Aller au contenu

Photo

Do Bioware know what "open world" means?


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
26 réponses à ce sujet

#1
mickey111

mickey111
  • Members
  • 1 366 messages

I don't think that they do know: I didn't get far into DA:I, just most of the hinterlands and some of the storm coast. You know what makes open worlds like far cry 4 so good? Wild animals. Random enemy patrols. Neither of these things are marked on the map, and this creates a lot of emergent game play. You can't always know exactly where a patrolling vehicle will come from or their route, but they have potential to either uncover you, kill you as your assaulting an outpost, or alternative, if your sneaky you can hijack the vehicle and use it's mounted gun, or you can booby trap it and detonate it to lure guards into a ball where they can be blown up. 

 

Didn't see much of this in DA:I. I saw a bunch of rifts marked on the map, with their difficulty level clearly marked, I saw a scripted fight between a giant an an ogre, and I soon quit the game after that. Didn't see anything I could describe as emergent gameplay.

 

Bioware, please remedy this in ME:A. Why go to the effort of creating an open world when your traditional ways of hub based narrative could have done the same thing? Emergent gameplay is the one thing open world genre does best.



#2
Helios969

Helios969
  • Members
  • 2 752 messages
Mixed feelings about that. It was tedious and frustrating with those hints. Without might have been worse. Maybe the ability to turn off map hints that want such. Or maybe make the content more interesting.

#3
Faust1979

Faust1979
  • Members
  • 2 397 messages

I hope they focus more on the story than big open worlds. I love Bioware for their stories and interacting with the main characters. 


  • Celtic Latino, Lord Bolton et Aesa aiment ceci

#4
JamieCOTC

JamieCOTC
  • Members
  • 6 343 messages

DAI isn't really an open world game. It's closer to the old style RPGs like Baldur's Gate than either of its predecessors in which you had set areas to explore w/ quests, side quests and random encounters. Granted, the old style RPGs didn't mark things on the map either. What DAI failed to replicate from those old games was the sense of story in every detail. The older games used text and could delve deeper into the story. Example. In one zone in DAI you have to fetch a ring for someone. You get it and take it back and that's it. In a Baldur's Gate style game you'd learn why the ring was important and probably have to kill something to get it back. JoH did a better job of incorporating story elements into the areas than any other area in the main game. Maybe by DA4 they will get it right.



#5
Scofield

Scofield
  • Members
  • 583 messages

DA:I isnt an never will be a open world game as far as im concerned, not even close to it



#6
Jaquio

Jaquio
  • Members
  • 255 messages

DAI isn't an open world, but I don't believe they intended it to be.

 

It's more like one of those wooden facades you see in old time movies where they prop up some painted wood to make it look like it's a full size town.  It's an illusion designed to give you the impression of open world, without actually giving you that.  I think this is by design though.  Open world games are popular, but they're difficult and time consuming and don't mesh well with Bioware's narrative focus.

 

I suspect ME:A will be the same thing.  More environment to explore, but not an open world in the traditional sense.  Just a lot of open set pieces to give us that illusion. 



#7
wolfhowwl

wolfhowwl
  • Members
  • 3 727 messages

I assume it will be the same format as ME1 with a handful of story worlds and a bunch of optional zones for the player to pursue side quests or explore in.



#8
Indigenous

Indigenous
  • Members
  • 249 messages

I don't think that they do know: I didn't get far into DA:I, just most of the hinterlands and some of the storm coast. You know what makes open worlds like far cry 4 so good? Wild animals. Random enemy patrols. Neither of these things are marked on the map, and this creates a lot of emergent game play. You can't always know exactly where a patrolling vehicle will come from or their route, but they have potential to either uncover you, kill you as your assaulting an outpost, or alternative, if your sneaky you can hijack the vehicle and use it's mounted gun, or you can booby trap it and detonate it to lure guards into a ball where they can be blown up. 

 

Didn't see much of this in DA:I. I saw a bunch of rifts marked on the map, with their difficulty level clearly marked, I saw a scripted fight between a giant an an ogre, and I soon quit the game after that. Didn't see anything I could describe as emergent gameplay.

 

Bioware, please remedy this in ME:A. Why go to the effort of creating an open world when your traditional ways of hub based narrative could have done the same thing? Emergent gameplay is the one thing open world genre does best.

