114 réponses à ce sujet

[JeffZero]

At that point I had 16 playthroughs completed. I like the game.

 

I'll say.

 

I was just talking to someone on NeoGAF who said they had 16-17 playthroughs, too. Man, y'all are dedicated.

[themikefest]

I'll say.

 

I was just talking to someone on NeoGAF who said they had 16-17 playthroughs, too. Man, y'all are dedicated.

The game can be played many different ways. That's my number one reason why I like Bioware games. Replay value.

[JeffZero]

No, I hear ya. I could never do it, myself, but I hear ya. Just impresses me that you've gone for 16 runs! You've really gotten your money's worth.

[pdusen]

Bioware should just follow my steps and the open world will be worthwile

Snip

Please stop spamming that post.

[Zekka]

Please stop spamming that post.

never

[Mathias]

You do only have one option. Walk straight ahead, kill the mooks standing right in front of you, press on down the only path we're given and you'll eventually get to where you're going because there's nowhere else to go. 

 

Yes, it was a literal linear walkway that you strolled down whilst shooting guns and using powers to kill enemies. Ohhh, a different piece of cover? Whoopdi do, it's 10 feet to the left of the piece of cover I was using last. Doesn't change the fact that this game is one of the most linear shooters on the market. Most FPS' even have more open level design than the Mass Effect sequels.

 

 

Bottom line, there is nowhere to go but straight ahead (no alternate routes, no freedom to explore, no sense of discovery), there is no other approach to combat other than killing the enemies that appear in front of your face (no passive or stealthy approach). It's a joke.

 

To each there own. I didn't have one iota of an issue with Mass Effect 1-3's level design (with some exceptions such as the letdown of the final mission in ME3). The different classes, ways to approach destroying the enemy, squad selection and difficulties added plenty of variety to me. If I wanted a sense of discovery, I did side content, and there was plenty of it. But on a main mission, I understood there was a story to tell and I was along for the ride.

[Mcfly616]

To each there own. I didn't have one iota of an issue with Mass Effect 1-3's level design (with some exceptions such as the letdown of the final mission in ME3). The different classes, ways to approach destroying the enemy, squad selection and difficulties added plenty of variety to me. If I wanted a sense of discovery, I did side content, and there was plenty of it. But on a main mission, I understood there was a story to tell and I was along for the ride.

 Too bad there wasn't anything to discover in the sequels side missions. Atleast not any substance. ME2 you land on a planet and kill some mercs and get a Mission Complete screen listing the creds and resources you've received. ME3  side missions were glorified horde modes apparent as soon as you realize they take place on MP levels.

 

 

Yup, there's always a story to tell. Not an excuse for having a singular approach to combat and level design. I.e. straightforward

 

 

 

Notice I keep specifically saying the "sequels". You're the only one bringing up ME1. I have no problem with ME1, I've played through it 30+ times. Atleast a dozen times more than my total amount of trilogy playthroughs. I'm glad ME:A is looking to it for inspiration.

[Mathias]

 Too bad there wasn't anything to discover in the sequels side missions. Atleast not any substance. ME2 you land on a planet and kill some mercs and get a Mission Complete screen listing the creds and resources you've received. ME3  side missions were glorified horde modes apparent as soon as you realize they take place on MP levels.

 

 

Yup, there's always a story to tell. Not an excuse for having a singular approach to combat and level design. I.e. straightforward

 

 

I won't argue with ME3, but I really enjoyed it's level design for the most part. We need to accept though that Bioware had 2 years to develop each of the Mass Effect sequels. Expecting them to create these wide open, multi-branching missions, while being chalk full of open terrains to explore on the side with plenty of things to discover, is highly unrealistic given the circumstances they were in.  I'm not excusing all of their mistakes, but when it comes to complaining about linear design for the missions, let's try to keep in mind Bioware didn't exactly have the luxury of time. Most especially Mass Effect 3.

 

Given what ME3 was suppose to be, and all the promises and variations it had to fulfill, giving that development team only 2 years to develop the game, was absolutely absurd on EA's part.

 

I enjoyed ME2 for what it was. ME1 introduced us to the universe, ME2 was crazy good at the world and lore building. When I wasn't doing missions, I felt there was plenty of things to go out and discover, especially with the multiple hubs. I personally feel it's level design was better than ME3's for the most part. But Mass Effect: Andromeda sounds like it's going to go to the other side of the extreme, which is what DA:I did. If we basically get exactly what ME1 was, with less rehashed hideouts and terrains, I'd be ecstatic for ME:A. 

