Sanunes
N6
Just a flip of the coin.
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Prime Posts: 4392
Prime Likes: 882
Posts: 5,993 Likes: 9,066
inherit
1561
0
9,066
Sanunes
Just a flip of the coin.
5,993
Sept 13, 2016 11:51:12 GMT
September 2016
sanunes
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
4392
882
|
Post by Sanunes on Mar 31, 2017 14:21:57 GMT
I have been reflecting on my time with Andromeda the last day or so and trying to figure out why it is not a game I enjoy more then I do and I think the reason why is that "Bigger and more complex doesn't mean its better".
Going into the hype phase for both Dragon Age: Inquisition and Mass Effect: Andromeda you could hear the team trying to statistics to prove the greatness of the systems they designed, with comments along the lines of "the least talkative squad characters has more likes then Shepard did". Now on the surface that sounds like an amazing statistic until you realize the work that goes with a statement like that such as animating all those lines of dialogue and the QA of all that dialogue to make sure it works.
Aside from the above mentioned dialogue I think that also seeps into the "open world" aspect of the game too, I like the idea that the game is open world, but unfortunately the open world areas become boring after awhile since the areas are designed to be much larger then the primary quests there. I liked the size of Eos prior to placing a settlement there for it felt open world, but at the same time it was contained and then when I went back it lost feeling unique.
The crafting system is the one other area that I think this applies to, but more on the complexity side of the argument. I think how it is implemented the crafting system hurts players more then it rewards them for you have to spend your time gathering a specific resource to learn how to make items and then relearn it each five levels and then make it later with even more resources. I don't see why a more simplified system wouldn't have worked out, for then it is just gathering resources to make a weapon at your level cap.
Now I liked the combat UI for it displayed what I wanted, but the menu system feels too complex to try and make it "lore friendly" over functional for the player. I got tired of going into sub-menus of sub-menus to try and get what I wanted access too or to complete crafting and eventually I just gave up. It feels a lot like the "one button for awesomeness" from Mass Effect 3 when it wasn't designed for player's.
I know other people have different opinions, but these are the things that I think are holding back Andromeda from being a truly great game and just trying to find a root cause instead of just pointing at a system and saying "fix that". I would be interested in hearing what others think, disagree with, or even think other areas might have suffered from being too big or too complex.
|
|
osito
N2
Posts: 176 Likes: 223
inherit
5330
0
223
osito
176
Mar 21, 2017 10:09:04 GMT
March 2017
osito
|
Post by osito on Mar 31, 2017 14:48:55 GMT
I think that in general it's certainly true that 'bigger and more complex doesn't mean its better'. That's true of most things in life, not just games. I like MEA so far, but I didn't like DAI so much. However, I think that's because I prefer MEA gameplay (combat) to that of DAI, rather than anything to do with size or complexity. I'm sure that if I wasn't enjoying the MEA gameplay I wouldn't enjoy the game. Had exactly this problem with the much acclaimed Witcher 3: didn't like the gameplay; didn't like the game.
One thing I have found about MEA is that you're free to ignore an awful lot of the systems it offers. So unless you have a fundamental problem with the game you can ignore bits you don't like, such as mining, crafting, travelling to non-colonisable planets and so on.
|
|
inherit
4247
0
Apr 20, 2017 18:42:14 GMT
489
ticktak77
460
March 2017
ticktak77
|
Post by ticktak77 on Mar 31, 2017 14:57:52 GMT
The narrative hook they were going for, and the way it ties into the gameplay hook, actually works remarkably well in my opinion.
Ignoring the main Kett threat, you land on a planet, and now your quests are planet-specific. Doing those quests makes the planet more viable for your colonies, which is your job. From a gameplay hook - it's do quests, increase viabllity score, earn more viability points, spend viability points on perks designed to help you with crafting and combat, craft and improve your combat, and get stronger/more powerful.
That's quite a compelling hook, and one that works well.
THe problem with Andromeda is that it lacks a lot of polish and finesse that a game this large needs.
While the framework surrounding the game is good, everything else isn't. The quests are boring, the side characters are mostly forgettable, most of the planets feel laborious to explore, the crafting UI is god awful, etc.
So while I generally agree with what you are saying, I think Bigger and more complex can often mean better if it's done in the right way which prioritizes player entertainment and polish.
|
|
R1Outcast
N3
That's what she said...
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 360 Likes: 925
inherit
4698
0
925
R1Outcast
That's what she said...
