117 réponses à ce sujet

[Legenlorn]

Soo... I see we are talking about 10 areas being too much or not. How does that compare to the "100" planets we are supposedly getting

[Casablanca]

When it's only empty areas.

[Sylvius the Mad]

More is better.

Some people don't like all the DAI zones, but they don't agree on which ones were subpar. Having more zones lets us pick and choose the ones we like, while ignoring the others.

Different players are different. Giving us less content treats us as if we are all the same.

[FKA_Servo]

More is better.

Some people don't like all the DAI zones, but they don't agree on which ones were subpar. Having more zones lets us pick and choose the ones we like, while ignoring the others.

Different players are different. Giving us less content treats us as if we are all the same.

 

This, emphatically. Ideally, there's way more than you can realistically or coherently do in a single playthough, which grants replay value all by itself when you chase other content with a Ryder that might have different priorities.

 

There's no hard fast rule that says you have to go everywhere and do everything, checking each location off a list - I would say that doing so on a single character would render that character nonsensical. In DAI, I didn't even unlock and set foot in the Emerald Graves or the Exalted Plains until my second character.

[Beerfish]

The area sizes are not a problem, nor really are fetch quests.  The problem in DAI was the lack of creativity of their fetch quests.  You can in essence have the normal rpg fetch quests but make them feel more important with a bit of clever writing.

[sjsharp2011]

This, emphatically. Ideally, there's way more than you can realistically or coherently do in a single playthough, which grants replay value all by itself when you chase other content with a Ryder that might have different priorities.

 

There's no hard fast rule that says you have to go everywhere and do everything, checking each location off a list - I would say that doing so on a single character would render that character nonsensical. In DAI, I didn't even unlock and set foot in the Emerald Graves or the Exalted Plains until my second character.

yeah indeed. I am moer of a completionist at least on my first couple of playthroughs of a game but I agree I think sometimes leaving things off can be a good thing. but having lots of options and having the player decide what to do or not do if they so choose is always a good thing. For example I don't always slay all the dragons in the main story just the ones that are in my way when trying to complete certain quests that  I'm on. Other times I'll leave other things undone just depends on the playthrough. Just depends on how the player feels about it and the character your RP'ing. For example my Qunari mage Worf I'm playing atm I can see wanting to go after all the dragons especially if he has the Iron Bull in tow

[Draining Dragon]

I'd say 12 inches is too much.

 

Sorry, what was this thread about?

[Kierro Ren]

I'm a bit confused and annoyed by the hypocrisy. Not referring directly at OP.

 

I can't remember where I seen this, perhaps another, likely Tweeter thread. Andromeda devs "Aside from the missions on a planet. You might find nothing when exploring a planet's surface. But that doesn't mean it's nothing, just like planets in space now. Finding nothing is something, in exploration."

 

Fans "NO, not another Dragon Age Inquisition! Give us more, we want the whole area with missions! You failed us again Bioware."

 

No Man's Sky dev "You may find a lifeless planet. A planet that's just rocks and deserts. With no missions or animals what-so-ever."

 

Fan "OH MY GOD IT'S SOO AMAZING, I'M GOING TO DIE!!! *foams at the mouth*"

[FKA_Servo]

yeah indeed. I am moer of a completionist at least on my first couple of playthroughs of a game but I agree I think sometimes leaving things off can be a good thing. but having lots of options and having the player decide what to do or not do if they so choose is always a good thing. For example I don't always slay all the dragons in the main story just the ones that are in my way when trying to complete certain quests that  I'm on. Other times I'll leave other things undone just depends on the playthrough. Just depends on how the player feels about it and the character your RP'ing. For example my Qunari mage Worf I'm playing atm I can see wanting to go after all the dragons especially if he has the Iron Bull in tow

 

I find the completionist mindset antithetical to actual enjoyment. I blame achievements.

[The Elder King]

I'm a bit confused and annoyed by the hypocrisy. Not referring directly at OP.

 

I can't remember where I seen this, perhaps another, likely Tweeter thread. Andromeda devs "Aside from the missions on a planet. You might find nothing when exploring a planet's surface. But that doesn't mean it's nothing, just like planets in space now. Finding nothing is something, in exploration."

 

Fans "NO, not another Dragon Age Inquisition! Give us more, we want the whole area with missions! You failed us again Bioware."

 

No Man's Sky dev "You may find a lifeless planet. A planet that's just rocks and deserts. With no missions or animals what-so-ever."

 

Fan "OH MY GOD IT'S SOO AMAZING, I'M GOING TO DIE!!! *foams at the mouth*"

Those are two completely different games. Though I won't have problems if some planets are like this. I don't expect every single planets to be full of interesting things. I do expect to have some planets to be more interesting and full of stuff then DAI's regions.

[The Elder King]

I find the completionist mindset antithetical to actual enjoyment. I blame achievements.

It depends. It's not really about achievements for me. It's about completing every single piece of content the game has to offer and is available in my playthrough, regardless of the achievements.

[Kierro Ren]

Those are two completely different games. Though I won't have problems if some planets are like this. I don't expect every single planets to be full of interesting things. I do expect to have some planets to be more interesting and full of stuff then DAI's regions.

 

Yes, two different games that are based off exploration. I'm not saying Game A has something that Game B doesn't, and that Game B should have it too. I'm saying two games' devs say the same thing, but fans freak out over one but not the other.

[The Elder King]

Yes, two different games that are based off exploration. I'm not saying Game A has something that Game B doesn't, and that Game B should have it too. I'm saying two games devs say the say thing, but fans freak out over one but not the other.