Of course Bioware knows what open world means, DA:I is an open world game. How do you define open world games?

 

Just toggle the map/hud or whatever and you won't see enemies on it or there levels. This doesn't seem to be a Bioware problem. As to sneaking around and setting traps... Have you played Dragon Age Inquisition? The rogue class can do that easily, you may need to level up a bit though.

 

If Origins was created using frostbite I am pretty sure there would only be one brecilian forest. It's still, as you said, quite traditional however, Bioware decided to create big areas instead of many small ones. I really can't see what your issue is. :)



#9
Rannik

Rannik
  • Members
  • 695 messages

DA:I is not open world.



#10
capn233

capn233
  • Members
  • 17 385 messages

DAI has more than enough random critters for my taste. There are enemies all over the maps that are not marked, although they aren't really random because they are in set spawn points.

 

Personally I could do without an abundance of enemies and hostile critters that have nothing to do with the mission or story.



#11
Zekka

Zekka
  • Members
  • 1 186 messages

Just follow my rules bio. Also, Open world can be multi regional or one land mass

 

Squash bugs, glitches, and other technical and performance issues. It's no secret that open world games will have lots of bugs at release but developers can always try to squash as much as possible. Quite frankly, this is one of my biggest issues with open world games. Having things like huge framerate drops, broken quests, deleted saves, AI & game freezes and more. It's really irritating playing a game and finding that you can't complete a quest because it's broken or your quick save becomes corrupted so you have to replay 2 hours worth of content again. 

No loading screens. This should be a rule and the only exception should be reloading saves and starting the game. 

The game should have a good content to size ratio. The larger the game world, the more content should be there but at the same time the content should be interesting and every difference counts. 

Make sure your open world makes sense in the context of the story/lore. If I'm on a battlefield, I don't expect hundreds of normal people to be walking around doing normal things. It doesn't make sense. Just like if I were in a desert, I'm not expecting hundreds of people just wandering around in the hot sun. 

The world itself should also be progressing as we play. I don't expect the world to be the exact same as what I saw and felt when I started the game. For the most part, this Same thing applies to the games characters. 

Limit the amount of fetch quests/missions, repetitive missions, mundane tasks, filler and chore side activities and reward the player some way for exploring. I don't think a lot of people like participating in filler material in a game and it becomes bothersome to the player especially in a second playthrough. 

Provide freedom for the player in how they can tackle their objective and limit linearity in exploration. I shouldn't always only have one way to get to somewhere except if said location is special, hidden or heavily guarded. 

Limit the amount of invisible walls and let the player traverse the world easily. I understand if the devs want to put a barrier in the game but there are ways to do this that can make sense. For example, Gothic 1 was set in a prison colony that was surrounded by a magic barrier that would let anything in but nothing out, it would shock you if you got too close. 

Make sure that game mechanics are actually good. Combat should function well, with little stiffness and have fluidity. If you have vehicular exploration make sure the vehicles controls well and it's mechanics functions properly, if you can explore on a horse make sure horse riding controls well works well. If on-foot exploration is the only way to go, make sure it works and controls well and the player is allowed to climb, run, jump, grab on things and do other things that make sense. 

Greatly limit the amount of grinding. If you have creatures in the world that can be killed to basically get xp, then make sure that they don't have unlimited spawning and they won't give you so much xp to greatly over level your character. One way to alleviate the problem is to split the story into chapters so that creatures only spawn in the beginning of chapters and their spawn points, amount of creatures spawned, and what creatures spawned are changed in the beginning of each chapter. 

Don't have unlimited resources in the world with exceptions. This is also on the issue of grinding, don't have unlimited herbs or crafting resources or items to pick up because the players will immediately exploit this. Do things in moderation and make sure certain items are far rarer than others. 

Have a day & night cycle, weather effects, different climate for different locations. It helps with the illusion that the world is alive. 

No static AI. Every AI in the game must have their own agenda as to what they do daily. People should be talking to each other, walking around, doing a job, going to sleep at the appropriate time. Let the AI do things. They should roam the world, take their horses for a ride, drive their car around to another store, even challenge the player to duels, try to steal from the player and more. AI should be reactive too. If you steal from them and you get caught, then they should either attempt to get their items back or call the authority on you. If you attack an AI they should attack back, flee or call the authority on you. If you do things against the AI then they shouldn't have a favorable opinion about you and can shun you from doing things. 

