40 réponses à ce sujet

[MelThorn]

Let me start off by saying this: I freaking love Skyrim. I've spent thousands of hours of my life playing that game, and I enjoyed every second of it. I modded that game so much that I might have even broken it. Totally worth it. Elder Scrolls games are fun, immersive, and have many aspects to them that other games of their nature can't achieve with as much success.

 

With that out of the way...

 

When I go into an Elder Scrolls or Fallout game, I know what I'm getting. I'm getting that good-old exploration, over-stuffed quest journal, massive talent trees, and lots and lots of roaming around. I go into a Bethesda game knowing what I'm going to get out of it, because it's their style. They just do it right.

 

BioWare attempted something like this in Inquisition. I personally think this was a mistake.

 

Clearly, I like both BioWare's role-playing and action style and Bethesda's exploration style. The two of them combined, however... I can't say I'm much of a fan.

 

I enjoyed Inquisition a lot, especially when it came to getting to know the companions and listening to their banter. I loved that classic role-playing feel of it. I also love exploration. But I have to admit that all of that running around and exploring killed Inquisition's replay value. It took me over a hundred hours to complete my first playthrough of Inquisition. I started up a second playthrough and never finished it. It's interesting the first time, but the second time... I just couldn't do it. I couldn't put my finger on why it was hard for me to replay Inquisition when I've replayed Origins dozens of times with no issues. Then it hit me: there was very little story.

 

If you took out all of the exploring, the game would probably only be six hours long. This is also why the second Mass Effect was my least favorite of the three ME games. What makes me enjoy a long game is its long story, and Mass Effect had a wonderful story. I've already replayed the games four times in a row and I just bought the trilogy a month or two ago. A game having high replay value is pretty important to me. It's like re-reading a really good book that you loved. Imagine if that book had nothing but really big maps in it and every few pages it told a short tale about a demi-god, then went back to the big maps.

 

What I'm getting at here is... I really, really hope Andromeda has a story and it isn't just "run here, run there, run, run everywhere." Or... drive. Whatever. What makes BioWare games great is seeing the main plot unfold by your hands. So far, Andromeda doesn't look or feel to me like a "Mass Effect" game. It may be too soon to tell, but they are putting a lot of emphasis on "exploring" Andromeda's worlds. I'm both titillated and nervous about the outcome.

[AzWarp]

What I'm getting at here is... I really, really hope Andromeda has a story and it isn't just "run here, run there, run, run everywhere." Or... drive. Whatever. What makes BioWare games great is seeing the main plot unfold by your hands. So far, Andromeda doesn't look or feel to me like a "Mass Effect" game.

Agree with the first part.

 

Don't understand where you get that MEA doesn't "feel" like a Mass Effect game. All we have are 2 tiny teasers that don't show much. It may just not "feel" like it because we don't have a game yet...

[Chardonney]

Don't understand where you get that MEA doesn't "feel" like a Mass Effect game. All we have are 2 tiny teasers that don't show much. It may just not "feel" like it because we don't have a game yet...

 

Agreed. Still too little to "feel like" anything. And what little we've actually seen... it does look like ME to me.

[MelThorn]

Agreed. Still too little to "feel like" anything. And what little we've actually seen... it does look like ME to me.

 

You're absolutely right. It is too soon for me to tell that, and I shouldn't make any sort of judgments based on assumptions.

 

I'm only hoping they don't stick with the route they took for Inquisition.

[Il Divo]

Despite ME1 and DA:I having extremely weak exploration aspects, I do think there is a lot of potential from a gameplay stand-point for a game which focuses on space/planet-side exploration. Personally I don't think Bioware will go the DA:I route where there is an npc waiting to hand you a quest every 5 feet. Not to say it isn't possible, just that it's not where I think they'd go with it. 

[MelThorn]

Despite ME1 and DA:I having extremely weak exploration aspects, I do think there is a lot of potential from a gameplay stand-point for a game which focuses on space/planet-side exploration. Personally I don't think Bioware will go the DA:I route where there is an npc waiting to hand you a quest every 5 feet. Not to say it isn't possible, just that it's not where I think they'd go with it. 

 

I have nothing against the concept of "exploring new reaches of space," personally. In fact, I think that would be interesting. But there should definitely be a limit to how much time is spent on such things. Exploring space through a game universe sounds really fun, but it also sounds like it might get exhausting. Inquisition did feel somewhat exhausting to me.

