bits of filler and side quests in the Witcher that were really...frustrating.  I never, ever, got mad at the open world in DA I.  Well crap maybe once or twice.  But Witcher's I have been yelling and cursing and shaking my fist at it.  I mean you have literally hundreds pittly little things to do in the Witcher, and DA I never approached that number.  

 

 

 

This is an area where I really hope the Dragon Age team doesn't demonstrate their tendency to over-correct. I think they could scale back on the size of the world a bit in order to put more stuff into it, but I don't want to see the exploration aspect go altogether. DAI is the first BioWare game to really pull that off since the first Baldur's Gate, and it would be nice to see them keep it up.

 

(In hindsight, I think DAI could have benefited from having eight exploration areas rather than ten - just cut the Exalted Plains and put the civil war stuff in the Emerald Graves instead, then get rid of the Forbidden Oasis and stick the Temple in the Hissing Wastes.)

I agree though I would have flopped out Storm Coast and Fallow Mire.  Just...ugh.  I mean maybe the Solassan Temple but those two areas felt the most pointless and least appeal to me and ugh (disgusted noise)

[Korva]

Getting rid of the Storm Coast would mean getting rid of claustrophobic dark caves full of giant spiders whom the camera just loves to surprise-hug. I'm all for that.

[Wulfram]

I don't think it was successful at all. The big areas were devoid of fun beyond a certain extent and was clearly approved over proper story content. Emerald graves and Hissing wastes were the biggest offenders where it is almost exclusively scenery with long distance resources.
 
I hope the next dragon age follows the same kind of formula but tones down the size just a tad and uses more time on connecting gamepley to story through better side quests and more main plot content.

Hissing Wastes was the only occasion when I really thought that open world worked. Not being drowned in bad side quests helped it have some atmosphere, and the quest had a genuine sense of exploration rather than the icon chasing standard.

edit: Crestwood and Fallow Mire were also quite good, but largely in linear ways.

[TeaLulu]

I feel like it was an overblown reaction to the crappy-copy-paste-areas of DA2. They really wanted to show what they could do, what the engine was capable, what Thedas REALLY is like (not just repetitive alleyways and caves that all look EXACTLY the same). Also, "open world" was the big thing everyone was on about at the time of development. Skyrim, etc.

 

I feel like they've accomplished that, and now its a little less necessary. We can scale it back some. My question is this, to everyone, which of the following options would you prefer:

 

1) Smaller but more diverse and numerous explorable areas, which would all be (fairly) linear similar to Trespasser's areas, but there would be much more of them to work throug.

2) Larger explorable areas, but fewer in total: Think half the number of giant crappy wastelands to explorable that DA:I had, but all of them would be the size of say, the Wastes?

OR

3) Combination of the two: Maybe 3 BIG explorable open areas, and the rest of the map is smaller but more diverse stage-specific exploration areas, that would be accessed due to story reasons and explored. 

 

All of these options would have the supposed default home base(Dorian's estate PUHLEASE), and one main city area (probably Tevinter's capital)

 

I think I'd personally want like 2-3 big explorable areas, mainly for random-arse quests, levelling, with 1 story-specific reason to visit each (Maybe they could be large areas BETWEEN the smaller story areas. Like, you have to explore across this forest to get to the next "cluster" of smaller exploration areas.) and then have the rest be more diverse, but also very specific areas.

[Al Foley]

Getting rid of the Storm Coast would mean getting rid of claustrophobic dark caves full of giant spiders whom the camera just loves to surprise-hug. I'm all for that.

Aside from Bull there really was no point to the zone.  Just...uggh.... on the flip side EP is like my favorite zone from the game. 

[TheRevanchist]

 

 

Now see I think the Witcher 3 is the far worse offender here when it comes to this sort of thing.  Yes its true there were several amazing sidequests in the Witcher 3, and there were in DA I, there was also literally hundreds of minor bits of filler and side quests in the Witcher that were really...frustrating.  I never, ever, got mad at the open world in DA I.  Well crap maybe once or twice.  But Witcher's I have been yelling and cursing and shaking my fist at it.  I mean you have literally hundreds pittly little things to do in the Witcher, and DA I never approached that number.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. Yes. but remember, Geralt is a Witcher, he hunts monsters for a living. Most of those quests was....monster hunting. I agree many side quests were annoying. Mainly because Roach is terrible and Combat feels a bit clunky at times. 

