198 réponses à ce sujet

[themikefest]

A solo adventure? Sure.

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

How can that be balanced, though? If a game is playable solo, it's going to be too easy with a party. This is a real problem with DAI already.

Because they set it up for players to have to get companions with you at all times when it comes to fighting and obstacles. I'm saying just make choices to let players decide if they want to have company or no, like Fallout and Elder Scrolls series how they balance choices to make them easy and enjoyable.

[straykat]

I wouldn't mind some solo space cop story or something.. but that chance is gone whatwith destroying the whole setting and all that. Ahem. So now things take on a colonial flavor. So whatever.

[Queen Skadi]

That's a change, not an addition or improvement.

 

No I am pretty sure stealth and additional methods of interacting with the environment would be an addition, and I am pretty sure more complex forms of movement and control such as zero G environments and the ability to scale vertical objects would be an improvement, all of things are much harder to do when you have AI companion pathfinding to worry about.

 

...you mean aside from the companions?


Yes, it is a fact that a character has to interact with other characters for there to exist character interaction.

 

 

Can you not interact with other characters in the Witcher games? It is all well and good to say you would lose the companions in a solo game but without actually saying what it is they add to the game it is hard to know what exactly you mean, I am sure you can have other characters provide most of whatever it is the companions usually provide without having to constantly have them in your party.

 

I'm 90% sure you're just trolling.

 

Are you actually going to answer my question? Can you even answer it?

 

Now 100%. The Witcher is a lone wolf. It's pretty much his thing. He's not part of an organization of any kind. Who would the PC be in this Mass Effect game you want? A guy who pilots and maintain an entire ship by himself, in addition to going on extended combat missions for no reason by himself? Even pirates have brothers in arms and crews to assist them.


Why would we have a full complement on the ship but not a single companion on the battlefield? It's entirely moronic and again, adds nothing. It would just be change for the sake of change.

 

Are there no independent contractors in the Mass Effect universe? Surely it isn't that big a stretch to imagine that a lone wolf type character could operate within the Mass Effect universe, perhaps they have a small ship, perhaps they book passage on merchant freighters to get where they need to go, perhaps they are a solo operative with a shadowy organization who prefers to get in and out without a trace, hell maybe they are a Turian Private Investigator who works from the shadows, use your imagination.

[Malanek]

In terms of pure combat gameplay I actually think it would be a little better without companions. It isn't implemented to really add much. On the other hand, they don't really hurt the experience all that much and I think the banter and conversations are extremely important from a story point of view. And you want to be integrating the combat and the story together as they did throughout the first three. So my vote would be to improve the AI a little bit and make the companions a little more resilient.

[Killroy]

No I am pretty sure stealth and additional methods of interacting with the environment would be an addition, and I am pretty sure more complex forms of movement and control such as zero G environments and the ability to scale vertical objects would be an improvement, all of things are much harder to do when you have AI companion pathfinding to worry about.

 
You would be taking things away to change what the gameplay is. That's very obviously not an addition. To be an addition it would have to come in addition to what's already there.
 

Can you not interact with other characters in the Witcher games? It is all well and good to say you would lose the companions in a solo game but without actually saying what it is they add to the game it is hard to know what exactly you mean, I am sure you can have other characters provide most of whatever it is the companions usually provide without having to constantly have them in your party.

90% of the content of Mass Effect games occurs during structured missions. The vast majority of character/companion interactions occur during missions, not during the brief periods between missions.
 

Are you actually going to answer my question? Can you even answer it?

What's the point? You want Mass Effect to be a completely different franchise from a completely different company.

Are there no independent contractors in the Mass Effect universe? Surely it isn't that big a stretch to imagine that a lone wolf type character could operate within the Mass Effect universe, perhaps they have a small ship, perhaps they book passage on merchant freighters to get where they need to go, perhaps they are a solo operative with a shadowy organization who prefers to get in and out without a trace, hell maybe they are a Turian Private Investigator who works from the shadows, use your imagination.

What are the stakes? What are the benefits to restructuring what the series is to accommodate these changes? I know a lot of people say they want "smaller" stories that aren't about saving the galaxy, but no one actually wants minor stakes. When you start on a very high, dramatic note with extremely high stakes you can't just drop down to Earth and have low stakes. If the next Avengers movie was just about finding the Hulk or fighting some low-power bad guy no one would want to see it aside from hardcore fans. The only place those sorts of stories have is as side stories, not full-on games. A $20, 6 hour DLC as a Turian detective on the Citadel would be cool, but who the hell would be happy about paying $60 for a story that doesn't matter instead of getting a substantive sequel?

[Gothfather]

/snip.

 

 

And don't worry I am sure they could still work in your stupid ****** romance options as well.

