179 réponses à ce sujet

[straykat]

This isn't like Naughty Dog trying to make an open world game. BioWare made the Baldur's Gate games, so there's a history there. Darrah commented that they noticed each of their games had become smaller than the last, and they wanted to try and change that. It's clear that there was more content planned for DAI, a lot more, and it just didn't work out. Some of the issues that prevented that content are gone, like last-gen systems. But it still remains to be seen how BW plans on making exploration in MEA interesting to the player. Contrary to what newbies to RPGs claim, it doesn't have to be meeting a bunch of NPCs who have small problems or vignettes to tell. There's going to be some of that, but it's also going to be a space exploration game. Expecting to meet a bunch of people out in deserted planets is dumb. So the question is, to what extent can BW make those types of planets interesting. The response is going to come down to whether the player is actually interested in feeling what space exploration would be like. If they don't care and just want to meet space ****** witches everywhere, I predict they'll have issues. If they care about role-playing the Pathfinder, though, I think they'll find deserted planets more interesting.

 

They couldn't give me a space exploration experience without making a simulator.

 

Which would make me truly hate it then. Not necessarily because I hate simulators. I just hate most.. and I definitely don't expect it in a series known for action.

 

If they think they can still pull it off without doing that, then... I wish them luck. I'm barely excited about No Man's Sky, and that has more ambitious ideas than anything I've heard here.

 

That all said, I still ended up disliking DAI for it's story elements more than anything. Even a closed world wouldn't have worked for me. The only positive thing I'll say about it is the armor designs (oh and some characters). 

[Cyberstrike nTo]

I'm not really sure her romance opens up any extra dialogue. And lots of her exposition is just on the wrong side of creepy - basically amounting to "it's totally cool and definitely not bestiality to bang asari." 

 

I have never found her dialogue creepy, I think it's that she's nervous and scared, she openly states that she is not "a people person" and has never had romantic feelings and has never been in romantic relationship before.

[TheRatPack55]

I should add... I sound overly harsh to bioware specifically, but I'm sick of all of those type of games. They're everywhere. The action-adventure-in-open-world thing.

 

I think the last one I really liked was this Spidey game that came out when Toby McGuire was still playing the part. It had a cool mechanic, so that was it's saving grace. Others don't have enough of that as a selling point. could be Far Cry Primal or DAI or Watchdogs, and it's just not enough of actually interesting gameplay to keep me interested. Metal Gear did something slightly different, so I'm not sure it counts. 

 

I personally like open world games a lot, but they have to feel alive. Fallout 4 for example messed up a lot of what made other Fallout games so appealing to me, but at least if I went back to the guy who gave me a quest and didn't find him in his office I could look at my pip-boy, see that it was past 8 pm and deduce that he had probably finished working and was in his quarters, but hopefully not sleeping yet. Then I could wait until morning, or go to his quarters and turn the quest in to him as he was sitting on the can. It helped make the world feel more real and engaging to me. Even Dark Souls, which doesn't have npc routines, makes some npcs move about so that you encounter them in different places in the world, doing their thing, and its world design is so good that you never have to look for them, it happens naturally and makes the world around you feel like it's moving at its own pace. One of the things that turned me off of DAI was how the world was so artificial, with npc that never budged from their spots and could have just as well been notes on a board.

[straykat]

I personally like open world games a lot, but they have to feel alive. Fallout 4 for example messed up a lot of what made other Fallout games so appealing to me, but at least if I went back to the guy who gave me a quest and didn't find him in his office I could look at my pip-boy, see that it was past 8 pm and deduce that he had probably finished working and was in his quarters, but hopefully not sleeping yet. Then I could wait until morning, or go to his quarters and turn the quest in to him as he was sitting on the can. It helped make the world feel more real and engaging to me. Even Dark Souls, which doesn't have npc routines, makes some npcs move about so that you encounter them in different places in the world, doing their thing, and its world design is so good that you never have to look for them, it happens naturally and makes the world around you feel like it's moving at its own pace. One of the things that turned me off of DAI was how the world was so artificial, with npc that never budged from their spots and could have just as well been notes on a board.

 

My bad.. I don't count Bethesda in the other group. I'm just talking about action adventure titles. Fallout 4 is more sandboxy. Not Minecraft or anything, but they fleshed out more of that stuff.

