183 réponses à ce sujet

[CronoDragoon]

Which is exactly what nobody wants more than likely. The idea of exploration in ME1 was great. The execution was horrendous. The likelihood they were able to flesh out 100 planets and make them all varied with a purpose just isn't very likely. Each planet is either very small or they are going to largely be empty zones like DAI. If the latter, that's a waste of time and effort on BioWare's part.

 

Large empty zones are not an issue until they become one. They can be a boon in space games. What matters is that the large empty zones still have interesting design, and that there are types of planets that aren't large empty zones.

 

Mass Effect 1's problem was that the large empty zones were boring. The environments were totally bland. That doesn't have to be the case.

[wright1978]

Which is exactly what nobody wants more than likely. The idea of exploration in ME1 was great. The execution was horrendous. The likelihood they were able to flesh out 100 planets and make them all varied with a purpose just isn't very likely. Each planet is either very small or they are going to largely be empty zones like DAI. If the latter, that's a waste of time and effort on BioWare's part.

 

Yep. Exploration could end up being a lot worse than it was in DAI.

 

It really depends on how coop were to be implemented. If it's entirely optional and has no impact on the single player experience, I don't have an issue with it. The problem would be if it's required and forced, which I know BioWare will never do. It's more likely to be like Far Cry 4 or ACU rather than Dead Space 3.

Yeah whilst i love the story of ME1, the way exploration was handled in ME1 was pretty terrible imo.

 

I struggle to see how it would have no effect on the development of the single player experience, if suddenly their aim for that experience design is no longer meant to be singular.

[Revan Reborn]

Yeah i knew he was back at Bioware, but he is wasted on SWTOR. Getting him on the new IP would be quite Interesting, he is a good writer, for the most part. 

Well he lives in Austin, TX now. I doubt he's going to fly all the way back to Canada. Plus, Drew loves Star Wars. He was the lead writer on KotOR and he likely prefers the franchise even though he was the principal creator of Mass Effect. We'll see what he does, but it could mean great things for SWTOR.

 

Large empty zones are not an issue until they become one. They can be a boon in space games. What matters is that the large empty zones still have interesting design, and that there are types of planets that aren't large empty zones.

 

Mass Effect 1's problem was that the large empty zones were boring. The environments were totally bland. That doesn't have to be the case.

They are an issue because they are boring and offer no incentive to explore. Unless there is a reason to explore these planets, then the game has already failed. I don't care how "interesting" the environments may appear, there needs to be a reason to be there. Most of the environments in DAI looked interesting. That wasn't why environments were universally panned in the game.

[CronoDragoon]

In any case as long as progress isn't gated like DAI I don't see why it would matter. Players could skip planets they don't like and just focus on story content if they want. Doing so will likely yield a game length equivalent to the older ME games (~35 hours) whereas exploring everything will probably take much longer.

 

They are an issue because they are boring and offer no incentive to explore. Unless there is a reason to explore these planets, then the game has already failed. I don't care how "interesting" the environments may appear, there needs to be a reason to be there. Most of the environments in DAI looked interesting. That wasn't why environments were universally panned in the game.

 

There's already a built-in reason for you to explore, hence being the Pathfinder. I understand what you mean, though. Nevertheless, comparing DAI and MEA is a mistake. One is high fantasy and another is a space exploration/colonization game. There can and should be different expectations for what kind of exploration will take place. In high fantasy you can stick a witch in the middle of the wilderness and it's fine. Do the same in MEA and it's super contrived.

 

It honestly sounds like you don't value exploration for its own sake at all. In which case, fair enough, but you are being warned well ahead of time that MEA is going to have a heavy exploration focus. Expecting to explore and be rewarded with story content on, for example, planets with hostile environments is I think an unreasonable expectation.

[SardaukarElite]

The number of planets is meaningless without a sense of how BioWare is approaching scale. Traveling to a planet, scanning it, landing on it, looking around and finding an artifact could be as significant as fighting through three rooms of goons. Both could be satisfying steps in the story, procedurally generated, or complete wastes of time.

 

Right now I'm most concerned about areas being overcrowded with insignificant actions like Inquisitions were. I'd rather a large, emptier area with a clear purpose. 

[CronoDragoon]

The number of planets is meaningless without a sense of how BioWare is approaching scale. Traveling to a planet, scanning it, landing on it, looking around and finding an artifact could be as significant as fighting through three rooms of goons. Both could be satisfying steps in the story, procedurally generated, or complete wastes of time.

 

Right now I'm most concerned about areas being overcrowded with insignificant actions like Inquisitions were. I'd rather a large, emptier area with a clear purpose. 