 

Troll troll troll troll troll troll.

[Queen Skadi]

 You would be taking things away to change what the gameplay is. That's very obviously not an addition. To be an addition it would have to come in addition to what's already there.

 

Call it what you will but sometimes you need to prune a few weeds to make room for more valuable contributions, while some things may get sacrificed to incorporate new ideas the end result is a net gain, in the end the potential additions are greater than the minor loss.

 

90% of the content of Mass Effect games occurs during structured missions. The vast majority of character/companion interactions occur during missions, not during the brief periods between missions.

 

Eh not really, unless a particular companion is forced on the player for a particular mission the amount of interaction your companions have is rather limited, generally relegated to inconsequential banter that can be provided by other NPCs on the mission and the odd "I object to this particular course of action but I will STFU and get back in line anyway" and there are always plenty of other ways they can have NPCs comment on your actions without having permanent companions.

 

What's the point? You want Mass Effect to be a completely different franchise from a completely different company.

 

It is always possible to do something different while keeping the spirit of the series alive, surely there is always room to try something different from time to time.

 

What are the stakes? What are the benefits to restructuring what the series is to accommodate these changes? I know a lot of people say they want "smaller" stories that aren't about saving the galaxy, but no one actually wants minor stakes. When you start on a very high, dramatic note with extremely high stakes you can't just drop down to Earth and have low stakes. If the next Avengers movie was just about finding the Hulk or fighting some low-power bad guy no one would want to see it aside from hardcore fans. The only place those sorts of stories have is as side stories, not full-on games. A $20, 6 hour DLC as a Turian detective on the Citadel would be cool, but who the hell would be happy about paying $60 for a story that doesn't matter instead of getting a substantive sequel?

 

 

The stakes can be whatever you want them to be, nothing says you can't have high stakes with a solo protagonist and nothing says you can't have lower stakes in a sequel. It really does not matter how big the stakes are as in the end the story never really matters in the long run as it is just a video game, the only thing that matter is whether or not it is entertaining and fun to play.

[Killroy]

Troll troll troll troll troll troll.

[Remix-General Aetius]

Yes. I thoroughly enjoyed Arrival and Omega.

[Mdizzletr0n]

I think it could work. It could still be a TPS with the same classes and abilities along with the ME lore. Sure, it won't play EXACTLY the same without companions but it wouldn't have to.

[Navasha]

I am split on both sides of this issue.   On the one hand, I like the idea of companion squad-mates, however, I don't think the ability to implement them well is here yet.   Companions are always somewhat of a limitation in the past games.   You spend a lot of time baby sitting them.   Functionally, you use them as an extension of your own character by giving you access to some powers that you don't have. 

 

A solo adventure where more versatility in character building is allowed might be pretty exciting.   I would be all for it myself, though I love solo adventures too. 

[Queen Skadi]

But seriously, You should let me come with you. Friends?

 

Oh Bunz, if Bioware allowed it you would always be the first person I would have on my squad.

[KaiserShep]

Yes. I thoroughly enjoyed Arrival and Omega.

 

Omega shouldn't really count. Most of the time, it was Shepard and Aria with Nyreen occasionally joining in. The only time Shepard really has to do it totally alone is during the final battle, which even then still involves Aria to some capacity as you get closer to freeing her. Shepard was probably solo in the Citadel DLC longer than in Omega. 

[Fullmetall21]

Oh come now Bioware is hardly unique in offering party based gameplay nor does it do the most interesting implementation of party based gameplay.

 

Perhaps I am alone in wanting to see Bioware branch out and try something new? It is still possible to have deeper interactions with NPCs in a solo game the only difference would be they would not be fighting along side you for the most part.

 

You know that's exactly what Bioware tried to do with Dragon Age Inquisition. They tried to branch out into the open world model, now I don't know if you were around during the game's release but let me tell you people were NOT happy. As to your idea, I wouldn't be opposed to something that works similar to how Arrival was handled back in Mass Effect 2. Some mission you have to go solo but for the vast majority of them you should have your squad with you. If you make Mass Effect a solo game, you might as well call it an other name because it won't be Mass Effect any more. Also I personally don't see the need to have your companions removed from combat. I could understand wanted to add them into a solo game but why remove them? are they bothering you in some way?

[Queen Skadi]

You know that's exactly what Bioware tried to do with Dragon Age Inquisition. They tried to branch out into the open world model, now I don't know if you were around during the game's release but let me tell you people were NOT happy. 

 

Meanwhile CDProjekt Red did the same thing with the Witcher 3 and it was met with almost universal praise, perhaps just maybe there are other factors as to why people were unhappy with Inquisition.

[Killroy]

Meanwhile CDProjekt Red did the same thing with the Witcher 3 and it was met with almost universal praise, perhaps just maybe there are other factors as to why people were unhappy with Inquisition.

