117 réponses à ce sujet

[FKA_Servo]

I get that it's unavoidable. I'm wondering how frenetic it is, or if it is more slow and deliberate.
It might.

Or I could just turn the difficulty all the way down and basically pretend the combat wasn't happening (this is how I eventually dealt with the incredibly boring combat in DA2).

It varies by the encounter, I think. Some of them are pretty frenetic, some are fairly deliberate. Turning the difficulty all the way down would utterly trivialize it though. I don't think you'd have an issue.

This is essentially how I powered through TW1. I installed a mod that granted infinite health and stamina, and ignored it as best I could.

[SKAR]

Inquisition had way too much filler, so hopefully Andromeda doesn't follow this formula. The ME series usually takes like 30 hours to complete, and that shouldn't change. More isn't always better, especially if it's just soulless fetch quests.

30 hours? MOFO you missin out. Should be more like 100 hours.

[Addictress]

It's not really hypocrisy, even if we assume it's the same fan making both statements.

 

I want different things out of different games. I'll be playing ME:A because I want a game with interesting characters in a story where I can go find cool side content to do. A nice view is good to run into once in a while still, but I'm really after the content.

 

I'll be playing No Man's Sky because I want to be let loose in an ever expanding universe I can go nuts and explore at my whim. That's what they have marketed to us.

 

I don't stick to just one type of game and want everything to be like that. I would be interested in seeing BioWare actually make a exploration focused game in the style of No Man's Sky, but Mass Effect needs to be Mass Effect still. That means story driven with interesting characters and side quests to do.

There is a difference between "this is one of ten important regions that you unlocked on a war table with a seemingly important point to it, on a strict deadline to beat an antagonist in a medievalesque world where entire armies must be spent to get there, and it has nothing but a few fetch quests," and "our ship landed on a barren and inhospitable planet in SPACE and found nothing whatsoever on it - not EVEN fetch quests, because it's goddamn space"

 

Those are two very different things.

[Cyonan]

30 hours? MOFO you missin out. Should be more like 100 hours.

 

I could beat the entire trilogy in under 100 hours. Probably more around 40-60 hours for the whole thing.

 

That's without missing side content other than pointless collection busywork like the ore in ME1, and playing on a higher difficulty.

[SKAR]

I could beat the entire trilogy in under 100 hours. Probably more around 40-60 hours for the whole thing.

That's without missing side content other than pointless collection busywork like the ore in ME1, and playing on a higher difficulty.

man **** that. I want to enjoy it as long as possible. I want something to do in my spare time while I wait for the next game. Play dragon age 4 and wait for next ME game. DLC better be like ME2. Interesting and long. Or omega or the citadel dlcs.

[Cyonan]

There is a difference between "this is one of ten important regions that you unlocked on a war table with a seemingly important point to it, on a strict deadline to beat an antagonist in a medievalesque world where entire armies must be spent to get there, and it has nothing but a few fetch quests," and "our ship landed on a barren and inhospitable planet in SPACE and found nothing whatsoever on it - not EVEN fetch quests, because it's goddamn space"

 

Those are two very different things.

 

Yeah but I'm still expecting side content in a game like Mass Effect so I'll question why I landed on a rock in the middle of space with nothing to do on it =P

 

It's mostly just that when it comes to Mass Effect and No Man's Sky, I'm expecting two different things out of those games. So it would be fine if NMS actually did have a barren rock in the middle of space for me to land on, if it had cool vistas and scenery for me to explore.

 

man **** that. I want to enjoy it as long as possible. I want something to do in my spare time while I wait for the next game. Play dragon age 4 and wait for next ME game. DLC better be like ME2. Interesting and long. Or omega or the citadel dlcs.

 

The thing is that I do take my time with it.

 

To this day I legitimately don't know how it takes people that long to complete the game =P

[SKAR]

Yeah but I'm still expecting side content in a game like Mass Effect so I'll question why I landed on a rock in the middle of space with nothing to do on it =P

It's mostly just that when it comes to Mass Effect and No Man's Sky, I'm expecting two different things out of those games. So it would be fine if NMS actually did have a barren rock in the middle of space for me to land on, if it had cool vistas and scenery for me to explore.