 

This is a good point. Just like there's no real reason for there to be a witch-type character in the middle of a planet, there shouldn't be a bunch of 0/10 collect the caches quests. I suspect there will be collections, though, because AAA companies are terrified of giving their players truly empty space.

[Heimdall]

Really not thrilled by this 100 planet business. I mean, I get that large empty spaces can have their place as long as they're interesting, but will they stay interesting on playthrough 3 or 4? Will I need to visit every one to complete all the content? Worst of all, will these worlds be justified by bland annoying collection quests? The completionist in my is groaning...

[Revan Reborn]

Really not thrilled by this 100 planet business. I mean, I get that large empty spaces can have their place as long as they're interesting, but will they stay interesting on playthrough 3 or 4? Will I need to visit every one to complete all the content? Worst of all, will these worlds be justified by bland annoying collection quests? The completionist in my is groaning...

Exactly. It reminds me of the mindless planet scanning in ME2, but worse. If there is no meaningful reason to really explore these planets, it's just a waste of time and effort. Not to mention, it will have no replay value whatsoever. Quantity is not always a good thing if quality has been sacrificed as a result.

[wright1978]

Really not thrilled by this 100 planet business. I mean, I get that large empty spaces can have their place as long as they're interesting, but will they stay interesting on playthrough 3 or 4? Will I need to visit every one to complete all the content? Worst of all, will these worlds be justified by bland annoying collection quests? The completionist in my is groaning...

 

For me empty space can be interesting but it needs to have something worthwhile storywise at the end of that emptiness. If its just worthless collection caches or generic mooks in a sand setting, in an ice setting, in a forest setting, in a lava setting, in another sand setting, in another ice setting ....... Yes i'll be groaning too if that's the case.

[Andrew Lucas]

The 100 planets already sounds exciting! Just the thought of exploring wild locations by my own gets me pumped, not every single planet needs to be filled with side quests that are like a whole new game, if it's balanced between planets with actual story and others that doesn't really have one, I'll be more than happy.

Loving everything so far.

[CrimsonN7]

Co-op in the SP campaign eh, if true I look forward to the backlash here.

[Iakus]

i believe it. Like I said in another thread, my husband's cousin is a tester and he played some 25 minutes of Andromeda right before Thanksgiving. All he said was that the transition from ship to Mako was one fail swoop. 

That's either a really hilarious typo or a really hilarious  criticism of the system.  

[Iakus]

The 100 planets already sounds exciting! Just the thought of exploring wild locations by my own gets me pumped, not every single planet needs to be filled with side quests that are like a whole new game, if it's balanced between planets with actual story and others that doesn't really have one, I'll be more than happy.

Loving everything so far.

Yeah it'll be great right up until your buddy Lt Garvey starts spamming you with messages about colonies on these worlds needing to be rescued from Space Mutants 

[malloc]

Co-op in single player? Bioware has been looking at original sin?

[Iakus]

Yeah, but those missions were specific to the co-op character, which was a nice way of doing it. It didn't change Carver if you played Single Player, you just didn't get his experience with the visions etc. Not saying its perfect, but it wasn't the worst of handling it.

If you lose story content because you're not playing coop (or MP of any kind), that's a Bad Thing.

[Akrabra]

If you lose story content because you're not playing coop (or MP of any kind), that's a Bad Thing.

You're a bad thing!

[DaemionMoadrin]

Stop whining and make a friend? Or, use the very accessible and easy matchmaking system? I've never found complaints against coop to ever be grounded in any tangible reasoning, especially when entirely optional. It's just whining for the sake of whining because you don't like something. Saints Row has had coop since Saints Row 2, so you have no one but yourself to blame for that one bud.

 

First of all, watch your tone. You don't get to talk to me like that unless I pissed in your cereal this morning and even then you have other options than insulting me.

 

Secondly, some people play SP games because you can pause them at any time you want. Maybe because we're on call or because we're having kids/pets or simply because it's more comfortable. You can't pause multiplayer games. I want to enjoy the game on my own, in my own time. Having someone else there, even if they are waiting patiently for me to make a decision, creates pressure that I do not want to deal with. I play games to relax, not to deal with other people.

[Iakus]

First of all, watch your tone. You don't get to talk to me like that unless I pissed in your cereal this morning and even then you have other options than insulting me.

 

Secondly, some people play SP games because you can pause them at any time you want. Maybe because we're on call or because we're having kids/pets or simply because it's more comfortable. You can't pause multiplayer games. I want to enjoy the game on my own, in my own time. Having someone else there, even if they are waiting patiently for me to make a decision, creates pressure that I do not want to deal with. I play games to relax, not to deal with other people.