360
Mar 16, 2017 20:38:03 GMT
March 2017
tizodd
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by R1Outcast on Mar 31, 2017 15:00:02 GMT
"Different strokes for different folks"
On my second playthrough now and still loving the game. Beat Normal, now running through Insanity. Its not without flaws, but it's a damn good game imo.
|
|
inherit
738
0
4,633
Link"Guess"ski
3,882
August 2016
linkenski
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda
Linkenski
asblinkenski
Linkenski
|
Post by Link"Guess"ski on Mar 31, 2017 15:16:43 GMT
I'm so hopeless regarding BioWare's own perception of their games's quality (they think the ambient side-quests in ME3 were an improvement) I just almost don't wanna bother pointing it out anymore. There's just too much facepalmness in the way they make games. All I can do is enjoy it for the parts i like like the story moments, character relationships and combat. But overall yes, BioWare has derailed themselves trying to mimic what Ubisoft and others are doing. I also saw one of the writers speculate that "conflictless storytelling is good", and anytime I see an employee retweet something Alexander Freed has said I just... uuggh. Conflictless storytelling is pretty much what they're attempting in Inquisition and Andromeda. There are moments of conflict in between but no overarching one because the player is just metagaming and grinding to success and the "story" is their journey through the world they're helping to colonize or fix (in both DA:I and ME:A). I noticed specifically in TotalBiscuit's "WTF is Mass Effect Andromeda" video that he praised the "story" by constantly refering to the Planet Viability and systems by refering to the game's "story". He kept saying "the story" in the most vaguest sense. It's a testament to how you cannot quite grasp the "story" in neither this nor Inquisition because it's too much of a framework as opposed to a plot. All the plot there is is the main crit-path questline and perhaps Ryder's companionship as a subplot to that, but they have yet to figure out how to tie an overarching plot, a story that goes from A to B with reason and DRAMATURGY into the metagame plot. I really like the world building in Andromeda (although it's still really cookie-cutter at times) and I loved the world building in Mass Effect 1 too and Mass Effect 2 and Witcher 3, but unlike those games Inquisition and Andromeda just don't find a way to make the "story" of the primary gameplay more than a framework or backdrop. That's why it feels so lethargic-inducing and purposeless at times. Sure, seeing the physical locations that amount to the world of Mass Effect Andromeda and helping those places is a form of literary merit for a game-story, but it cannot replace the dramatic flow of a tightly prescripted plot and Andromeda severely needs a better plot within its narrative framework. What I admired about Witcher 3, although it was far from perfect, was the way in which the game took you from area to area in the open-world via its particular plot. You're looking for a person because she's important personally to Geralt. You have dreams, conversations and magical visions along the journey and even omniscent flashbacks that reveal what this person has been doing to tie it all together, and the game uses this plotline as an excuse to throw the player into side-quest arcs tied to each area you're supposed to visit in your pursuit and you end up doing other side-quests in those areas becuase those stories compelling too. The drawback of Witcher 3's narrative design was how padded the main plot ended up feeling. "The princess is always in another castle" is a meme that is attributed to it, but as long as each pitstop in that search leads to other important subplots that compliment and expand upon why finding said person is important it works in the end. The important point to make here is that Witcher 3 had a good 3-act structure that spanned the entire open-world setting with appropriate highs and lows like a good story should Inquisition had some interesting elements in its main plot especially thematically because it was about faith, but it was wrapped in a shallow mystery-plot and a farcical good vs evil hero plotline that just didn't work. It ended up feeling broken from a drama-standpoint. And Andromeda which I haven't finished yet also seems to take this unfortunate route because the main plot jumps as it pleases. There's however a better point of no return in this game I think, but i can't be sure. I'll get back to that. I'd just like to see BioWare create a game like Andromeda where the goal is more akin to ME1 where you're trying to stop a bad guy from doing a certain thing so you have to hunt him across 6 different planets. Each planet reveals a way in which he has tampered with the peace there so you can help restore that or skip past it and then have 3 encounters with the bad guy along the way or something and otherwise you'll find leads about his whereabouts or meet his subordinates. Instead Inquisition and Andromeda's main plots end up feeling like a side-step to everything else in the game which is wholly counter-intuitive IMO. I really like how the main areas lead you to the main plot in Andromeda but the main plot is still completely seperate to the focus of the game which is the planetary exploration and viability-grinding metagame. They need to make their open-world concept feel less grindy and busywork-like. Any form of reducing narrative decisions or quest completions to a meter that fills up or a number system like EMS, Power or Viability... as gratifying as that progression can feel from a gameplay POV it is counterintuitive to making it a story.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
Sept 16, 2024 15:46:24 GMT
9,324
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,875
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Mar 31, 2017 17:23:55 GMT
Though by structuring the plot that way you're making all the zones mandatory. Bug or feature?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
1255
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2017 17:42:20 GMT
I disagree with the posted graph for the DA:I drama. For me, the fall of Haven was followed by a continuous sinusoid of:
1. Level up for the Next Story Mission in an Area that has the most easy to travel Landscape. Boooring. 2. Embark on a Story Mission. Looks sort of cool... What do I supposed to do again? 3. Get a walkthrough and read what I am supposed to do. 4. Go through convoluted exploration sequence of a small area, get sort of a build up, then an anticlimactic... nothing. No battle, no boss. Adamantine took the cake with 3 out of 3 bosses not being killable by the Inquisitor in a battle. A Dragon flies away. You can't even take a swing at an evil wizard. A traitor Warden dies heroically all on her own. Even a big demon in that quest refuses to fight to the death, you just toss a human sacrifice to it. WTF.