[Cyberstrike nTo]

I personally like open world games a lot, but they have to feel alive. Fallout 4 for example messed up a lot of what made other Fallout games so appealing to me, but at least if I went back to the guy who gave me a quest and didn't find him in his office I could look at my pip-boy, see that it was past 8 pm and deduce that he had probably finished working and was in his quarters, but hopefully not sleeping yet. Then I could wait until morning, or go to his quarters and turn the quest in to him as he was sitting on the can. It helped make the world feel more real and engaging to me. Even Dark Souls, which doesn't have npc routines, makes some npcs move about so that you encounter them in different places in the world, doing their thing, and its world design is so good that you never have to look for them, it happens naturally and makes the world around you feel like it's moving at its own pace. One of the things that turned me off of DAI was how the world was so artificial, with npc that never budged from their spots and could have just as well been notes on a board.

 

Honestly it depends on the world, I love flying around and the super powers in Saints Row IV and it's humor but the dramatic stuff feels out of place in a game where I can use a giant purple ****** baseball bat or a probe that sticks rockets up NPC's asses as weapons, but IMHO the virtual Steelport is bland looking and feels bland.

 

I thought Kingdoms of Amular looked great and had plenty of side-quests and factions, but after I finished the main quest I couldn't be bothered to go back and finish any of it.

 

On the other hand The Witcher 2 looked beautiful and I couldn't give a rat's ass about it.

[straykat]

Doh. I liked Sunset Overdrive too. But chalk that up to having enough quirks to win me over. Like that old Spider-Man game.

[TheRatPack55]

My bad.. I don't count Bethesda in the other group. I'm just talking about action adventure titles. Fallout 4 is more sandboxy. Not Minecraft or anything, but they fleshed out more of that stuff.

 

Ah, yeah, ok then. I think the problem with games like Far Cry is that the gameplay is so monotonous the big world becomes a problem rather than an asset. I know I loved FC3 - 4 at first, but after the tenth liberated camp I just got bored to tears of repeating the same things over and over again... did I ever tell you the defini-  The same issue plagued DAI, imo.

 

 

Honestly it depends on the world, I love flying around and the super powers in Saints Row IV and it's humor but the dramatic stuff feels out of place in a game where I can use a giant purple ****** baseball bat or a probe that sticks rockets up NPC's asses as weapons, but IMHO the virtual Steelport is bland looking and feels bland.

 

I thought Kingdoms of Amular looked great and had plenty of side-quests and factions, but after I finished the main quest I couldn't be bothered to go back and finish any of it.

 

On the other hand The Witcher 2 looked beautiful and I couldn't give a rat's ass about it.

 

I personally liked SR2 the best. I thought it had a proper balance between wacky and serious. The later games were just wacky, and like you said, any attempt at seriousness fell flat. Entertaining gameplay, but you can only enjoy it for so long without any emotional connection to the story and characters, same problem as with Far Cry tbh.

[Cyberstrike nTo]

Ah, yeah, ok then. I think the problem with games like Far Cry is that the gameplay is so monotonous the big world becomes a problem rather than an asset. I know I loved FC3 - 4 at first, but after the tenth liberated camp I just got bored to tears of repeating the same things over and over again... did I ever tell you the defini-  The same issue plagued DAI, imo.

 

 

I personally liked SR2 the best. I thought it had a proper balance between wacky and serious. The later games were just wacky, and like you said, any attempt at seriousness fell flat. Entertaining gameplay, but you can only enjoy it for so long without any emotional connection to the story and characters, same problem as with Far Cry tbh.

 

I came into the series with the third game, the first and second games never looked all that appealing to me.

[TheRatPack55]

I came into the series with the third game, the first and second games never looked all that appealing to me.

 

The first SR was just bootleg GTA, but the second was really good. For all its weird, quirky humor it had one of the very few moments when I genuinely felt horrified at what happened to one of the characters in my inner circle, and I'm usually the eye-rolling type when "emotional" moments in games happen.

 

It also helped that I could finally play an utter bastard of a pc and the game didn't try to make me feel bad about it. 

