Hello, mob. Just a bit curious to know your opinions on this subject. The main point that might have been responsible for an entire rework on ME franchise is going Open World. Critics have debated on it for a while now. Some of them point out that this might have been a mistake. Some members here have suggested the same, others are motivated, happy and engaged by it. So, long story short. Do you approve of MEA's Open World, AS IT IS NOW? Yes or no. If NO, why not? If you wish to explain your option, even YES, or want to add a few words to any position you have, be our guest. Please, people, be civil.

Yes, I do approve of open world. I just wish it had been implemented with more care.

Qualified yes. As an adventure game it is leaps and bounds forward... but as a roleplaying game it feels like a step back. The two do not have to be mutually exclusive but you can feel the shift of focus. It isn't fair they have to try and jump over the bar set with the ME series but they set it that high themselves. I would personally hate to have to have everything I produce be compared to my best work for expectation. Hopefully they now have standing in the shadow of the original ME series out of the way and can run with this one.

@jpcerutti1 wrote: Qualified yes. As an adventure game it is leaps and bounds forward... but as a roleplaying game it feels like a step back. The two do not have to be mutually exclusive but you can feel the shift of focus. It isn't fair they have to try and jump over the bar set with the ME series but they set it that high themselves. I would personally hate to have to have everything I produce be compared to my best work for expectation. Hopefully they now have standing in the shadow of the original ME series out of the way and can run with this one. I agree with you about them taking the ME series in another direction. More emphasis seems to be placed on combat/ game play and less on the RPG aspect. Story/character/choice and consequence is the ONLY reason I have bought Bioware games in the past and it appears to me that they are moving away from that formula. If that is indeed the case then I won't be continuing with the series. AS far as Open world goes, I'm fine with it as long as other parts of the game don't suffer because of it, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Yes to the open world setting, no to how it was implemented. You plunk down a colony, and it's fully built after a cutscene. That's totally not realistic. It should start out small, and necessitate you coming back later to see it built up some more. The map should noticeably change, each time you come back after some time has passed. Missed opportunity after the Kett base is destroyed on Eos, for example, for Initiative forces to be picking it apart for tech and intel, or attempts to be made to recover/salvage the first two sites. Prodromos doesn't visibly grow since you initially plunk it down, and it's like that for every colony. How they handled viability is also kinda dumb. It shouldn't be a static value that you reach and that's it. It should drop over time (and never reach 100% until just short of endgame), with new objectives to complete that simply weren't available before, and not simply walled-off by insurmountable waist height fences/radiation hazards. Reaching 100% viability should be an indication that you're literally done with the map, and have zero reason to ever go back there.

Definitely yes, I approve of the new "open world" structure of MEA. Can it be improved upon? Yes, again. But I think Bioware took a step in the right direction by going this route over the previous games that were very linear in where you could go. Looking back at those maps now, they were basically tunnels that you could travel through a static environment. I'm not knocking the original trilogy, I loved those games, but there was always this tight restriction on where you could go. This was true in Dragon Age 1&2 also, but Bioware changed their approach to game worlds with the advent of Inquisition. There also seem to be degrees of "open worldness" in different games. Inquisition, Witcher 3, Skyrim, Fallout 4, Two Worlds, and even going back as far as Gothic 3 (there are others but I can only comment on those games that I've actually played) all have their own approach in how open the world is. There will always be barriers of some type, where the open world actually ends, some type of barrier, whether it be natural or invisible. MEA has made a good start, but there are always improvements to be made, such as how certain quests/tasks require you to cover ground you've already discovered. Also someone previously mentioned how expansion was handled in Inquisition, with troops/citizens occupying new territory once it was safe. I'd like to see something like this, give the world a little more population as you achieve 100% viability. Get a few more out of Cryo.

POLL | Open world. Yes or No? Then, how?

39 Replies

Anonymous
9 years ago
YES.

I love feeling smol compaired to the scope of a planet, a galaxy, a universe. I love space to move and exploring. I prefer the freedom Andromeda had given over the linear direction of ME3 tbh.

P.S. this doesn't mean I think it was implemented perfectly though- there is a lot of room for improvement but I do think they can learn and build on it now for a more improved experience next time. Even this time with fixes etc.
Anonymous
9 years ago
Yes, I do approve of open world. I just wish it had been implemented with more care.
jpcerutti1
9 years ago
Qualified yes. As an adventure game it is leaps and bounds forward... but as a roleplaying game it feels like a step back.