One of the quests, I was so clueless that I just actually have just defeated a dungeon boss that I realized it only searching for loot and he was a "near death clickable".
There is bland, and then there is... Inquisition.
Andromeda tries to make the bosses into interesting people you can kill than just another mob and have locales that can qualify as an actual dungeon rather than a room.
Anyway, Andromeda did a far better job to appealing to my feeling charged with an important task and keeping me interested than inquisition
I also only plan to go exploring for something that is important for me, like the memories, and skip the crafting entirely.
I am equally at a loss for words for how much I hated both the Haven and the Skyhold, the way too large, door infested convoluted PoS you had to continuously walk around to get convos. Tempest ftw.
|
|
osito
N2
Posts: 176 Likes: 223
inherit
5330
0
223
osito
176
Mar 21, 2017 10:09:04 GMT
March 2017
osito
|
Post by osito on Mar 31, 2017 17:43:29 GMT
Looking at those graphs posted above, I don't see one as being fundamentally better than the other. The so-called 'low' of losing Haven is exciting and makes getting the next place all the sweeter. I think that's more to do with personal preference than one system being inherently better than the other.
|
|
CTPhipps
N2
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 249 Likes: 275
inherit
5757
0
Apr 13, 2017 19:07:41 GMT
275
CTPhipps
249
March 2017
ctphipps
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by CTPhipps on Mar 31, 2017 17:45:02 GMT
I think the game suffers only in the following areas:
1. It's required to wash the taste of Mass Effect 3 from everyone's mouth.
2. The Kett are weak villains.
3. The squadmates are okay but no one really leaps off the page.
4. A lot is rehashed from the previous games.
So, the game is good but not great.
Still, I don't get anyone's hate for it as it's better than most games out there.
|
|
inherit
2044
0
Nov 10, 2016 16:47:07 GMT
10,271
AnDromedary
4,444
Nov 10, 2016 16:30:09 GMT
November 2016
andromedary
|
Post by AnDromedary on Mar 31, 2017 18:00:13 GMT
The narrative hook they were going for, and the way it ties into the gameplay hook, actually works remarkably well in my opinion. Ignoring the main Kett threat, you land on a planet, and now your quests are planet-specific. Doing those quests makes the planet more viable for your colonies, which is your job. From a gameplay hook - it's do quests, increase viabllity score, earn more viability points, spend viability points on perks designed to help you with crafting and combat, craft and improve your combat, and get stronger/more powerful. That's quite a compelling hook, and one that works well. THe problem with Andromeda is that it lacks a lot of polish and finesse that a game this large needs. While the framework surrounding the game is good, everything else isn't. The quests are boring, the side characters are mostly forgettable, most of the planets feel laborious to explore, the crafting UI is god awful, etc. So while I generally agree with what you are saying, I think Bigger and more complex can often mean better if it's done in the right way which prioritizes player entertainment and polish. I pretty much agree with this. I think the concept for Andromeda's gameplay and story were sound (well, apart from going to Andromeda but they kinda had to do it I guess). I also think they did a decent job with the overall gameplay. As you said, the real problem is the lack of polish in many areas and I also feel they could have cut a lot of the very simple fetch quests (mostly the additional tasks stuff and a few others) and rather included a few more intricate questlines, like the free labor camp -> attack Kett base -> attack Kett archeological dig -> find and deal with AI on Voeld. More of that and less of the "find 5 random data pads" quests would have improved a lot. Another suggestion that goes into the bigger =/= better category I'd make is this: Don't get too fixed on one concept. The concept for ME2/3 was small set pieces for cinematic missions and not much else. The concept for ME:A was huge worlds to drive around in and do Ubisoft style content and that's what it is (with the pleasant exception of Havarl, which broke out of the pattern a little). I'd like to see a mix of those two concepts. I want