[N7Jamaican]

If Andromeda has a good story, solid gameplay like the 3rd, exploration from the first game, with improved and refined RPG elements (armor and weapon modding/customization). Then it will feel like a Mass Effect game.

[The Hierophant]

After DAI i only want the team to stick with, and improve on top of what they did for ME.

[AzWarp]

I'm only hoping they don't stick with the route they took for Inquisition.

 

Ah! Now I couldn't agree with you more!

[MelThorn]

If Andromeda has a good story, solid gameplay like the 3rd, exploration from the first game, with improved and refined RPG elements (armor and weapon modding/customization). Then it will feel like a Mass Effect game.

 

 

After DAI i only want the team to stick with, and improve on top of what they did for ME.

 

Exactly how I'd want it. Agreed one hundred percent. I was glad to see they brought the weapon-modding system back in ME3. I'd like to see them develop it more. 

[AlanC9]

If you took out all of the exploring, the game would probably only be six hours long. This is also why the second Mass Effect was my least favorite of the three ME games.

So by "story" you only mean main plot stuff? Not, say, companion missions, ME2 loyalty missions, or the like? By that standard wouldn't DA:O come off badly too? Of the four primary missions two are wholly unrelated to the plot, and two have only a tenuous connection.

[Cheviot]

Despite ME1 and DA:I having extremely weak exploration aspects.

Don't even try to lump ME1 and DAI together in the same category; in ME1, most of the explorable space was basically a ground texture, while DAI had more fully realised scenery, with lots of find, interesting battles to stumble upon, a wide range flora and fauna, not to mention the dragons.  Even at the start, when you first explore the Hinterlands, there's a templar-mage war going on in the middle of the zone, which immediately puts it beyond anything in ME1 when it comes to exploration.

[N7Jamaican]

Don't even try to lump ME1 and DAI together in the same category; in ME1, most of the explorable space was basically a ground texture, while DAI had more fully realised scenery, with lots of find, interesting battles to stumble upon, a wide range flora and fauna, not to mention the dragons.  Even at the start, when you first explore the Hinterlands, there's a templar-mage war going on in the middle of the zone, which immediately puts it beyond anything in ME1 when it comes to exploration.

 

ME1 is really the only game you can explore in, don't know why they even said that..

[MelThorn]

So by "story" you only mean main plot stuff? Not, say, companion missions, ME2 loyalty missions, or the like? By that standard wouldn't DA:O come off badly too? Of the four primary missions two are wholly unrelated to the plot, and two have only a tenuous connection.

 

In a way, yes, that is what I mean. Companion missions are stories in of themselves, and while they are definitely part of the big picture and I encourage that every sequel have loyalty/friendship missions in place, the game's main focus should not be those loyalty missions. That was my issue with ME2. I love loyalty and companionship missions, but it put a much bigger focus on those rather than on the main story line. I like a nice balance between the two. The loyalty missions were not "forced" on you exactly-- you didn't have to do them to continue the game-- but you did feel it was necessary to complete them to get a decent ending. 

 

I'm trying to recall missions in DA:O that didn't relate to the plot. Joining the Grey Wardens, searching for the treaties, reaching out to each race from the treaties to join the cause, trying to get the arl in on the cause and trying to save his life, and even stopping Loghain had a great deal to do with the main plot. If there were missions that didn't connect to the plot, I can't remember them very well. It's been years since I've played it, but I remember it following a pretty linear story line.

[timebean]

I agree that DAI has little replay value becuase of the immensity of it all.  It is a grind, and only works well for one solid playthrough.

 

The difference with Skyrim is that it is a more choose your own adventure game.  You don't have to explore everything to progress the central plot (or even play it at all), but can if you want to. And each playthrough feels different depedning on where you decide to explore and what you decide to do. 

 

The porblem is, how can one sucessfully combine open-world with deep story?  Is it even possible to do this well?

 

What about something like this - There is very strong story central to charcaters on the ship. Bioware knows how to do this and do it well. Then, there is an optional aspect that allows you to explore and establish bases on unchartered worlds to strengthen your hold in the new galaxy.  You need to have, say, 5 major settlements established to progress the main story.  You can have more if you want em, but only if you enjoy the exploration stuff. Perhaps there could be, say,  45 worlds to choose from (might not be possible logistically, but just an idea).  Thus, each playthrough could be different.  Each time, you try different worlds for you settlement quests, while reliving the exctiement of the central narrative. 

 

I don't know.  I liked Skyrim for exploration, but the story and chracters were soulless.  I liked DAI companions and story, but the maps were tedious and did not allow true enjoyment of the central narrative.  I don't know if it is possible to have both in the same game without something getting watered down.