Yup.

 

If I want to play a multiplayer game, I do a tabletop game.  If I'm playing a video game, I typically wanna unwind by myself

[SolNebula]

First of all, watch your tone. You don't get to talk to me like that unless I pissed in your cereal this morning and even then you have other options than insulting me.

 

Secondly, some people play SP games because you can pause them at any time you want. Maybe because we're on call or because we're having kids/pets or simply because it's more comfortable. You can't pause multiplayer games. I want to enjoy the game on my own, in my own time. Having someone else there, even if they are waiting patiently for me to make a decision, creates pressure that I do not want to deal with. I play games to relax, not to deal with other people.

 

Well said Sir...well said

 

[Revan Reborn]

First of all, watch your tone. You don't get to talk to me like that unless I pissed in your cereal this morning and even then you have other options than insulting me.

 

Secondly, some people play SP games because you can pause them at any time you want. Maybe because we're on call or because we're having kids/pets or simply because it's more comfortable. You can't pause multiplayer games. I want to enjoy the game on my own, in my own time. Having someone else there, even if they are waiting patiently for me to make a decision, creates pressure that I do not want to deal with. I play games to relax, not to deal with other people.

Calm down.  I was merely pointing out how ridiculous you sounded for complaining about a series that has had coop long before Saints Row 4. Again, you assume the risk. Recognize what you invest your money into.

 

This isn't competitive multiplayer. On the contrary, there are cooperative experiences where you actually can pause the game for both players. This is ultimately not germane because any coop would be optional and not required. For the last time, if BioWare handles coop similar to how Far Cry 4 or ACU tackled the feature, it would not be a problem at all. It's entirely dependent on how it's implemented.

[Andrew Lucas]

Yeah it'll be great right up until your buddy Lt Garvey starts spamming you with messages about colonies on these worlds needing to be rescued from Space Mutants 

Leave me alone Iakus....

[DaemionMoadrin]

Calm down.  I was merely pointing out how ridiculous you sounded for complaining about a series that has had coop long before Saints Row 4. Again, you assume the risk. Recognize what you invest your money into.

 

This isn't competitive multiplayer. On the contrary, there are cooperative experiences where you actually can pause the game for both players. This is ultimately not germane because any coop would be optional and not required. For the last time, if BioWare handles coop similar to how Far Cry 4 or ACU tackled the feature, it would not be a problem at all. It's entirely dependent on how it's implemented.

 

I played the entire Saints Row series. I only choose SR4 as example because the optional content still showed up for single players, only with access blocked. Which is a very cruel thing to do to completionist gamers.

 

"Calm down, you sound ridiculous" is exactly the wrong response in this situation btw. I recommend you do not try it in real life.

[Revan Reborn]

I played the entire Saints Row series. I only choose SR4 as example because the optional content still showed up for single players, only with access blocked. Which is a very cruel thing to do to completionist gamers.

 

"Calm down, you sound ridiculous" is exactly the wrong response in this situation btw. I recommend you do not try it in real life.

Voice your criticism to Volition with their future titles. Instead of just saying "coop is bad," how about offering feedback so they can better implement it without it affecting your experience?

 

If you actually saw me in real life, you probably would change your tune a bit. I'm just pointing out there are methods of incorporating coop without interfering with the single player. By being completely against the issue for your own personal reasons is a disservice to the rest of the community and also limits BioWare's potential player base. Generally, the more variety in features you have, the more likely you are to appeal to more consumers.

[CronoDragoon]

He said "No comment" on coop. It's neither a confirmation nor a refutation since either way it's not something that's been leaked or announced. I wouldn't read too much into it yet.

 

Also, remember that the leak had  a form of coop, wherein you could pair up with friends to do Strike Missions. So, not story coop but gameplay coop in isolated missions. More multiplayer than anything, really.

[DaemionMoadrin]

Voice your criticism to Volition with their future titles. Instead of just saying "coop is bad," how about offering feedback so they can better implement it without it affecting your experience?

 

If you actually saw me in real life, you probably would change your tune a bit. I'm just pointing out there are methods of incorporating coop without interfering with the single player. By being completely against the issue for your own personal reasons is a disservice to the rest of the community and also limits BioWare's potential player base. Generally, the more variety in features you have, the more likely you are to appeal to more consumers.

 

Bla bla. Where do you get all this? Where have I said anything about being completely against co-op?

 

My first post in this thread merely said that I am not screaming for co-op.

 

Why did you make up all the other stuff? It has nothing to do with me, my statements so far or my intent/wishes for Andromeda.