The only real difference was that it abolished the mission/assignment distinction, wasn't it?
It also removed the various mission sub-steps, also the overall assignement description in the journal no longer updates; In ME1/ME2, the mission description would change after completing a certain step or the overall mission to reflect Shepard's actions, in ME3 the starting description will remain even after completing a mission.
Yeah but the stuff that's not on the map shouldn't be on the map. Most of the Citadel series don't have defined destinations in the first place.
I can only speak for the Pc because its been years since the PS version for me. But plenty of flashing systems have no notes on why its flashing. Even if it did, it would be a entirely moronic way to organize things when a journal with some minor details and a couple tabs would do it many times better.
My main issue was the lack of details in the quest. It would be like get the manifold for Bob, and i'm like um I stepped away for a couple weeks I don't know who bob is, or where this manifold might be found . So then you go through the flashing icons and hope while on the right planet you notice the manifold on the ground, but when you miss it you don't know you missed it or if it is on a different planet.
DAI's was simple and effective 99% of the time so I'd just assume it's going to be similar in ME:A.
DAI's was simple and effective 99% of the time so I'd just assume it's going to be similar in ME:A.
I wouldn't assume that. The journal in DA games has always been different from ME games. That said, based on the preview video we won't have a galaxy map. It looks like an entirely different mechanic.
I agree with most posters above. both ME2 and ME3 had way too much information on the galaxy map for me. The labels often blocked the view of other systems. Way too busy.
It was horrible to track your progress in ME3. The UI works fine for combat but not in between. But it wasn't as horrible as the latest Civ games. Try building an empire without having proper feedback about what's happening.
Could be. Which of yours don't have blurbs?
DAI's was simple and effective 99% of the time so I'd just assume it's going to be similar in ME:A.
Related to this, please don't use "Priority" to effectively mean "Quest you should do last because it might close off other quests".
I presume such a quest should be marked in some manner, right? I'm having trouble coming up with a good term for them.
I thought of most of those myself, Thing is, don't those also all imply that it's important to do the mission, not that it's important to delay doing it?
It also removed the various mission sub-steps, also the overall assignement description in the journal no longer updates; In ME1/ME2, the mission description would change after completing a certain step or the overall mission to reflect Shepard's actions, in ME3 the starting description will remain even after completing a mission.
Right. That's a blindspot for me, since I mostly found those journal updates annoying -- one more thing to clear to stop the menu screen from flashing, and they never told me anything I didn't already know.
I suppose they might be useful for missions with multiple steps that can be done in various orders, but we haven't seen one of those since ME1.
That's tough for me to answer because all the priorities have blurbs but some of the side missions don't. Like.... I can tell a side mission is there, but there are multiple side missions in that location, so it flashes but no blurb. Though.....maybe that's why. Even the citadel will do it, unless there's a priority mission. In the end....it's confusing. :/
The side missions have blurbs, but only if you hover the cursor over the flasher. (Don't know if that's true for consoles.) I guess it was to distinguish between main and side quests?
Note that side quests which are required to advance main quests will also put blurbs up without hovering -- for instance, the rachni mission always gets a blurb since it's a possible prerequisite for activating Priority:Tuchanka. So the main/side distinction isn't even coherently applied.
Yeah, this is not a great implementation. I'd just put everything on the map myself, since I'm not a huge fan of distinguishing between main and side quests in the first place. YMMV, though; you might want more guidance than I do.
The side missions have blurbs, but only if you hover the cursor over the flasher. (Don't know if that's true for consoles.) I guess it was to distinguish between main and side quests?
Note that side quests which are required to advance main quests will also put blurbs up without hovering -- for instance, the rachni mission always gets a blurb since it's a possible prerequisite for activating Priority:Tuchanka. So the main/side distinction isn't even coherently applied.
Yeah, this is not a great implementation. I'd just put everything on the map myself, since I'm not a huge fan of distinguishing between main and side quests in the first place. YMMV, though; you might want more guidance than I do.
I thought of most of those myself, Thing is, don't those also all imply that it's important to do the mission, not that it's important to delay doing it?
I very much like having content sensibly organized and sorted - when an author fails to do that with their manuscript, I eventually go into Hulk mode after my rage builds up to high enough levels after being forced to untangle whatever disorganized mess they handed to me to be formatted.
I don't want the future ME:A journal system to make me Hulk out, so yes, they really, really do need to come up with a better way to sort quests and tasks. I don't want to be reminded of work when I'm playing a game to have fun. I liked ME3 overall, but the way the journal was handled...let's just not repeat that, okay, BW?
Retour en haut