to be able to fly into a star system with the Tempest and just not know what I might find. It culd be a big planet to explore with the Nomad but maybe there are only 2 or 3of those in the entire game instead of 5-6. It could also be a planet with a smaller area like Havarl (or half of Havarl). It could be a more cinematic mission in a more linear level. It could be a N7 type mission like we saw in ME2/3 with very little content but just a fun distraction that will be done in 5-10 minutes. This would also allow us to visit more planets again. To be honest, I was pissed that BW's marketing said "there will be 100 planets so this will be the biggest ME ever". That was just misleading. While it might have been unrealistic to really hope for 100 planets, I was hoping that we'd visit at least as many worlds as we used to in the trilogy again. After all, the diversity in the places we could visit was a major cornerstone of the fun in the whole space exploration premise. ME:A, despite the fact that it probably still is the biggest ME ever, managed to disappoint me by ony letting us visit 5/6 planets. That balance between huge spaces on worlds and the number of worlds needs to be tweaked in the next game. But all these are solvable problems. in general, I think BW did well, taking ME out of the ME2/3 formula. Now it's time to take the beginnings of this new concept and refine it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
1818
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2017 18:23:07 GMT
I disagree with the posted graph for the DA:I drama. For me, the fall of Haven was followed by a continuous sinusoid of: 1. Level up for the Next Story Mission in an Area that has the most easy to travel Landscape. Boooring. 2. Embark on a Story Mission. Looks sort of cool... What do I supposed to do again? 3. Get a walkthrough and read what I am supposed to do. 4. Go through convoluted exploration sequence of a small area, get sort of a build up, then an anticlimactic... nothing. No battle, no boss. Adamantine took the cake with 3 out of 3 bosses not being killable by the Inquisitor in a battle. A Dragon flies away. You can't even take a swing at an evil wizard. A traitor Warden dies heroically all on her own. Even a big demon in that quest refuses to fight to the death, you just toss a human sacrifice to it. WTF. One of the quests, I was so clueless that I just actually have just defeated a dungeon boss that I realized it only searching for loot and he was a "near death clickable". There is bland, and then there is... Inquisition. Andromeda tries to make the bosses into interesting people you can kill than just another mob and have locales that can qualify as an actual dungeon rather than a room. Anyway, Andromeda did a far better job to appealing to my feeling charged with an important task and keeping me interested than inquisition I also only plan to go exploring for something that is important for me, like the memories, and skip the crafting entirely. I am equally at a loss for words for how much I hated both the Haven and the Skyhold, the way too large, door infested convoluted PoS you had to continuously walk around to get convos. Tempest ftw. I don't much appreciate it when a game tries too hard to enforce pacing. I'm one of those role-players who wants a game to allow me to create my own narrative. That bit with followers scattered all over the place started with DA2, and I really resented having to sit through lengthy load screens (PS3) just to have conversations with them, especially when they were in my party. The reason for that, of course, is so that they could make oh-the-drama cinematic cutscenes - which I don't value. (I actually prefer ambient conversations, because they feel like my character actually lives in that world instead of being some actor in a movie.) But - a lot of people appreciate those cutscenes, so DAI upped the ante. In DAI, you can stop to talk with a follower en route to somewhere else in that vast castle, and after the big hairy cutscene, you're dropped off... wherever. Oh, goody! DAI enforced pacing just enough to make it difficult for me to create a playthrough that feels well-paced. MEA isn't doing that to me thus far - I have plenty of main story stuff to do, but the game isn't pushing urgency, so I feel that I have more freedom to pace it out as I see fit.