 

I am excited to see how they do it in ME:A.  Who knows?  It may just be amazing!

[MelThorn]

I agree that DAI has little replay value becuase of the immensity of it all.  It is a grind, and only works well for one solid playthrough.

 

The difference with Skyrim is that it is a more choose your own adventure game.  You don't have to explore everything to progress the central plot (or even play it at all), but can if you want to. And each playthrough feels different depedning on where you decide to explore and what you decide to do. 

 

The porblem is, how can one sucessfully combine open-world with deep story?  Is it even possible to do this well?

 

What about something like this - There is very strong story central to charcaters on the ship. Bioware knows how to do this and do it well. Then, there is an optional aspect that allows you to explore and establish bases on unchartered worlds to strengthen your hold in the new galaxy.  You need to have, say, 5 major settlements established to progress the main story.  You can have more if you want em, but only if you enjoy the exploration stuff. Perhaps there could be, say,  45 worlds to choose from (might not be possible logistically, but just an idea).  Thus, each playthrough could be different.  Each time, you try different worlds for you settlement quests, while reliving the exctiement of the central narrative. 

 

I don't know.  I liked Skyrim for exploration, but the story and chracters were soulless.  I liked DAI companions and story, but the maps were tedious and did not allow true enjoyment of the central narrative.  I don't know if it is possible to have both in the same game without something getting watered down.

 

I am excited to see how they do it in ME:A.  Who knows?  It may just be amazing!

 

I think that's actually a good idea-- to make the majority of exploration optional so that you don't have to go through it all over again with a new character and you can hit key points the second time around. You could even have different results. The possibilities are sort of endless when it comes to exploring an entire galaxy. I am excited about it, but I do not want it to be, as you said, "grindy".

 

I agree that Skyrim's characters don't have the soul of many of BioWare's RPGs. It makes for a more detached character whenever I play Dragonborn. When I play Shepard, Hero of Ferelden, Hawke, or Inquisitor, I'm a lot more invested in their endeavors, regardless of any disappointing factors.

[timebean]

I will always prefer story to open-world, and Bioware is amazing at that. 

 

Though I did love Skyrim. I was totally this guy when I leanred my first dragon shout. 

 

 

Gah, I love watching things fly through the air! 

[Zekka]

I have yet to play Dragon Age inquisition but I doubt that it is as bad as the BSN makes it out to be.

 

I want Bioware to continue with this more open approach, maybe not a full open world but say larger landmasses and areas.

It is possible to make a large game world with interesting characters and a story after all. Bio just needs to try. There are enough games that Bio can take inspiration from to do this.

[AlanC9]

In a way, yes, that is what I mean. Companion missions are stories in of themselves, and while they are definitely part of the big picture and I encourage that every sequel have loyalty/friendship missions in place, the game's main focus should not be those loyalty missions. That was my issue with ME2.

What's the problem with that, exactly? Loyalty missions in ME2 are "part of the big picture;" they improve your combat performance in the SM. That's why Shepard's doing them. I can see having a problem with this if you didn't like the basic mechanics of ME2 and didn't want to be reminded of them, of course.
 

I'm trying to recall missions in DA:O that didn't relate to the plot. Joining the Grey Wardens, searching for the treaties, reaching out to each race from the treaties to join the cause, trying to get the arl in on the cause and trying to save his life, and even stopping Loghain had a great deal to do with the main plot. If there were missions that didn't connect to the plot, I can't remember them very well. It's been years since I've played it, but I remember it following a pretty linear story line.

What you actually do when trying to recruit the treaty races is unrelated to the Blight. (Same thing for KotOR, where the stuff keeping you from the Star Map usually has nothing to do with the Sith.)

If solving Zathrian's werewolf problem counts as being related to the main plot, why doesn't solving Tali's treason problem count?

[wolfhowwl]

It will be another "Mass Effect 1" type.

 

Prepare to clear outposts and prospect for resources in alien moonscapes...endlessly.

 

Remember all those fanboys and contrarians complaining about the Mako being cut? Blame them.

 

This is the future they chose.

[FKA_Servo]

It will be another "Mass Effect 1" type.

 

Prepare to clear outposts and prospect for resources in alien moonscapes...endlessly.

 

Remember all those fanboys and contrarians complaining about the Mako being cut? Blame them.

 

This is the future they chose.

 

But this sounds awesome.