[tybert7]

Large sounds terrible. I want a game like Mass Effect 2 and 3 and absolutely not a Mass Effect Inquisition. If Andromeda will be again an offline MMO I'm definitly out.

 

 

Large is only terrible in rpgs when story is sacrificed and too spread out... which is what happened in DA:I.

 

 

IF they make a large world AND fill it with plenty of story that is properly spaced, it can be great.  I just have not seen it done before.  It's like people saying they hate long movies, I LOVE long movies if they are engaging, same with book series.  Again, the problem is that what often happens is some sections are laced with uninteresting filler (filler can be interesting to flesh out details... but it's often not) and it drags and becomes a chore.  I would LOVE for mass effect to have enough content to last for several weeks or a MONTH of engrossing gameplay and be just as engaging as previous mass effect installments that usually only took me a week to get through. 

[Inalt]

Large is only terrible in rpgs when story is sacrificed and too spread out... which is what happened in DA:I.

 

 

IF they make a large world AND fill it with plenty of story that is properly spaced, it can be great.  I just have not seen it done before.  It's like people saying they hate long movies, I LOVE long movies if they are engaging, same with book series.  Again, the problem is that what often happens is some sections are laced with uninteresting filler (filler can be interesting to flesh out details... but it's often not) and it drags and becomes a chore.  I would LOVE for mass effect to have enough content to last for several weeks or a MONTH of engrossing gameplay and be just as engaging as previous mass effect installments that usually only took me a week to get through. 

I also have not seen this done before and I think it is impossible. Basically there are two sorts of RPGs:

 

1) Open world with focus on exploration and the world but with the known issues like bad story, characters, quests, presentation and sooner or later boredom. Good examples for open world are Skyrim and Fallout 3, New Vegas. The worst example is DA:I.

 

2) more or less linear with focus on story, characters, quests and presentation. The best examples are Mass Effect (1), 2, 3 and Dragon Age: Origins, (Dragon Age 2).

 

I strongly prefer 2) because this games are the best gaming experience I've had so far.

If I want to play an open world RPG I play Fallout or Skyrim, so it's not necessary that BioWare games have an open world. Besides every game which switched from linear to openworld got worse.

 

Furthermore I prefer content (2)) which is only for a week but which entertain me very well much more than content (1)) which is for several weeks but which bored me very soon. Several weeks or a month of engrossing gameplay is not possible in a game in my opinion. Sooner or later the good content is over and you have to fill it with crap if you want to extend the game.

[medusa_hair]

Not entirely accurate. I played Witcher 1 & 2 before reading the books (all but the most recent are translated to english). The game actually has close to no connection to the books frankly, other than some minor details of Geralt's past and some parts about Ciri when she was a child. 
 
If you're feeling lost by the witcher 1 & 2 it's not because you didn't read the books (they won't help you understand the game / story any further since they aren't connected at all), the reason you likely are struggling (as many do it seems) is because the material is rather... dense. I love the writing in the game as it deals with complex ideas in the realities of "gray" as opposed to the overly convenient good / bad or that 99% of every game (dragon age included) deals with. Unfortunately because the game was written in polish and translated to english, it doesn't always transition with the greatest clarity. It is clear if you focus hard enough on what's going on, but the game / series definitely requires much much more attention by the player to properly follow people, places, events, lore etc. There's a great deal of it, a lot of it is complex, but if you treat the game like a novel where you need to pay close attention (as opposed to many games where you can often only passively focus on the narrative and still comprehend the majority of it with ease) then I suspect you'll no longer struggle following it and get to appreciate how unique (and incredible) this writing is for a game.
 
The game simply requires a greater level of focus by the player than most games... this may or may not be a shortcoming of the game, but once I realized I had to treat the game as if I were reading a book I was able to very thoroughly enjoy its excellent story telling. The problem is, it requires much more investment of attention to it than a game like Mass Effect or Dragon Age which can you can leisurely enjoy their narratives without having to focus intently upon the events etc.

