Polygon's open-letter to BioWare regarding their open-world-like games.

I think one reason Skyrim is still around and kicking is the modding community. Heck there's even an entire new world to download and play as a mod.

Haven't been able to do that with any BW game since the Original NeverWinter Nights. Modding DAO was easy enough. However, when the modding community found the code inside the game (DAO) that would allow the player to host servers, EA or BW whichever, had a cease and desist order handed to the modder that started the project

And modding anything since DAO that has a BioWare name on the label has been a jump through the hoops, not only for the modding community, the end users of the mods.

Ridiculous. Skyrim was a hit(which is a big understatement), fallout 3 was a hit, fallout 4 was a worthy game but not shattering records. People don't play Bethesda games for the story either, they play it because of endless things to do, being allowed to go where ever they want. The dude stories tend to also be better than the actual mainline quest. In fallout you can discover the history of the faults that destroyed themselves or what their original intentions were, in skyrim you can take part in assassinating the emperor, decide the fate of the dark brother hood, bring the thrives guild back to relevance, discover the dreadful gods trying to come out if their slumber, ectvect the list is literally endless. You're correct the mods help by quite a bit but the base game was no slouch lol.

specifcally at the elder scrolls series as I've never enjoyed the fallout series: I find the elder scrolls as orobone of the best RPGs because it lets your imagination go wild if you choose to do so. Ever notice how every ESO game your character starts out in prison? Yet they never give or expand on it (in skyrim case you happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time), that lets the player use their imagination to make up that reason, same applies to various quests where everything may not get expanded upon but that's part of the design to it, you make up the scenario in your mind. See dead bodies? Investigate what you can but ultimately you never find out what happens minus slight clues that only lead you to speculate.

i guess I need you to elaborate how they wouldn't be able to stand on their own, if you've ever played those games you'll see they don't necessarily have direct ties to the previous game, nothing story wise translates to the next game, it's essentially a new world each game but only looking better and better each game. They pretty much are games standing on their own and not relying off previous ones.skyrim is very different from oblivion, oblivion is very different to morrowind, ESO is different than all of them (obviously though since it's the first multiplayer for the series). I think you don't give credit to Bethesda when you think their ganescwould fail on its own, theyvtend to only get better each game and Bethesda is one of the few devs I can even say that about.

I know a lot of people have a lot of instances where the open world fell short. I mentioned the time sinks before. But I also would note how little you can alter it. That drop ship coming in and dropping people off for the 50th time? Didn't I kill them before? Whats going on? So people you killed come back to life, but that mineral node you extracted once from is gone forever. And the plot flags or lack there of - comments from Sam or squaddies that refer to quests you already finished. I could go on, and maybe these are not open world problems, but they are problems that are exposed because you return to the same areas over and over again, something that only happens in open world.

I think the formula they're looking for is something like the typical BioWare roundabout like Feros, Noveria, Therum or DA:I's Warden campaign vs Orlais but where each beat is its own planet. This actually harkens more back to the KOTOR formula as well than I think BioWare seems to let it show. The problem is how much MEA and DA:I wastes all this potential by making every planet not have a plot that is tied to the overarching plot. Because they're optional they aren't essential to the story and thus they become filler arcs or vignettes. I think the ones in Andromeda are pretty vital like the Krogan settlement on Elaaden but there's no real story there. It's just the length of a side-quest maybe and it could've potentially been Tuchanka of ME3 in its full length.

A game I think they could take tremendous inspiration from in terms of pacing the story of each open world is InFamous on PS3. I recall that game had such a great sense of story-progression despite being a pretty basic open-world and similarly Jak 2 had a bit of that too. They're both basically the "GTA formula" but GTA seems to jump between different mission givers all the time while I felt InFamous really kept a nice sense of having a hero vs villain arc from start to finish that simply took you from one landmark in the map to the next whilist allowing for free-roam between every mission. The key to a BioWare plot is to ensure that the 3 suplots that act like a supporting structure to the central plot can be done in any order with minimal sacrifice to story pacing and narrative structure. I just don't think the best option is to make every open-world zone completely optional and inconsequential to the larger story.

In other words, I think they've made DAI and MEA too open to the point where it starts to all feel like filler.