[MelThorn]

What's the problem with that, exactly? Loyalty missions in ME2 are "part of the big picture;" they improve your combat performance in the SM. That's why Shepard's doing them. I can see having a problem with this if you didn't like the basic mechanics of ME2 and didn't want to be reminded of them, of course.
 

What you actually do when trying to recruit the treaty races is unrelated to the Blight. (Same thing for KotOR, where the stuff keeping you from the Star Map usually has nothing to do with the Sith.)

If solving Zathrian's werewolf problem counts as being related to the main plot, why doesn't solving Tali's treason problem count?

 

You don't gain the wolves or elves in your armies unless you help them with that problem they're having. Tali is part of your crew regardless of whether you help her or not. You don't have to do her loyalty mission for her to join you. You do have to help the elves and wolves take care of their problem for either of them to consider you. Tali and Garrus alike should already be "loyal" to Shepard, if we're going to get technical. They served with him on the SR1 and helped him take down Sovereign. They even treat Shepard like a close and good friend long before he does "loyalty" missions for them. I would have helped them do anything they wanted of me because we were already friends. I realize that Shepard did "die" and was gone for two years, but they both seemed really glad to see him and joined up with him without hesitation. Not even Kaidan/Ashley did that. But I digress.

 

Don't get me wrong, though. I'm not saying at all that I "don't like" the loyalty missions. In fact, I like them a lot. I love the characters and I love helping them out. My complaint is that the encounters and dealing with the Collectors was very brief. I wanted to know much more about them. I wanted to learn more and see more. I felt that the actual story involving the Collectors was shorter and over with much quicker than I wanted it to be-- and that's not because ME2 is a bad game. I love all three Mass Effect games a lot. They're all great. I just left ME2 wanting more than I got. Mass Effect 3, however, did seem like it had much more of that "bulk" to it that I was looking for. Would I have liked little side companion missions in 3 with the addition to the main story line? Hell yeah. And I would have done them, too.

 

I'm not saying the loyalty missions "don't count." But I am saying that I'd like more meat to the main story as well. That's all.

[DaemionMoadrin]

I have yet to play Dragon Age inquisition but I doubt that it is as bad as the BSN makes it out to be.

 

I want Bioware to continue with this more open approach, maybe not a full open world but say larger landmasses and areas.

It is possible to make a large game world with interesting characters and a story after all. Bio just needs to try. There are enough games that Bio can take inspiration from to do this.

 

DA:I isn't bad at all... it just falls critically short of what it could have been. People are more griping about wasted potential than anything else, I think. Oh, and the MMO style timesinks and the grinding.

 

DA:I was nearly there in regards to a large world. It's not open world (not even close) but it consists of huge, beautiful maps. With some more work those could have been filled with interesting elements, which is something I hope they'll do for ME:A.

[StarcloudSWG]

Bioware's strength is in character-based, story-focused games. Making a game 'open world' for the sake of competing with other games that have lackluster stories with no character focus is a BAD idea. It showed in Inquisition, where the vast majority of activity in the world was running around empty spaces, doing nothing to advance the story, and doing fetch / kill quests for the sake of killing time. Skyrim's popularity comes down to the ability to modify the game. THAT is its true appeal, because the stories were terrible. Not every location in ME:A needs to be significant, but *every* location in ME:A should have a tie-in to the main story or advance the main story in some way.

[MelThorn]

It will be another "Mass Effect 1" type.

 

Prepare to clear outposts and prospect for resources in alien moonscapes...endlessly.

 

Remember all those fanboys and contrarians complaining about the Mako being cut? Blame them.

 

This is the future they chose.

 

I can't say I ever complained about the Mako going missing. There are aspects of Mass Effect 1 that definitely aren't perfect. One of those is the Mako.

Unless I'm doing extreme Mako driving! Doing flips and twists, watching it land sideways. That was pretty fun. I got a geth stuck under it once. It was hanging there like a dead bird.

 

DA:I isn't bad at all... it just falls critically short of what it could have been. People are more griping about wasted potential than anything else, I think. Oh, and the MMO style timesinks and the grinding.

 

DA:I was nearly there in regards to a large world. It's not open world (not even close) but it consists of huge, beautiful maps. With some more work those could have been filled with interesting elements, which is something I hope they'll do for ME:A.

 

DA:I was definitely a beautiful game, and exploring it for the first time was interesting. After that, there doesn't seem like there's a lot of incentive to go back in and try again. Even the tough decisions you have to make throughout the game to see different outcomes doesn't seem worth grinding through it a second time. As you said, it was almost there, if it was tweaked just enough.