|
|
inherit
4247
0
Apr 20, 2017 18:42:14 GMT
489
ticktak77
460
March 2017
ticktak77
|
Post by ticktak77 on Mar 31, 2017 18:30:36 GMT
The narrative hook they were going for, and the way it ties into the gameplay hook, actually works remarkably well in my opinion. Ignoring the main Kett threat, you land on a planet, and now your quests are planet-specific. Doing those quests makes the planet more viable for your colonies, which is your job. From a gameplay hook - it's do quests, increase viabllity score, earn more viability points, spend viability points on perks designed to help you with crafting and combat, craft and improve your combat, and get stronger/more powerful. That's quite a compelling hook, and one that works well. THe problem with Andromeda is that it lacks a lot of polish and finesse that a game this large needs. While the framework surrounding the game is good, everything else isn't. The quests are boring, the side characters are mostly forgettable, most of the planets feel laborious to explore, the crafting UI is god awful, etc. So while I generally agree with what you are saying, I think Bigger and more complex can often mean better if it's done in the right way which prioritizes player entertainment and polish. I pretty much agree with this. I think the concept for Andromeda's gameplay and story were sound (well, apart from going to Andromeda but they kinda had to do it I guess). I also think they did a decent job with the overall gameplay. As you said, the real problem is the lack of polish in many areas and I also feel they could have cut a lot of the very simple fetch quests (mostly the additional tasks stuff and a few others) and rather included a few more intricate questlines, like the free labor camp -> attack Kett base -> attack Kett archeological dig -> find and deal with AI on Voeld. More of that and less of the "find 5 random data pads" quests would have improved a lot. Another suggestion that goes into the bigger =/= better category I'd make is this: Don't get too fixed on one concept. The concept for ME2/3 was small set pieces for cinematic missions and not much else. The concept for ME:A was huge worlds to drive around in and do Ubisoft style content and that's what it is (with the pleasant exception of Havarl, which broke out of the pattern a little). I'd like to see a mix of those two concepts. I want to be able to fly into a star system with the Tempest and just not know what I might find. It culd be a big planet to explore with the Nomad but maybe there are only 2 or 3of those in the entire game instead of 5-6. It could also be a planet with a smaller area like Havarl (or half of Havarl). It could be a more cinematic mission in a more linear level. It could be a N7 type mission like we saw in ME2/3 with very little content but just a fun distraction that will be done in 5-10 minutes. This would also allow us to visit more planets again. To be honest, I was pissed that BW's marketing said "there will be 100 planets so this will be the biggest ME ever". That was just misleading. While it might have been unrealistic to really hope for 100 planets, I was hoping that we'd visit at least as many worlds as we used to in the trilogy again. After all, the diversity in the places we could visit was a major cornerstone of the fun in the whole space exploration premise. ME:A, despite the fact that it probably still is the biggest ME ever, managed to disappoint me by ony letting us visit 5/6 planets. That balance between huge spaces on worlds and the number of worlds needs to be tweaked in the next game. But all these are solvable problems. in general, I think BW did well, taking ME out of the ME2/3 formula. Now it's time to take the beginnings of this new concept and refine it. Yep. They could have easily trimmed many of the fetch quests out of this game. Let's say 75% of them, just dumped. And no one would have missed them and the gameplay would have improved. The problem with that means it's less content. SO now, playthroughs that are taking people 70-80 hours to complete, now only take 30-40 hours to complete. A 40 hour game all of a sudden begins to feel a little light on content, and then the community gets up in arms about it, etc. It's quite a catch-22.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
1255
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2017 18:37:32 GMT
The thing though, I just don't do the side-quests that do not pick my curiosity, and I think that's the way it is designed, by giving you tons of choices on what to do to level up before following the next part of the main story. In Inquisition, I did not do five or six major areas and did just enough quests in areas that pleased me to get enough levels to advance the main story. I find it odd that people complain that they do quests they do not like UNLESS they cannot meet the level requirements without the infamous mob grinds. But so far I have not seen any leveling problems in Andromeda related to skipping side-show, and it had by far more narrated and interesting stories than Inquisition.