Mass Effect isn't only based on exploration though. It's an action RPG with more story content then the other, as far as I know. It's normal that people might expect a better balance from MEA. 

[FKA_Servo]

It depends. It's not really about achievements for me. It's about completing every single piece of content the game has to offer and is available in my playthrough, regardless of the achievements.

 

I guess. I think that sometimes completing all available content can result in an incoherent character. You end up doing things or recruiting companions that might make no sense in the context of the character you're playing just because they're "there." That's one of the best things about DAI, I think. That so much of the content - and so many of the companions - were optional.

[sjsharp2011]

I find the completionist mindset antithetical to actual enjoyment. I blame achievements.

Perhaps but then I've always enjoyed games that take ti,me to get throug hand are not just simple button mashing type games which to me is why I like Bioware's games because for me they meet that criteria.

[The Elder King]

I guess. I think that sometimes completing all available content can result in an incoherent character. You end up doing things or recruiting companions that might make no sense in the context of the character you're playing just because they're "there." That's one of the best things about DAI, I think. That so much of the content - and so many of the companions - were optional.

That's a particular case in which I might decide to skip some based on the character I roleplay. I'm more referring to sidequests and exploring every part of the regions in the game. I don't recall side quests where my characters would be incoherent if they intervene.

The companions, yes, it's a case where based on your PC's personality, values and stances, making their recruitment optional works well with not recruiting them. Though generally when they force on us companions there are reason that would fit why my character would be forced to recruit them. 

[Navasha]

No such thing as too much.   The problem in DA:I wasn't that there were too many regions, but that they didn't make the game difficult enough.  You were overleveled for every region after you reach level 10.   You hit max level before you ever complete all the regions, which really kills the desire to progress.    Game mechanics were DA:Is issue, not the amount of content. 

[Sartoz]

                                                                                      <<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>

 

With 100 possible planets and high resolution textures for that graphic awesomeness, I'd say 40GB+ digital download.  Also, I can't see Bio populating 100 planets with meaningful content and I don't count exceptional  terrain visuals as content.. I'm hoping 15 will have massive things to do and another 20 - 30 with minor (ie: the fetch quests, alien Outposts).

 

Of course, Bio mentioned we must look for resources, ergo exploring planets for the minerals. Ergo, many planets will have just that and some will have nothing.

 

Executive Summary

1.- 15 planets with massive content

2.- 20-30 planets with minor content

3.- the rest are free to be explored.

 

[Iakus]

Which proves that the number is the wrong question.

Maker, I'm agreeing with you!

 

Yes, number is the wrong question.  You can have ten areas with tons of amazing content, or you can have one zone that's essentially the Hinterlands redux.

[Zatche]

I guess. I think that sometimes completing all available content can result in an incoherent character. You end up doing things or recruiting companions that might make no sense in the context of the character you're playing just because they're "there." That's one of the best things about DAI, I think. That so much of the content - and so many of the companions - were optional.

I wouldn't blame achievements for that. I would blame Fear of Missing Out.

Like, sure, this character would never recruit Iron Bull, but what if he has great character writing? I'll never know if I don't recruit him.

[Sylvius the Mad]

The area sizes are not a problem, nor really are fetch quests. The problem in DAI was the lack of creativity of their fetch quests. You can in essence have the normal rpg fetch quests but make them feel more important with a bit of clever writing.

The areas in DAI were good even ignoring the fetch quests. Why do people keep pointing to the quest design as part of their criticism of the level design?

I largely ignored those quests, but I still fully explored all the zones.

We shouldn't need the game to give us a reason to go somewhere. In fact, I'd rather it didn't. I prefer my exploration to be undirected.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I find the completionist mindset antithetical to actual enjoyment. I blame achievements.

There's no reason for achievements to motivate behaviour. I've never understood the point.

I like how FO4 lets you disable the achievements. All games should allow that.

[LinksOcarina]

I'm a bit confused and annoyed by the hypocrisy. Not referring directly at OP.

 

I can't remember where I seen this, perhaps another, likely Tweeter thread. Andromeda devs "Aside from the missions on a planet. You might find nothing when exploring a planet's surface. But that doesn't mean it's nothing, just like planets in space now. Finding nothing is something, in exploration."

 

Fans "NO, not another Dragon Age Inquisition! Give us more, we want the whole area with missions! You failed us again Bioware."

 

No Man's Sky dev "You may find a lifeless planet. A planet that's just rocks and deserts. With no missions or animals what-so-ever."

 

Fan "OH MY GOD IT'S SOO AMAZING, I'M GOING TO DIE!!! *foams at the mouth*"

 

Different design philosophy to be fair.

 

No Mans Sky is not an RPG/story driven game. It's a simulator/survival game.

 

People want missions basically, or at least, high quality missions, in Andromeda. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

I wouldn't blame achievements for that. I would blame Fear of Missing Out.

Like, sure, this character would never recruit Iron Bull, but what if he has great character writing? I'll never know if I don't recruit him.

If you're playing the game to see all the content, sure.

If you're trying also to roleplay your character, though, that's a problem, because those two objectives are incompatible.

Play the parts you want to play. If you want to play all of them, play all of them. But that's always your choice.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Different design philosophy to be fair.

No Mans Sky is not an RPG/story driven game. It's a simulator/survival game.

People want missions basically, or at least, high quality missions, in Andromeda.

Side content is necessarily not story-driven, though. If it were, it wouldn't be side content.

I prefer RPG/simulators.