The two do not have to be mutually exclusive but you can feel the shift of focus. It isn't fair they have to try and jump over the bar set with the ME series but they set it that high themselves. I would personally hate to have to have everything I produce be compared to my best work for expectation. Hopefully they now have standing in the shadow of the original ME series out of the way and can run with this one.
mcsupersport
Hero+
9 years ago
I loved the mostly open world design of the planets, but hated the linear design of the quests....

You had to do main quest A to get to main quest B, to get main quest C, and so on.....rather than being able to do C, A, B, D and finally E....

You had to do Eos, then Aya, then finally a choice of two.....so many other quests you couldn't pick up in the middle or just find an item for later....no you had to WAIT until you got the quest and THEN you could find items....such as on Harval, finding Remanent relics, I travel ALL over that planet, then get the quest and when I wander back by someplace I had already been, poof item to pick up....nope couldn't snag it the first 3 times I passed by here, I had to wait until I talked to X person.......
Anonymous
9 years ago
@mcsupersport wrote:

I wander back by someplace I had already been, poof item to pick up....nope couldn't snag it the first 3 times I passed by here, I had to wait until I talked to X person.......

Yah, that bothered a lot too.

I had just realized I haven't post my vote.

The way it is, I don't approve. I could also answer that I like Open Worlds, but not like this? Both would do. I also feel that the design of things around didn't come as intended. I feel a generic copy and past feel about the worlds (I don't mean visually, each planet is very beautiful and gorgeous, never complained about scenery), where you have vaults, then you have camps, then you have bizarre NPCs strandled, some scanning of animals and plants and elements. Then we have the looting system, with inventory, and crafting ... these things are connected to the Open World scheme itself. In my humble opinion, all that need rework.
Anonymous
9 years ago
Meh. Those were the options right? Yes, No, or Meh? Cause I choose meh.

I guess... I will be the first to lean towards... no? No.

Here's why, most of the game was just filler to me and you asked how it is now. There were whole star systems there for practically nothing and that's effort that could have went into making more worlds that could be explored despite having fewer planets and the like.

But, if I am being entirely honest, unlike most people, I've never been a fan of clutter. There's a ton of * you can loot in games like Skyrim that have virtually no purpose other than being clutter and I hate it. "Booooo Pretzle!"

Yeah yeah. Everybody say hello to the bad guy, lol.

I especially do not approve of the open world as it is now when I think of fetch quests that had me jumping from star system to empty star system.
fudgietroll
9 years ago
Yes, I like open world

However, I wish it had been implemented more like DA:I's open world, to give you a sense of accomplishment. IE, you establish forward camps, destroy enemy spawn points, get patrols/explorers moving in mostly secured zones, capture and occupy bases/fortresses, and generally push the forces of darkness back to the fringes of the map so that you can still fight groups of them but they no longer own the place. Sadly, a couple of small safe zones and a collection of giant interstellar blue plastic eggs doesn't have the same oomph. In theory this is a giant 4X RPG, so it would be nice to have a full 4X feel, at least on the ground.
chrissyce1123
9 years ago
Yes, I would of liked more hidden surprises. I enjoy wandering especially if it means more xp or found information. It would also have been nice to ask people who are just trying to survive to come back from being exiled.
VladVonCastein
9 years ago
Yes if it is done properly, however looking at the current state of MEA, think it's just too much for them to handle. It's clearly quantity at the sacrifice of quality, making their open world filled with crappy fetch quest. I enjoyed playing me2/me3's short 30-40hr game play more than 100hrs of this.

So Yes to a properly done open world, but No if they cant manage. I would rather play a good ME4(as in a continuation of the ME3 style) than MEA.
Anonymous
9 years ago
Yes, BUT these worlds really need a bit more diversity to them, maybe a season now and then, day and night rotation would be great.

I like the open world concept because it's not linear, yes you could potentially do things out of order, but that's up to you to figure out. It gives you more investment, being able to discover something on your own. There's less handholding. That being said, it's not quite open world enough for my tastes. Not enough to do or discover, that's not relevant to your mission. Maybe go camping with your love interest, gather resources, go hunting, scare the wildlife with weird mating sounds. Maybe start Ryder town somewhere, anywhere of your choosing (that doesn't already have a town in that same spot).

I guess I would say, it's too much sandbox and not enough world.