[Al Foley]

I feel like it was an overblown reaction to the crappy-copy-paste-areas of DA2. They really wanted to show what they could do, what the engine was capable, what Thedas REALLY is like (not just repetitive alleyways and caves that all look EXACTLY the same).

 

I feel like they've accomplished that, and now its a little less necessary. We can scale it back some. My question is this, to everyone, which of the following options would you prefer:

 

1) Smaller but more diverse and numerous explorable areas, which would all be (fairly) linear similar to Trespasser's areas, but there would be much more of them to work throug.

2) Larger explorable areas, but fewer in total: Think half the number of giant crappy wastelands to explorable that DA:I had, but all of them would be the size of say, the Wastes?

OR

3) Combination of the two: Maybe 3 BIG explorable open areas, and the rest of the map is smaller but more diverse stage-specific exploration areas, that would be accessed due to story reasons and explored. 

 

All of these options would have the supposed default home base(Dorian's estate PUHLEASE), and one main city area (probably Tevinter's capital)

 

I think I'd personally want like 2-3 big explorable areas, mainly for random-arse quests, levelling, with 1 story-specific reason to visit each (Maybe they could be large areas BETWEEN the smaller story areas. Like, you have to explore across this forest to get to the next "cluster" of smaller exploration areas.) and then have the rest be more diverse, but also very specific areas.

Probably 2.  But just DA I already did 3.  That is what DA Is schtick.  Each are had different functions, large exploration areas, (Hinterlands, Emerald Graves), story focused areas (Emprise, Fallow Mire), and some combination of two (EP).  For instance.  We can argue on which area is which but each one of the areas in DA I did have very different feels to them and purposes.  

 

The big thing though is, no matter which one you chose, again I cannot stress this enough, make sure each area you go to has importance to the overall story arc, like in Origins. 

[TheRevanchist]

I feel like it was an overblown reaction to the crappy-copy-paste-areas of DA2. They really wanted to show what they could do, what the engine was capable, what Thedas REALLY is like (not just repetitive alleyways and caves that all look EXACTLY the same). Also, "open world" was the big thing everyone was on about at the time of development. Skyrim, etc.

 

I feel like they've accomplished that, and now its a little less necessary. We can scale it back some. My question is this, to everyone, which of the following options would you prefer:

 

1) Smaller but more diverse and numerous explorable areas, which would all be (fairly) linear similar to Trespasser's areas, but there would be much more of them to work throug.

2) Larger explorable areas, but fewer in total: Think half the number of giant crappy wastelands to explorable that DA:I had, but all of them would be the size of say, the Wastes?

OR

3) Combination of the two: Maybe 3 BIG explorable open areas, and the rest of the map is smaller but more diverse stage-specific exploration areas, that would be accessed due to story reasons and explored. 

 

All of these options would have the supposed default home base(Dorian's estate PUHLEASE), and one main city area (probably Tevinter's capital)

 

I think I'd personally want like 2-3 big explorable areas, mainly for random-arse quests, levelling, with 1 story-specific reason to visit each (Maybe they could be large areas BETWEEN the smaller story areas. Like, you have to explore across this forest to get to the next "cluster" of smaller exploration areas.) and then have the rest be more diverse, but also very specific areas.

 

Choice number 3 is basically TW3, which I feel mostly worked fine. So I would go with that.

[Al Foley]

1. Yes. but remember, Geralt is a Witcher, he hunts monsters for a living. Most of those quests was....monster hunting. I agree many side quests were annoying. Mainly because Roach is terrible and Combat feels a bit clunky at times. 

Roach is wonderful but I am reffering to the stupid frakin treasure hunts and Q marks all over.  UGH.  Big problem especially considering how poorly balanced the game is in terms of leveling. 

[dsl08002]

I wouldnt call it a success considering that all explorations along with the sidequests were boring and uniteresting. Had they applied the open world on a city rather than a landscape it would have been better

[TheRevanchist]

Roach is wonderful but I am reffering to the stupid frakin treasure hunts and Q marks all over.  UGH.  Big problem especially considering how poorly balanced the game is in terms of leveling. 

 

Roach is wonderful? What game did you play? Roach was the single most annoying thing in that game lol.

 

As for the Treasure Hunts....yes those were horrible...I just stopped doing them after awhile. No idea what the Q Marks are actually, so can't comment on those.

[Al Foley]

I wouldnt call it a success considering that all explorations along with the sidequests were boring and uniteresting. Had they applied the open world on a city rather than a landscape it would have been better

Novigrad

 

....wait...AHEM.