Have random events and random occurrences. Okay, this is something that a number of recent open world games tout but in reality they are somewhat scripted but they are good enough to fool the player. Having things that happen in the living world outside of a quest or mission that has nothing to do with the player but the player can still get involved helps with the illusion that the player can make an impact or is part of a living world. GTA V had this in which you can randomly find people robbing a store and you can kill them and return or take the money for yourself or help them and evade the police. 

Get rid of leveled enemies. You should remove or limit the amount of enemies that go by "level 10 skeleton" all the way up to "level 80" skeleton. Just increase the variety of creatures, monsters, mutants, aliens or whatever. A normal skeleton should have stats that stay the same throughout the game, an orc enemy should have stats that stay the same throughout the game. A fire dragon should have stats that stay the same but are different from the stats that an ice dragon has. Also, when enemies should spawn in places that make sense, no sense in seeing an ice wolf in a desert. 

Make sure to never allow the player to become to over powered, there should still be a sense of challenge from the beginning of the game till the end of the game and this ties into the enemy variety that I mentioned earlier. Let's say, in the beginning of the game you will mostly fight human or bandit level enemies during main missions, later on in the game you should be fighting warrior or paladin level enemies and this also applies for monsters too. 

Don't scale enemies and gear. You don't want to repeat the problem Elder Scrolls IV oblivion had by having bandits that had really high level gear. 

There should be some level of interactivity in the world whether it is having conversations with people or picking things up around the world, or killing any and everybody that you see, stealing, breaking into houses, looting dead people. Interactivity should be there, it should make sense and most interactive items should serve a purpose. If I kill a wolf and take it's teeth, I should be able to sell it's teeth or turn it in to someone. If I see a weapon laying on the ground, I should be able to pick it up. If you are going to have crap in your world, most of it should serve a purpose. 

Diverse locations should exist. Things like having a small town that had only intelligent super mutants living in it, or an underwater planet, or a giant prison colony. Your open world game should have somewhere that is cool or different from the norm in the world and it should be reflected by the people you find there, the items you find there and the story they tell. 

Choices and consequences for minuscule and major actions. If your game takes place in a civilized world then I expect a police force or authority to come after you. If I am carrying my gun out in the open and there are laws against it or the general populace freaks out about it, then I expect the people to flee, attack me, warn me or call the authority on me. If this is set in a world that doesn't have a general authority, then I expect people to take matters in their own hands. 

Have extra activities that can be done in the world to make the player feel like their character blow off steam in the world. Gothic 1 & 2 allow you to smoke various types of weed, Witcher 3 has gwent, GTA series has a huge variety of mini games like tennis, bike riding, racing and more.



#12
SolNebula

SolNebula
  • Members
  • 1 519 messages

I didn't know this forum was lurking with game designers that knows gaming production better than people who do this professionally. You should really send your CV to BW if you think you know their job better than them. All gaming community could benefit from this forum wisdom.

 

totally sarcastic....


  • pdusen et Gothfather aiment ceci

#13
Zekka

Zekka
  • Members
  • 1 186 messages

I didn't know this forum was lurking with game designers that knows gaming production better than people who do this professionally. You should really send your CV to BW if you think you know their job better than them. All gaming community could benefit from this forum wisdom.

 

totally sarcastic....

I'll do it in a couple of years



#14
Malanek

Malanek
  • Members
  • 7 838 messages

Sorry OP, but there is no strict definition for "Open world game" and I'm not even sure if Bioware ever explicitly stated that is what they were making with DAI. I think they made clear that they were trying to merge their typical story driven RPG with bigger environments, flexibility in the order you approach goals, exploration and a strategical element to the story. I didn't really enjoy the game as much as other Bioware games, but then I generally don't like open world games at all, and I didn't feel at all surprised with what they delivered given what I had heard about the game.