 

And perhaps people are just so far up CDP Red's ass they'll never admit that the Witcher isn't perfect? Seriously, people ignore every flaw in that game. People were calling it the "Dragon Age killer" before it even had a title. It's the tail wagging the dog.

[Sarayne]

And perhaps people are just so far up CDP Red's ass they'll never admit that the Witcher isn't perfect? Seriously, people ignore every flaw in that game. People were calling it the "Dragon Age killer" before it even had a title. It's the tail wagging the dog.

I am just so sick and tired of people fan boying that series so hard.They make good games but please stop circle jerking that cdred is going to kill Bioware.

[Queen Skadi]

And perhaps people are just so far up CDP Red's ass they'll never admit that the Witcher isn't perfect? Seriously, people ignore every flaw in that game. People were calling it the "Dragon Age killer" before it even had a title. It's the tail wagging the dog.

 

Wow that is a lot of salt, nobody has ever said that the Witcher does not have it's share of flaws however I doubt you will find any game that does not have any flaws to speak of, the reason the Witcher is so well received however is because it's strengths far exceed it's weaknesses. Sure you COULD focus on the series flaws and you COULD find things to complain about but you would have to be a very bitter person to go out of your way to find things to complain about when there is so many things the series does really well.

[capn233]

You know that's exactly what Bioware tried to do with Dragon Age Inquisition. They tried to branch out into the open world model, now I don't know if you were around during the game's release but let me tell you people were NOT happy. As to your idea, I wouldn't be opposed to something that works similar to how Arrival was handled back in Mass Effect 2. Some mission you have to go solo but for the vast majority of them you should have your squad with you. If you make Mass Effect a solo game, you might as well call it an other name because it won't be Mass Effect any more. Also I personally don't see the need to have your companions removed from combat. I could understand wanted to add them into a solo game but why remove them? are they bothering you in some way?

 

I didn't get that game until February, after many "leave the Hinterlands" articles or posts were written.  I wonder if there would have been as much of a problem if the game would have simply forced or teleported you back to Haven or Val Royeaux after you take the Crossroads.

 

Of course that still leaves shard anger and the fact that many of the areas seem completely superfluous, but the "go at your own pace" structure seemed like it massively backfired when people failed to do so.

[TheBunz]

Oh Bunz, if Bioware allowed it you would always be the first person I would have on my squad.

I'm sooo excited! Let's go on an adventure

[Fullmetall21]

Meanwhile CDProjekt Red did the same thing with the Witcher 3 and it was met with almost universal praise, perhaps just maybe there are other factors as to why people were unhappy with Inquisition.

 

So to get this straight, you want Mass Effect to be....Witcher with guns? because that's what it sounds like to me. Whether or not CDPR made the Witcher 3 an excellent game is irrelevant because we are talking about 2 very different companies and 2 very different franchises and I truly believe that each company should stick to their strengths. Bioware always used companions and it worked for them remarkably well, so why should they change it now? 

[Queen Skadi]

So to get this straight, you want Mass Effect to be....Witcher with guns?

 

No, I was merely pointing out that despite the fact that both games made the switch to open world gameplay one was well received while the other wasn't suggesting that just maybe Bioware trying something slightly (and I mean as slight as slight gets) different is not the reason the latest Dragon Age games have not been as well received. I am getting a little sick of people using Inquisition and Dragon Age 2 as an excuse as to why Bioware should not do anything different as if putting less effort into your games is somehow this edgy and experimental new game design philosophy.

 

Perhaps you should read the entire thread and then re-read it again to ensure that you have a somewhat informed idea of the subject being discussed before posting knee jerk reactions.

[Neon Rising Winter]

I'd prefer the complete opposite. I'd like to see the design altered so companions are vital at least at higher difficulties. I'm fed up with games designed to use companions but with the difficulty nerfed through the floor to pacify the people who refuse to play well with others. If you can complete it solo it's too easy for me playing with a full party, I'm not selfish, you can have easy mode, but give me a maximum difficulty level that is difficult for the game as designed.

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

No, I was merely pointing out that despite the fact that both games made the switch to open world gameplay one was well received while the other wasn't suggesting that just maybe Bioware trying something slightly (and I mean as slight as slight gets) different is not the reason the latest Dragon Age games have not been as well received. I am getting a little sick of people using Inquisition and Dragon Age 2 as an excuse as to why Bioware should not do anything different as if putting less effort into your games is somehow this edgy and experimental new game design philosophy.

Perhaps you should read the entire thread and then re-read it again to ensure that you have a somewhat informed idea of the subject being discussed before posting knee jerk reactions.

Change is always good, staying the same and not to change is bad.