So, I will reserve the judgment for now. If later in the story I find myself having to scour the surface of Eos for more outposts to establish and more ketts to kill because I am underleveld and is one-shotted in the next story mission, well, then, I will eat my words.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
Sept 16, 2024 15:46:24 GMT
9,324
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,875
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Mar 31, 2017 18:42:55 GMT
I disagree with the posted graph for the DA:I drama. For me, the fall of Haven was followed by a continuous sinusoid of: 1. Level up for the Next Story Mission in an Area that has the most easy to travel Landscape. Boooring. 2. Embark on a Story Mission. Looks sort of cool... What do I supposed to do again? 3. Get a walkthrough and read what I am supposed to do. 4. Go through convoluted exploration sequence of a small area, get sort of a build up, then an anticlimactic... nothing. No battle, no boss. Adamantine took the cake with 3 out of 3 bosses not being killable by the Inquisitor in a battle. A Dragon flies away. You can't even take a swing at an evil wizard. A traitor Warden dies heroically all on her own. Even a big demon in that quest refuses to fight to the death, you just toss a human sacrifice to it. WTF. One of the quests, I was so clueless that I just actually have just defeated a dungeon boss that I realized it only searching for loot and he was a "near death clickable". I find some of this hard to comprehend. How could anyone not know what was going on in a zone to the point where he actually needs a walkthrough? Could you give a specific example?
|
|
linksocarina
N5
Always teacher, sometimes writer
Teaching Mode Activated
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
PSN: LinksOcarina
Posts: 3,186 Likes: 4,072
inherit
Always teacher, sometimes writer
370
0
4,072
linksocarina
Teaching Mode Activated
3,186
August 2016
linksocarina
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
LinksOcarina
|
Post by linksocarina on Mar 31, 2017 18:49:24 GMT
I agree, but truth be told this game is not that complex.
What is complex is the narrative choices for a lot of individual quest lines. They give it weight and nuance.
What is not is the overall narrative arc. That...however...I have a feeling is going to go places soon.
|
|
inherit
1544
0
Feb 25, 2021 11:56:07 GMT
2,466
Andrew Lucas
1,562
Sept 11, 2016 18:33:18 GMT
September 2016
andrewlucas
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Andrew Lucas on Mar 31, 2017 18:56:20 GMT
I for real thought this was a Lin thread, it was so accurately worded.
Dammit. I guess Satan wins this round.
|
|
inherit
2044
0
Nov 10, 2016 16:47:07 GMT
10,271
AnDromedary
4,444
Nov 10, 2016 16:30:09 GMT
November 2016
andromedary
|
Post by AnDromedary on Mar 31, 2017 19:08:45 GMT
I pretty much agree with this. I think the concept for Andromeda's gameplay and story were sound (well, apart from going to Andromeda but they kinda had to do it I guess). I also think they did a decent job with the overall gameplay. As you said, the real problem is the lack of polish in many areas and I also feel they could have cut a lot of the very simple fetch quests (mostly the additional tasks stuff and a few others) and rather included a few more intricate questlines, like the free labor camp -> attack Kett base -> attack Kett archeological dig -> find and deal with AI on Voeld. More of that and less of the "find 5 random data pads" quests would have improved a lot. Another suggestion that goes into the bigger =/= better category I'd make is this: Don't get too fixed on one concept. The concept for ME2/3 was small set pieces for cinematic missions and not much else. The concept for ME:A was huge worlds to drive around in and do Ubisoft style content and that's what it is (with the pleasant exception of Havarl, which broke out of the pattern a little). I'd like to see a mix of those two concepts. I want to be able to fly into a star system with the Tempest and just not know what I might find. It culd be a big planet to explore with the Nomad but maybe there are only 2 or 3of those in the entire game instead of 5-6. It could also be a planet with a smaller area like Havarl (or half of Havarl). It could be a more cinematic mission in a more linear level. It could be a N7 type mission like we saw in ME2/3 with very little content but just a fun distraction that will be done in 5-10 minutes. This would also allow us to visit more planets again. To be honest, I was pissed that BW's marketing said "there will be 100 planets so this will be the biggest ME ever". That was just misleading. While it might have been unrealistic to really hope for 100 planets, I was hoping that we'd visit at least as many worlds as we used to in the trilogy again. After all, the diversity in the places we could visit was a major cornerstone of the fun in the whole space exploration premise. ME:A, despite the fact that it probably still is the biggest ME ever, managed to disappoint me by ony letting us visit 5/6 planets. That balance between huge spaces on worlds and the number of worlds needs to be tweaked in the next game. But all these are solvable problems. in general, I think BW did well, taking ME out of the ME2/3 formula. Now it's time to take the beginnings of this new concept and refine it. Yep. They could have easily trimmed many of the fetch quests out of this game. Let's say 75% of them, just dumped. And no one would have missed them and the gameplay would have improved. The problem with that means it's less content. SO now, playthroughs that are taking people 70-80 hours to complete, now only take 30-40 hours to complete. A 40 hour game all of a sudden begins to feel a little light on content, and then the community gets up in arms about it, etc. It's quite a catch-22. I am not sure if this isn't a misconception of the marketing departments. ME1 and especially 2/3 also were 30-40 hours at best (if you spend a lot of time reading the codex and GM and stuff) and the community was fine with it. As long as they don't just cut content but replace it with higher quality content (but less quantity of course, e.g. cut 5 fetch quest and implement 1 proper quest instead), and playthruoghs now take an average of 40 hours or so, I doubt people would complain (not en mass anyway, there will always be a few). Before DA:I and now ME:A BW was never really known for making super long games, just really good ones. I'd like them to realize their strength there again.