[Beerfish]

I wonder if multiplayer wasn't available for ME3, would the completion number be higher? I'm sure a lot of folks bought the game only for the multiplayer portion. I wouldn't be surprised if the same happens with Andromeda where people only buy the game for the multiplayer and not the campaign

I would think re ME3 that would only be reflected in second and third wave of sales.  Me3 mp was not a well known entity when the game came out.  It might be more relevant when MEA comes around becasue of the success of ME3mp.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Are you advocating then that people should have to watch a youtube walkthrough before they can effectively navigate their way through the game? I think that being able to play through ME effectively and efficiently without the benefit of watching some sort of walkthrough was a big plus for it... one that helped the completion rate. A lot of people tend to quit games when they start to feel that they aren't making any real progress in them or if they have to continually consult with a Wiki, guide book or Youtube walkthrough just to get them back onto a progressive tract within the game.

I think we should abandon the idea that there's a way through. There's just stuff we can do, and some of it leads to other stuff. But there's no one correct path that we're supposed to follow. There are things we can do, not things we must do.

[Cyberstrike nTo]

The first SR was just bootleg GTA, but the second was really good. For all its weird, quirky humor it had one of the very few moments when I genuinely felt horrified at what happened to one of the characters in my inner circle, and I'm usually the eye-rolling type when "emotional" moments in games happen.

 

It also helped that I could finally play an utter bastard of a pc and the game didn't try to make me feel bad about it. 

 

I've heard a lot of good things about it but I don't like playing as a complete bastard, I get accused of being that enough here and on other message boards I frequent and gets real old real fast.

[Mdizzletr0n]

You might have something here: if the story only supports combat, like in Diablo, for example, and the main goal is to level up your character by fighting more and more difficult bosses with one final super-boss, AND (it's important!) developers did not overdone it, then chances are more people will finish the story.

It also explains why ME2 was completed more times then any other game in the series - you are truly building up your character and your team (and ship as well) for one mega-battle. Everything is counted, everything you worked for is used at the end and needed. You see the result of your work there and that final battle truly is the culmination of the game.
While in ME1 you are more wandering around, your team is there just to talk and comment, but you have the story . And in ME3 part of the frustration with the endings is coming from pointless journey and complete ignoring of all your work on the way (those points you accumulate is the only outcome).


You talk about movies and I see it more like books. In the movie theater it is unlikely you will leave or fall a sleep, but if the book is not interesting you might throw it away without regrets. Same with the game - again, STORY driven game - it you are not engaged with the story, you leave that story. And same with the book-writers it indicates the fail of the story.
There were games that I finished despite deeply hated combat system only in order to see the story. And there were games which I did not play through only because stories were too lousy to pick my interest.

Sure, some people are looking only for an interesting combat and do not care about the story, but I do think another type - the one seeking story first and everything else later does exist as well (I am one of them). Can not say if one group is bigger then another, but for "story-type" gamers completion does equal success.

This is exactly why I even finished the ME trilogy. HATE the combat but wanted to see where the story was going to go.

Also I think some of the higher completion rate with ME2 could be more players in general. ME1 wasn't available for PlayStation for a good amount of time.

[TheRatPack55]

I've heard a lot of good things about it but I don't like playing as a complete bastard, I get accused of being that enough here and on other message boards I frequent and gets real old real fast.

 

While I personally do like playing as a complete bastard, I feel like SR2 did it the right way. It's not presented in a "for the evulz" kinda way, it's just the setting. You're a gang leader and it's brutal, and the funny bits are more black comedy in that context, unlike in the later games where the killing is played down as this thing that is always done in games so no one cares, and the funny is the focus.

 

But yeah, it's a personal preference, not everyone likes that. I'll stop the off topic posts now. 

[SKAR]

Mass Effect 2 also did not have a story that made much sense so I guess that makes you think about the necessity of story in a story-driven game, does it not?

It made sense. Maybe not to you but it made sense.

[Gothfather]

I'm not sure these statistics are very reliable. Look at how low Divinity: Original Sin and Pillars of Eternity are, and those are supposed to be niche games funded by the bulk of their playerbase, who think very highly of them.

 

And even if they're accurate, I don't think that says anything about the quality of any of the games. Some of these, like Skyrim, aren't even meant to be played for the main story. Plus, ME2 is the most completed Bioware game and DAO the least. That automatically invalidates the whole list 

 

 

I still haven't played Pillars, but Original Sin was good. The numbers surprised me too.

 

These numbers don't surprise me at all. There is no correlation with enjoying a game and completing it. Achievement hunters will still finish many games just to get achievements in games they hate. As people get older, games get longer and there are more games to choose from game completion rates have dropped. It has been a long standing, dirty little "secret" that most games are never finished. That gamers are not as dedicated to actually finishing games as they are dedicated to the 'franchise.'