The thing is that I do take my time with it.

To this day I legitimately don't know how it takes people that long to complete the game =P

My one regret for the orig tril is that I never played as a female. I'm gonna do that for my second playthrough this time around.

[AlanC9]

man **** that. I want to enjoy it as long as possible. I want something to do in my spare time while I wait for the next game. Play dragon age 4 and wait for next ME game. DLC better be like ME2. Interesting and long. Or omega or the citadel dlcs.

jeez... I can't imaging taking more than about 100 hours for a trilogy run. What would I be doing?

[CronoDragoon]

jeez... I can't imaging taking more than about 100 hours for a trilogy run. What would I be doing?

 

Me2 planet scanning functions as my digital stress ball.

[Addictress]

Well, I wouldn't mind two or three "barren inhospitable planets" a la Interstellar in Andromeda. It would not need to be a huge region that you spend a lot of time in and actually... in fact you don't even have to land. Remember in Mass Effect 1, you could scan entire planets for resources or interesting things, and then it would return 'nothing' or 'desolate, barren.'

 

So we can have similar dead worlds in Andromeda. And we should, because if we have any scientific integrity left in this series we should stick to the widely-held theory that the majority of planets in our universe are inhospitable. 

[Kapilux]

There can never be too much good, unique and hand crafted content!!

But I won't touch games that are full with repetitive filler content anymore. Sad thing is that filler content seems to be all the rage with many developers these days, because it is cheap to produce, easy to implement and the easily amused love indulging in it for hours on end.

[LinksOcarina]

Well, I wouldn't mind two or three "barren inhospitable planets" a la Interstellar in Andromeda. It would not need to be a huge region that you spend a lot of time in and actually... in fact you don't even have to land. Remember in Mass Effect 1, you could scan entire planets for resources or interesting things, and then it would return 'nothing' or 'desolate, barren.'

 

So we can have similar dead worlds in Andromeda. And we should, because if we have any scientific integrity left in this series we should stick to the widely-held theory that the majority of planets in our universe are inhospitable. 

 

It's weird.

 

I have been replaying Mass Effect because I am bored as of late, and ive noticed a theme with the planets:

 

Yes, they are empty when you land on them, but they all have little bits here and there to give it the illusion of  a planet with things to discover, a pyrmaid here, an abandoned mining colony there, a giant skull on one or a collapsed tunnel on another.

 

It's interesting to see all of that, it sticks out like a sore thumb from the design of the planets, which are mostly just hills with palette swaps, but there was some thought put into giving incidental details that have nothing to do with the plot.

 

I expect that in andromeda, although it may run the risk of over-design if that occurs. 

[Norhik Krios]

I still, to this day, can not understand how a videogame, especially areas, can be too big for people. There was not a single game yet, that had too large areas, people's attention span is just shrinking and shrinking. You want story rich quests, don't like fetch quests and "my boot has a hole, bring it to the Smith that is 10 meters away" Quests, but don't like running through a nice landscape? I honestly don't get it. The problem most people have, is not the game, that is too large, but that no one is willing to enjoy a videogame, for what it is, anymore. You want to have action, wanna get shocked, wanna get all the stuff in the game as soon and fast as possible, defeat the last boss and new content and more content and even more content, just to rush through that stuff, too.
People scream and shout, that Call of Duty is for kids and people who got the attention span of a fly, but no one wants to walk through or stare at a beautiful landscape. There have to be enemies, dungeons, houses and loot, even though it doesn't make any sense.

Stop this "don't make the game too big" madness. People wanted lots and lots of content from BioWare in dragon age inquisition. Once you got it, you complain how there's "too much to do"... either I got hit by a meteor or everyone's out of their mind. I don't understand "gamers" these days.

[Monk]

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

 

When used in non-game contexts it's called "gamification" because these features motivate most people's behavior. It's likely you're just numb to its effects.