|
|
AGECCR
N3
Vae Victis
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 316 Likes: 620
inherit
2235
0
May 15, 2017 19:14:22 GMT
620
AGECCR
Vae Victis
316
December 2016
ageccr
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by AGECCR on Mar 31, 2017 19:09:27 GMT
Small and simple can work well (and best, imo), but you have to be smart about it. That's what the pros in any field do: make something exceedingly complex look so simple. Putting in more and more is easier to showcase the illusion of "better"; more opportunities to miss, but more to hit a mark of something. Stuffing stuff in isn't a good thing, it needs to have a purpose or strip it out.
I definitely think Andromeda is a step-up from Inquisition, one of their weakest titles for me. They're still getting used to the bigger world designs, but things are better integrated together as a whole. I think they'd do better shrinking down in a few areas for their games, for example: landscape size and the crafting (as op mentioned). The squadmates having a bigger chunk all around is awesome <- don't lessen that Bioware, please.
I will argue against having an overarching enemy to work towards taking down at the end. It's not necessary and I find it too much in media and often not dealt with the best hands, if you will. Plus, it's already been done in their games for the series (Sovereign and Saren in ME1, Collectors in ME2 and Reapers in 3). Also, we did have the Archon in Andromeda... I much preferred the other themes flowing through this game as the overarching plot: family, life and death, and hope in the face of despair. These are far more interesting and engaging than "Big baddies gotta be stopped!". Gameplay-wise, too formulaic.
Just my two cents on this.
|
|
inherit
4247
0
Apr 20, 2017 18:42:14 GMT
489
ticktak77
460
March 2017
ticktak77
|
Post by ticktak77 on Mar 31, 2017 19:11:12 GMT
The thing though, I just don't do the side-quests that do not pick my curiosity, and I think that's the way it is designed, by giving you tons of choices on what to do to level up before following the next part of the main story. In Inquisition, I did not do five or six major areas and did just enough quests in areas that pleased me to get enough levels to advance the main story. I find it odd that people complain that they do quests they do not like UNLESS they cannot meet the level requirements without the infamous mob grinds. But so far I have not seen any leveling problems in Andromeda related to skipping side-show, and it had by far more narrated and interesting stories than Inquisition. Many people 100% the game. You also need to do them to 100% most of the planets viability score
|
|
Hunter
N2
Run Fast
PSN: TheSho21
Posts: 127 Likes: 175
inherit
194
0
175
Hunter
Run Fast
127
August 2016
hunter
TheSho21
|
Post by Hunter on Mar 31, 2017 19:15:37 GMT
In my opinion the game is just ok. There is something lacking, it's missing a certain charm that the original trilogy had. I find myself getting bored with it after only a couple hours of playing. With the trilogy I could play for hours and never get bored. This is why I'm heading out to buy a Ps3 in order to play the trilogy again. I may return to Andromeda at a later date but I'm not sure.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
1255
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2017 19:22:52 GMT
I disagree with the posted graph for the DA:I drama. For me, the fall of Haven was followed by a continuous sinusoid of: 1. Level up for the Next Story Mission in an Area that has the most easy to travel Landscape. Boooring. 2. Embark on a Story Mission. Looks sort of cool... What do I supposed to do again? 3. Get a walkthrough and read what I am supposed to do. 4. Go through convoluted exploration sequence of a small area, get sort of a build up, then an anticlimactic... nothing. No battle, no boss. Adamantine took the cake with 3 out of 3 bosses not being killable by the Inquisitor in a battle. A Dragon flies away. You can't even take a swing at an evil wizard. A traitor Warden dies heroically all on her own. Even a big demon in that quest refuses to fight to the death, you just toss a human sacrifice to it. WTF. One of the quests, I was so clueless that I just actually have just defeated a dungeon boss that I realized it only searching for loot and he was a "near death clickable". I find some of this hard to comprehend. How could anyone not know what was going on in a zone to the point where he actually needs a walkthrough? Could you give a specific example? The Exalted Place. Was trying to go North forever. Walk through? Apparently need to do something to unlock an Operation... forgetit. The Winter Palace. OMG, climbed that trellis and jumped back because approval rating was dropping like a stone about seven times, the Journal tells you to search the