#15
Amplitudelol

Amplitudelol
  • Members
  • 453 messages

I don't think that they do know: I didn't get far into DA:I, just most of the hinterlands and some of the storm coast. You know what makes open worlds like far cry 4 so good? Wild animals. Random enemy patrols. Neither of these things are marked on the map, and this creates a lot of emergent game play. You can't always know exactly where a patrolling vehicle will come from or their route, but they have potential to either uncover you, kill you as your assaulting an outpost, or alternative, if your sneaky you can hijack the vehicle and use it's mounted gun, or you can booby trap it and detonate it to lure guards into a ball where they can be blown up. 

 

Didn't see much of this in DA:I. I saw a bunch of rifts marked on the map, with their difficulty level clearly marked, I saw a scripted fight between a giant an an ogre, and I soon quit the game after that. Didn't see anything I could describe as emergent gameplay.

 

Bioware, please remedy this in ME:A. Why go to the effort of creating an open world when your traditional ways of hub based narrative could have done the same thing? Emergent gameplay is the one thing open world genre does best.

 

They probably had to release the game but cut the intended content from the open world because they couldnt keep up with the schedule or whatever reasons. I dont remember a single quest outside the story missions with characters story - the real stuff.. Its all solo mmorpg activities. Next time they might have Frostbite ready to go and they can actually develop the game properly in time. I dont think this will be a problem with Andromeda though.



#16
MrObnoxiousUK

MrObnoxiousUK
  • Members
  • 266 messages

The main problem with a true sandbox game is it can ruin the storyline. You lose all sense of urgency,similar to Skyrim when a God/Dragon is heralding the end times and you are off stealing wheels of cheese to spell out arse biscuits on the side of a hill.


  • Han Shot First, Lord Bolton et ZombiePopper aiment ceci

#17
Salarian Master Race

Salarian Master Race
  • Members
  • 2 823 messages

it means Destiny Clone


  • Rannik et ZombiePopper aiment ceci

#18
SetecAstronomy

SetecAstronomy
  • Members
  • 598 messages

The main problem with a true sandbox game is it can ruin the storyline. You lose all sense of urgency,similar to Skyrim when a God/Dragon is heralding the end times and you are off stealing wheels of cheese to spell out arse biscuits on the side of a hill.

 

Did that! 

 

Though, I'm American, so it came out "arse cookies."



#19
Artemis_Entrari

Artemis_Entrari
  • Members
  • 551 messages

I hope they focus more on the story than big open worlds. I love Bioware for their stories and interacting with the main characters. 

 

This.  BioWare's strength has always been about their characters.

 

Dragon Age Inquisition showed that "open world" is a weakness for them.  The only parts of DAI that actually worked were the few bits associated with either the main story or with the companion quests.  The actual open world part failed miserably, IMO.

 

IF they're going to insist on going open world, then they need to put a lot more time, effort, and resources into fleshing out that portion of the game.  You can't simply label something "open world" by having wide open spaces a player can travel to, but have very little to do in those wide open spaces.



#20
JeffZero

JeffZero
  • Members
  • 14 400 messages

From what I could tell, they spent quite a bit of time and money on said open world. Unfortunately, there was little time or money to populate it with meaningful content, so much of DAI is essentially a ridiculously pretty walking simulator.



#21
ZombiePopper

ZombiePopper
  • Members
  • 396 messages

The main problem with a true sandbox game is it can ruin the storyline. You lose all sense of urgency,similar to Skyrim when a God/Dragon is heralding the end times and you are off stealing wheels of cheese to spell out arse biscuits on the side of a hill.


This ^. Nailed it.
The story is so small and forgettable that many times I forget where I'm at in the story and the reasons for doing specific missions.

Having to clear 2-3 complete areas before progressing to a single, main story mission was just to much. If there had been some kind of connection between many of the areas/side quests it would've helped immensely.
In fact,
Several times
I can remember thinking, "why the heck am I going to this location and what's the purpose of this mission?" I simply forgot after clearing multiple locations.

#22
Draconuuse

Draconuuse
  • Members
  • 1 messages

I think part of the problem people are having is confusing what Bioware meant by open world. Throughout the lead up to release I felt they were really clear on this one point. It is why I have been confused by people complaining about it. I remember it was outright stated that this would not be an open world game in the vein of Skyrim. That sort of game as previously stated would not have worked with Bioware's narative style.