I agree completely with this. I did not play TW1 or 2 but I am currently playing 3 and I really love it. I like that the side quests branch naturally out of the story sometimes and other times they are things you can pick up at a notice board or just by stumbling upon them, but even the side quests have a story behind them. It's not just fetching something, for the most part. And he is free to be quite a jerk too, if you want. I'm only maybe 1/3 of the way through but I think Bioware could learn something from the mechanics (and the journal!) of this game. Also, how to do natural-looking hair - I have Geralt's hair down and it moves pretty realistically for the most part. :-) Seriously, though, I think Bioware knows how to tell a story and create characters; they just need to figure out how to mix in a more open world and side quests in a smoother less forced fashion.

[IndyAnna]

http://wccftech.com/...ss-effect-ever/

 

Alistair McNally ‏@Al_McNally  Sep 11

Spent today reviewing creative progress on #MassEffectAndromeda. I believe it to be the best (and certainly largest) Mass Effect ever! #Hype

 

 

 

Best sounds good, large sounds good, but REALLY scares me.

 

 

Dragon Age Inquisition was by FAR the largest dragon age game ever made in terms of sheer time and land mass and detail.  And while it was orders of magnitude better than a game like dragon age 2, it felt... empty compared to origins.

 

 

I think it was SO big, SO devoid of narrative cut scenes that fleshed out the story that it often played more like an open world mmo rather than a more intense and focused rpg like origins or previous mass effect games.

 

 

A good analogy for this is babylon 5.  Many of you never saw the series, the single greatest sci fi series of all time.  But let me tell you a bit of history, the writer/creator did not know if the show would get a 5th and final season (it did) so he crammed as much content as POSSIBLE into the 4th season.  There was virtually ZERO filler in that entire season, it was dreadnought after dreadnought of powerhouse and engaging episodes.  THAT is my ideal tv season or rpg.  When the show did get a 5th season, the left over stories, while interesting, were not as intensified and concentrated as season 3-4, and so it did not have the same impact.

 

Dragon Age Inquisition was like a tv series giving too many episodes where the writers had to put in a lot of filler.  Even the witcher series which I'm not a fan of seemed to lose some more intense and strong story beats compared to previous installments when it switched to a more open world approach.

 

Previous mass effect games had a great balance, you could travel to different stars, have some superficial exploration with the mako, but mostly the open world was going to major hubs of activity of condensed and intense and engaging story and narrative.  

 

 

When the guy mentions this being the biggest mass effect game, that might just mean big and too spread out with the engaging content.  That was the biggest flaw of dragon age inquisition, please for the love of the flying spaghetti monster, let's not have that same mistake made here.

What killed my fun it DAI was the keyboard and mouse controls. I bought it on sale and played 30 minutes of it and haven't played it anymore.

[Chealec]

... exploring makes little sense when such a threat is looming over you. The plot needs to written such that there are times when there isn;t an immediate threat so that it would make sense for you to go visit all the various planets. There needs to be times when taking the Mako out for a joyride wouldn't be wasting time that could be better used saving humanity. The main plot should not always imply that you are time constrained the way games like DA:I and ME did, yet when it does imply that, you should actually be constrained (so if the story says something is happening now, you should have to go do it now instead of exploring a new planet in the arse end of nowhere).

 

Didn't they attempt to do that with ME2? If you spent too long monkeying about before going to the Collector base to rescue your crew then when you got there more of them would already be liquefied?

[Chealec]

The problem for me is that I just can't get into The Witcher. So yeah, I hope BioWare learns some hard lessons from that series going forward, so that, going forward, I might share in the expertise which CDProjekt has demonstrated.

 

Weirdly I love The Witcher games ... but could never really get into The Elder Scrolls; I own Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim but I dunno, I don't like wandering about without any real purpose. At least in TW3 wandering about meant finding side-quests to kill beasties ... and it's fine in that game as, you know, that's your day job - "beastie baiter".

 

Wandering about to do something entirely arbitrary ... not so much.

[PhroXenGold]

Didn't they attempt to do that with ME2? If you spent too long monkeying about before going to the Collector base to rescue your crew then when you got there more of them would already be liquefied?

 

Yeah - that's part of why I consider ME2 to do this aspect of things, if not perfectly, then better than BW's other games. Having things like this in ME:A would be great. I'd love for things to go as far as completely branching the story should you waste time when the story implies you shouldn't be (i.e. the big bad achieves his goal in that bit of the story), but I accept that's unfeasible. Instead, having things like characters dying is an excellent compromise: you can do what you like, but if you don't react to the fact that things are happening now, there are consequences.