 

I have friends who buy games and rarely even get past the first quarter of a games content. When they asked me if they should get X game I often say 'NO because you will never finish it,' but they do it anyway. I have put in over a 1000 hours on skyrim and I still haven't completed the main quest lol and i pretty much try to finish most games I buy that i enjoy. If I don't enjoy something i usually shelve it fast but I have suffered through to some endings of games i don't like, DA2 comes to mind.

 

I also think that Divinity original sin players and pillar's of eternity players may not be as enamoured with the isometric engines that a very vocal minority on the would like to admit. It doesn't surprise me that in 2015 people liked the IDEA of a isometric rpg but when they actually got it in their hands the 20 year old UI and game play wouldn't hold their interest. It is exactly what happen to me i just found the experiences tedious after awhile. This was especially true for PoE as half of a conversation would be voice acted then the rest was text but I found myself reading all the text which meant things became monotonous for me as I was reading what I just heard. Which ruined the voice acting for me and ruined the text reading as well. I simply found in hindsight i had no desire to go back in time to 20+ year old systems. We have far better ways today to make rpgs I see no advantage fr going backwards. But again people have different subjective tastes so lots of people will/have enjoyed the game I am sure. It just doesn't surprise me that people said 'I'm done' with either of these games even if they are good games.

[In Exile]

I have never found her dialogue creepy, I think it's that she's nervous and scared, she openly states that she is not "a people person" and has never had romantic feelings and has never been in romantic relationship before.

It's still weird. Let's talk about how my species reproduces is a weird topic. It's like just starting to talk about sex with someone you barely know. There's a line between socially awkward and kind of creepy and that's the line.

[AlanC9]

Well, a lot of the ME1 squadmate convos exist to convey information to the player, typically information which most Shepards would know already.

[straykat]

Maybe it's just writer difference. Drew K wrote Liara and Tali and they are bit codex/lore dumpy. Talking to Kaidan or Garrus is more personal and the lore elements just implicit in their stories.

 

Garrus doesn't tell me about the effects of the genophage. He tells me about testicle transplants. Slight difference

[Amirit]

Characters are what 4-5m people lost themselves in before. Open worlds are what 20m+ do.

 

Or at least, that's the logic of chasing Skyrim.

 

The question is - what game they are cosplaying now? With DA2 they used ME2 as an opposite to DAO (and failed in implementation), ME3 was "inspired" by Deus Ex (and failed in implementation), DAI was based on Skyrim (you know the drill).

 

This time we heard a lot about ME1 "as we always saw it". Since DAI was also "DA as we always saw it" - I worry about outcome.

[straykat]

The question is - what game they are cosplaying now? With DA2 they used ME2 as an opposite to DAO (and failed in implementation), ME3 was "inspired" by Deus Ex (and failed in implementation), DAI was based on Skyrim (you know the drill).

 

This time we heard a lot about ME1 "as we always saw it". Since DAI was also "DA as we always saw it" - I worry about outcome.

 

If that was how DA was as they originally saw it, I'm glad I caught them on a bad day at first. Go mediocrity!

[rossler]

Bioware's statement in their trailer that "we've created a world you can lose yourself in" might generate some worries then.  We might expect a lower completion rate out of this ME installment than the other 3 games.

 

I think some people might be taking that statement a bit too literally. 

 

Losing yourself in something doesn't mean you'll actually get lost in it. Or running into numerous dead ends trying to find your way out of a maze. 

 

It can also mean, it's really interesting. I'm reading this 500 page book, and I'm getting really lost in it because the story is so interesting. 

[AngryFrozenWater]

It suddenly hit me. To go full open world is a great BW tactic. The bigger the game, the less likely people will reach the end of ME:A and thus the less likely they'll complain about its ending. Brilliant.

[SKAR]

It suddenly hit me. To go full open world is a great BW tactic. The bigger the game, the less likely people will reach the end of ME:A and thus the less likely they'll complain about its ending. Brilliant.

Nice one comedian. ME1 and 2 endings were fine. 3 was ehhhh butike they're gonna do somethin like that again. They should just do 1 canon and 1 non canon endings for now on just as long as all other choices matter.

[Pearl (rip bioware)]

I like how Dark Souls 3 has the highest completion rate of any of the games on that chart.