Honestly, I enjoy MEA... now that I finished playing it and know the pacing I want to take, the quests i'll never bother with again, and what would let me craft a playthrough that lets my character be defined by their actions. But how long did I had to invest to know the game so I can now play it for fun? WIf its gonna be an open world, at least give us some clue to know what were getting ourselves into. Thats all I would ask of the game.

Like the f*ing skulls&shards in DAI. Should I really go online to read up on quests to know what Im investing my time in? Thats not my definition of a game.

Then how would I know that mining is completely pointless? Or that killing zillons of outposts for datapads brings nothing to the story? How do I not get my questlog (and my map ffs) cluttered with quest I have no intention of finishing ?

Now that I know the game, I got an idea of the workings of things and what quests to decline so my military type, scientist type and smuggler type playthroughs dont all feel the same.

But guess what... i would have loved to be able to make those choices the fisrt time I played. I dont think this is asking too much. How about giving us questlines on every planet:

The main questline for creating outposts (of course)
A scientific questline with scanning plants, helping grow things and find water, etc.
A military questline with securing the place, hitting bandit and kett camps, etc.
An exploration questline with discovering mysteries, going after remnant artefacts (beyound the vaults needed to make the place viable)
A smuggler questline for helping shady types get their footing, making planet profitable, etc.

questline can still be a loose collection of quests and 'You look like the adventuring/scientist/military type... my friend who lives/works/fights there may need your help, here are a few navpoints to start with'

Lets say it takes 3 out of 5 to make a planet viable (main + 2 others = 100% viability). Its up to you to do them all of course. Or craft a Pathfinder that speaks by their actions. Have a change of heart midgame and go from the scientist approach to the military one, or be influenced by what you think will be more profitable to the planet. Roleplay! Have fun!

That doesnt keep you from exploring, coming back and running an extra questline based on what you feel is needed, etc. Its just a more story driven approach of an open world.

Honestly all I want is to have a sense of how to craft the character I want ot play BEFORE having to do all possible quests. I want to have fun the first time around without a wiki to help me invest my time appropriatly.

They treid the open world formula twice and failed miserably in incoporating this game design with Bioware traditional narrative. The article is right, drop it!

The shattered planet in Andromeda is amazing. It's the smallest planet you can drive the Mako, but also the most unique. That's the way. Not Karada, not Eos, not the Hintherlands...

Laugh all you want, at least I'm not on CDPRs site praising a subpar game over one of their titles. Of course it would take work for me to find a poorer open world RPG than TW3.

Do you see hoy fanboys come off as yet? And still am not making a fool myself on a site devoted to a dev I hate like many of you are.

If they get the message that people like me just dislike open worlds... then they're getting the right message.  TW3 is total crap in my mind... no better than ME:A as far as sidequests go.  I'm waiting for an Andromeda patch, but in the meantime I thought I'd give TW3 a second chance.  I've been plowing my way through Velen for hours now... can't even remember what the main story is... have TON of crap loot and crying widows all over the place.  The side quests are every bit as bad as the basic fetch ones... go here, kill this, come back and get paid... BORING if you're at an acceptable level or you just die if you're not... and you can't tell from all the markers what is at your level or not... and all the reading of those bits of books and jumbled notes.  I doubt I'll finish the game again this time.  I'm really hoping Andromeda get another patch soon so I can at least get into a time period I enjoy.  I don't yet know if they did a better job on the side quests;; but IMO, they couldn't do much worse than TW3.

Please Bioware... give me some proper level gating any day of the week over all this "open world" (translation:  only good for people who like being lost) shite.

No, you're making a fool of yourself by being deliberately contrarian because you seem to want to hate on TW3 for no real reason

Says the fanboy.

Poor story.
Poor antagonists.
Repetitive side quests
One dimensional characters
Generic world with cut and paste design
All the subtlety as a teenager screaming he's edgy

The game was simply awful. It is not objectively great despite the religous zealotry of your fanboyism annoyingly screams.

Anyone can post random bullshit, back it up

What makes characters like the Bloody Baron or Ciri one dimensional?
What makes the monster contracts or things like the assassination of Radovid repetitive?

There are valid criticisms to level at TW3, it does have weak main antagonists in the form of the Wild Hunt leaders (though I'd say it makes up for this with the likes of the Crones).