Library or something. On the verge of tears, find a walkthrough. Apparently you need to find a halla statue waaaay out of the way to go unlock some door to progress the plot. I kept fighting the two parties in the hinterlands while running around till I looked up in the Walkthrough where their "strongholds" were. Not that the battles there were any better than in the general area. The Hissing Wastes (or whatever) where you needed to go find an Orlesian scientist to unlock a quest for a keep in that area, and then start doing an unremarkable quest chain to clear out maybe three operations that got you North... I am not sure why, but Inquisition was apparently really hard on the going North impulses. And all those infuriatingly vague Journal and "hint" entries... "this door cannot be open w/o a special mechanism" "locked from inside" "search the area for clues" made me so happy my blood pressure is good. because otherwise, I'd be hospitalized. Honest to god, any time I was stomped, on any map, I searched the Internet, and I always ended up finding a post starting: "Please, HELP! I was running around for 2 hours trying to find X... I feel like killing someone I am so MAD!" and the response starting with: "Well, it is a little tricky... First you need to go to over there and to do this, then..." Gods, I can't describe how much I hated the areas in that game. I was literally so excited when I saw I had enough levels to get on the straight and narrow after Adamantine and don't have to do all those Emprise du Lion, Forbidden Osasis etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
1255
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2017 19:28:32 GMT
The thing though, I just don't do the side-quests that do not pick my curiosity, and I think that's the way it is designed, by giving you tons of choices on what to do to level up before following the next part of the main story. In Inquisition, I did not do five or six major areas and did just enough quests in areas that pleased me to get enough levels to advance the main story. I find it odd that people complain that they do quests they do not like UNLESS they cannot meet the level requirements without the infamous mob grinds. But so far I have not seen any leveling problems in Andromeda related to skipping side-show, and it had by far more narrated and interesting stories than Inquisition. Many people 100% the game. You also need to do them to 100% most of the planets viability score I hope that 100% viability is reachable through not all the quest completions and is not really required. I am okay with imperfect endings. Also, if you could increase it with MP, like Galactic Readiness, that would be super.
|
|
inherit
2044
0
Nov 10, 2016 16:47:07 GMT
10,271
AnDromedary
4,444
Nov 10, 2016 16:30:09 GMT
November 2016
andromedary
|
Post by AnDromedary on Mar 31, 2017 19:31:14 GMT
Many people 100% the game. You also need to do them to 100% most of the planets viability score I hope that 100% viability is reachable through not all the quest completions and is not really required. I am okay with imperfect endings. Also, if you could increase it with MP, like Galactic Readiness, that would be super. IIRC, I got to 100% viability on 2 planets now quite a while before finishing all the quests there. So it shouldn't be a problem.
|
|
inherit
2026
0
Apr 12, 2017 18:45:41 GMT
139
ravenous
224
November 2016
ravenous
|
Post by ravenous on Mar 31, 2017 19:32:03 GMT
I disagree to me the bigger more complex works for this game in my opinion of course and so far I like everything about this game and I will never understand the hate for this game no matter how many times I read the so called reason for the hate
|
|
CTPhipps
N2
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 249 Likes: 275
inherit
5757
0
Apr 13, 2017 19:07:41 GMT
275
CTPhipps
249
March 2017
ctphipps
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by CTPhipps on Mar 31, 2017 20:10:08 GMT
The thing though, I just don't do the side-quests that do not pick my curiosity, and I think that's the way it is designed, by giving you tons of choices on what to do to level up before following the next part of the main story. In Inquisition, I did not do five or six major areas and did just enough quests in areas that pleased me to get enough levels to advance the main story. I find it odd that people complain that they do quests they do not like UNLESS they cannot meet the level requirements without the infamous mob grinds. But so far I have not seen any leveling problems in Andromeda related to skipping side-show, and it had by far more narrated and interesting stories than Inquisition. Many people 100% the game. You also need to do them to 100% most of the planets viability score That's not true. Every world can be brought to 100% without doing all the quests.
|
|