[sjsharp2011]

Yeah but I'm still expecting side content in a game like Mass Effect so I'll question why I landed on a rock in the middle of space with nothing to do on it =P

 

It's mostly just that when it comes to Mass Effect and No Man's Sky, I'm expecting two different things out of those games. So it would be fine if NMS actually did have a barren rock in the middle of space for me to land on, if it had cool vistas and scenery for me to explore.

 

 

The thing is that I do take my time with it.

 

To this day I legitimately don't know how it takes people that long to complete the game =P

yeah but then ME isn't supposed to be as long as DA it's faster paced combat style whereas DA ois a moer medieval slower  combat style game. Mainly because i ME you can zip aroun the galaxxy in what is ironically a speedy stealth ship where you get dropped off do your missoin and return straightaway. In DA the characters spend days travelling from one missoin location to another and mostly on foot and the games are designed around reflecting that I think and both series do it well.

[Eelectrica]

I still, to this day, can not understand how a videogame, especially areas, can be too big for people. There was not a single game yet, that had too large areas, people's attention span is just shrinking and shrinking. You want story rich quests, don't like fetch quests and "my boot has a hole, bring it to the Smith that is 10 meters away" Quests, but don't like running through a nice landscape? I honestly don't get it. The problem most people have, is not the game, that is too large, but that no one is willing to enjoy a videogame, for what it is, anymore. You want to have action, wanna get shocked, wanna get all the stuff in the game as soon and fast as possible, defeat the last boss and new content and more content and even more content, just to rush through that stuff, too.
People scream and shout, that Call of Duty is for kids and people who got the attention span of a fly, but no one wants to walk through or stare at a beautiful landscape. There have to be enemies, dungeons, houses and loot, even though it doesn't make any sense.

Stop this "don't make the game too big" madness. People wanted lots and lots of content from BioWare in dragon age inquisition. Once you got it, you complain how there's "too much to do"... either I got hit by a meteor or everyone's out of their mind. I don't understand "gamers" these days.

I live about 30 to 40 minutes away from real rain forests with real waterfalls, and about 20 minutes away from real beaches with real surf. So yeah, a game is going to have give me a little more than just a pretty tech demo.

Graphics are nice and all - I built my system so I could pretty much have the best graphics, but gameplay is still king.

For example.

I'm all for taking my time in a game - In X-com I'll delay doing the final mission until my squad is absolutely ready

In Stellaris I'm happy enough pottering around in my corner of the galaxy and try to learn the games systems and see whats what - I had my science team examining a clay pot orbiting around a sun, they concluded it was just a clay put somehow orbiting a sun.

 

MEA could be an awesome game if we do have heaps of interesting planets to explore, cultures to discover, different ways of solving problems, or we could be we just pick up insterstellar elfroot, lots and lots of interstellar elfroot... Time will tell.

[Sylvius the Mad]

When used in non-game contexts it's called "gamification" because these features motivate most people's behavior. It's likely you're just numb to its effects.

They have never worked on me. I've attended seminars about gamification in business and I just don't get it. People must be idiots.

For a prize to be motivating it needs to provide some actual benefit.

[Cyonan]

yeah but then ME isn't supposed to be as long as DA it's faster paced combat style whereas DA ois a moer medieval slower  combat style game. Mainly because i ME you can zip aroun the galaxxy in what is ironically a speedy stealth ship where you get dropped off do your missoin and return straightaway. In DA the characters spend days travelling from one missoin location to another and mostly on foot and the games are designed around reflecting that I think and both series do it well.

 

Well the travel time doesn't factor in to game completion time since it's just a loading screen.

 

I think Origins simply just has more content than any one Mass Effect game. Dragon Age 2 I can beat in probably about the same time as a Mass Effect game, and Inquisition I'd be rushing to try and get under a 20 hour completion time but it suffered from a lot of its content not being of the same quality as BioWare's other games.

 

I've never been bothered by the amount of content in a Mass Effect game though.