In Skyrim you are invited to make your own stories through exploration. BioWare's idea of exploration is to gain experience points.
I'm the first to say Bioware needs to learn lessons in open world design, but you don't make stories through exploring, you generate experiences through the game engine.
They aren't mutually exclusive. The Witcher 3 had an abundance of both, and both were of a very high quality as well. Bioware's problem is that they don't yet know how to mix the two, they've been telling the same story for 15+ years in games that basically play the exact same way. Now that they're (finally) branching out, there are going to be some teething issues.
TW3s writing was rather weak in many areas (politics and poor continuation from TW2), with massive issues popping up in act 3 along with its ending that is a hot mess.
And all of this can be attributed to the game being open world.
Compare the main game to HoS expac, which was better written and took place in a small new area of Novigrad.
TW3s writing was rather weak in many areas (politics and poor continuation from TW2), with massive issues popping up in act 3 along with its ending that is a hot mess.
And all of this can be attributed to the game being open world.
Absolutely agreed.
Though, I don't know if I'd agree that it can all be attributed to being open world. Some of that is purely the effect of negligent and simplistic writing.
TW3s writing was rather weak in many areas (politics and poor continuation from TW2), with massive issues popping up in act 3 along with its ending that is a hot mess.
And all of this can be attributed to the game being open world.
Compare the main game to HoS expac, which was better written and took place in a small new area of Novigrad.
Perhaps, but the writing is still far superior to most games out there, open world or no. I don't think you can say ALL of the drawbacks are down to it being open world though, with no explanation given.
Also, I don't know how to break this to you, but Hearts of Stone is open world too.
Absolutely agreed.
Though, I don't know if I'd agree that it can all be attributed to being open world. Some of that is purely the effect of negligent and simplistic writing.
We know the main writer from TW2 left during the project to go to Cyberpunk. While there was some rather poor stuff before, alot of this could have been salvaged (along with characters like Saskia, Adda ect showing up) in act 3. As it is now, act 3 is a mess of poor writing and OOC to the max on many characters. When the only thing fans can fully agree that was consistent was Geralt himself and being his best version, says alot.
HoS showed that CDP CAN still do it with characters like Gaunter and Olgierd being two of the best characters they have ever done along with a main story that tops the base game in very way and on par with TW2.
Perhaps, but the writing is still far superior to most games out there, open world or no. I don't think you can say ALL of the drawbacks are down to it being open world though, with no explanation given.
Also, I don't know how to break this to you, but Hearts of Stone is open world too.
90% of HoS takes palce in its own area in Novigrad is on on par with TW2s size. This allowed the story to be tighter and have more focus. It also lacks the very convoluted main Novigrad questline that was find x to find y to talk to z to find a to get hints to c and talk to h to then talk to x to talk to v and then save d to get vague hints on c that lead nowhere.
I'm the first to say Bioware needs to learn lessons in open world design, but you don't make stories through exploring, you generate experiences through the game engine.
Bethesda does too.
if the game doesnt have at least 80 hrs of playtime i wont buy it
If the game mentions time on the package i wont buy it
Expolration is not my thing. I try to play Skyrim but in the middle of game because this Exploration (and same sex romance that make me play this game in first place) can't keep me to play more and more like Bioware's game does.
If More Exporation mean less Story,character quest, The answer is NO
If More Exporation mean less side (worthless) quest, The answer is YES
Even knowing this is a KingofTime thread and thus a troll as well as being a lover of exploration in video games:
Absolutely agreed.
Though, I don't know if I'd agree that it can all be attributed to being open world. Some of that is purely the effect of negligent and simplistic writing.
I'd say it's mostly attributed to that. Them turning Radovid into ME3 TIM and having the Order play zero role in it(until reduced to bandit mooks in HoS) made me weep inside.
No Iorverth either, which was major suckage, but all in all, TW3 was at least a very enjoyable game and by far the best in the trilogy in terms of gameplay(not unlike ME3).
EA doesn't release sales numbers for ANYTHING anymore. Not even flagships like FIFA and Battlefield
Indeed they don't. Which doesn't speak in their favor you know.
Indeed they don't. Which doesn't speak in their favor you know.
It also doesn't support the point you were trying to make, which is that not releasing sales numbers constituted proof that DAI was a failure.
Skyrim had a breathtaking landscape, but the story was pretty lame and I got bored pretty quickly. Bioware should stick to what they can do best and that is story and characters. 
.
If I want to play a game like Skyrim, I play "Skyrim". If I want to play a game like "The Witcher", I play "The Witcher".
I play Bioware games, because I want to play a Bioware specific game ...... Bioware have his own style, they sould keep this direction. Give a few more choices through game and at the end and it's even better.
I'd rather play game where developers have written the story for me and not play game where I have to write the story myself. I'm playing and paying to experience story after all. I think Bioware should pretty much do opposite than that, limit game in smaller and tighter areas and focus story and character content within that area.
Why do we love Mass Effect?
For the gunfight?
For the Multiplayer?
For the space fights?
No, we play it for the solo story and the massive replayability.
If you prefer the gunfight, play at Gear of Wars.
If you prefer the multiplayer, play any Callof.
If you prefer the space fight, play Elite.
But let us keep Mass Effect Story mode.
Well let's be real ME 2 and 3 pretty much copied and pasted Gears of War. The reason why it was so easy to pick up for me being a big Gears fan.Why do we love Mass Effect?
For the gunfight?
No, we play it for the solo story and the massive replayability.
If you prefer the gunfight, play at Gear of Wars.
Retour en haut