 

Now onto the actual content itself. I honestly like it. I bought this game on release and barely got to skyhold before I gave up on playing for a while. That was really to do with the technical limitations of my computer making the game run like Superman 64. Ten year old computer with brand new frostbite engine did not mesh well. Now recently I have restarted and am now 45 hours into my playthrough. Only finished Hinterland, Storm Coast, and Fallow Mire. Have recently arived in skyhold and done 3 companion quests plus a lot of companion dialogue. (Gotta love Cassie and Varric interactions. Especially her book quest). Now in that time I have felt the game get bigger and bigger. Hinterlands went from being a dangerous hot bed of the templar/mage war along with sneaky bandits and demons and such to a lovely community recovering from a conflict with the only enemies I run across are the ocasional bear or a small unorganized group of bandits. That is more realistic in some senses than a lot of games. Same thing happens in Fallow Mire and Storm Coast.

 

No its not an open world do anything Skyrim clone. It is a well done story driven game wth far more exploration than its predecessors. It takes the worst of the last 2 games and fixes it. It then takes the best of those games and does a descent job of combining those elements. Is it perfect? NO. Is it a good game that delivers on their intended and stated goals? YES.



#23
mickey111

mickey111
  • Members
  • 1 366 messages

I feel like Divinity: Original Sin is approximately the size of the average Bioware game... only less segmented and more open. It's a good middle ground between skyrim and standard bioware stuff. 

 

Also I seem to have over-emphasized map markers, and said too little about gameplay emerging from the environment. Look at the gameplay in Dragon Age: Origins, how you could freeze someone to shatter them, slip them up with oil and burn the oil, and there were about 10 of these so called "spell combinations" in the codex. D:OS was DA:O on steroids. Just about any practical application of the elements you could think of was in the game. You could hit someone with a barrel of water, electrocute that water to do further damage and form a smoky mist for concealment against ranged attackers, you could freeze the water, you could melt the ice, could ignite puddles of ooze, clouds of gas, and so much more. This is the type of emergent gameplay that open world environments are perfect for.


  • Enigmatick aime ceci

#24
Zekka

Zekka
  • Members
  • 1 186 messages

The main problem with a true sandbox game is it can ruin the storyline. You lose all sense of urgency,similar to Skyrim when a God/Dragon is heralding the end times and you are off stealing wheels of cheese to spell out arse biscuits on the side of a hill.

Then the story shouldn't have a strong urgency then. Gothic 1 & 2 did this well.

 

 

 

I feel like Divinity: Original Sin is approximately the size of the average Bioware game... only less segmented and more open. It's a good middle ground between skyrim and standard bioware stuff. 

 

Also I seem to have over-emphasized map markers, and said too little about gameplay emerging from the environment. Look at the gameplay in Dragon Age: Origins, how you could freeze someone to shatter them, slip them up with oil and burn the oil, and there were about 10 of these so called "spell combinations" in the codex. D:OS was DA:O on steroids. Just about any practical application of the elements you could think of was in the game. You could hit someone with a barrel of water, electrocute that water to do further damage and form a smoky mist for concealment against ranged attackers, you could freeze the water, you could melt the ice, could ignite puddles of ooze, clouds of gas, and so much more. This is the type of emergent gameplay that open world environments are perfect for.

D:OS has a level of interactivity that I have yet to see in a Bethesda or Bioware game. Now, I don't know how all of it's elements would work in a 3d world though, seems like it is something that Dragon Age would have needed more than Mass Effect. ME could do well with it's elemental effects.



#25
Salarian Master Race

Salarian Master Race
  • Members
  • 2 823 messages

This ^. Nailed it.
The story is so small and forgettable that many times I forget where I'm at in the story and the reasons for doing specific missions.

Having to clear 2-3 complete areas before progressing to a single, main story mission was just to much. If there had been some kind of connection between many of the areas/side quests it would've helped immensely.
In fact,
Several times
I can remember thinking, "why the heck am I going to this location and what's the purpose of this mission?" I simply forgot after clearing multiple locations.

 

Phantasy Star IV solved this by adding a "chat" function to the menu so characters could discuss the current objective, which served to remind the player what they were supposed to be doing at any given point.

 

This didn't improve the graphics any, so of course no one cared.