inherit
9002
0
Oct 13, 2023 22:02:03 GMT
681
natetrace
437
Jul 13, 2017 17:36:20 GMT
July 2017
natetrace
|
Post by natetrace on Dec 31, 2018 4:20:34 GMT
But I and people on this forum dont think that it’s a bad game. No, you like the game in spite of its poor quality - it's not good because you like it. Quality is not subjective. I don't think it qualifies as a bad game. If we base it on gameplay alone, it succeeds. I also defend Andromeda because I'll be damned if I stand by while someone rips a game that has a butt like Cora's, which rivals Mirandas, in it.
|
|
inherit
8885
0
Mar 28, 2024 21:16:55 GMT
7,209
river82
4,946
July 2017
river82
|
Post by river82 on Dec 31, 2018 4:26:23 GMT
The effects of these consequences are outside the scope of the main story, and so the consequences border on meaningless as it pertains right now with the information we have. The idea of choice and consequence is for the consequences of your choices to affect the story or the game. The story, once again, is the plot and the characters. You're talking about consequences for characters that are insignificant, and so the choice and consequences of Andromeda is also insignificant. Your squadmates dying affects the story being told because you are deprived of a character that can have a major imprint on the story (not plot) and gameplay. The council dying at the end of ME1 had plot ramifications. Choices which affect the lives of NPC#30053 are inconsequential, and not what I look for with choice and consequences. Andromeda is trash with that mechanic. Trash. Everything is trash nowadays. I see that word used to describe things often. This is trash. That is trash. Also the council dying did not have a large impact. A few lines here and there, an all human council they didn't even bother to create, and in 3 a ship that looks just like the acension can be seen flying to earth, even if destroyed in 1. Maybe they had a backup. BioWare always said the loyalty missions were optional and would have no impact on the main story. Come on, if they did have a major impact people would say they were recycling the ME2 formula... and they'd probably call it trash. I didn't say Andromeda was trash, I said it was trash relating to that one aspect. That one aspect being choice and consequence. The measuring stick being how choice and consequence affects the experience. I didn't say the council dying had a large impact, and if it came across like that then my bad cause I certainly didn't mean it. I'm currently watching the Lakers getting smashed and venting on Laker forums, so it's not like these are heavily thought out essays. The council affects the plot, so even if choice and consequence can be done better and the council dying doesn't have much impact, you can affect the plot in a way in the first game. Which helps satisfy illusion of control. Which helps satisfy agency, which is important in games. It automatically makes ME1 better in this regard than ME;A. Loyalty missions have negligible impact on the plot. The effect on the whole experience is more though. Because Bioware put such a heavy emphasis on companions, and because companions and their banter and dialogue make up much of the experience in a Bioware game, their absence (if they die) creates a hole in the experience. Therefore they matter. In contrast anyone dying in Andromeda doesn't really create a hole in the experience, therefore the consequences are minor. You're right, choice and consequence wasn't great in ME:T, but it was done better than Andromeda almost by default. Quality is subjective, people have priorities and how a game measures up depends on how it does on its list of priorities. The choice and consequence is a negative to me, in Andromeda. What is quite annoying is that choice and consequence is quite blatently a negative in Andromeda, and worse than the trilogy, and yet we have to have these 3 page arguments every time because people just don't want to admit there's anything wrong with their games.
|
|
Arcian
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, SWTOR, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Origin: GVArcian
XBL Gamertag: GVArcian
Prime Posts: 2473
Prime Likes: 2168
Posts: 928 Likes: 1,354
inherit
174
0
Nov 28, 2023 21:09:53 GMT
1,354
Arcian
928
August 2016
arcian
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, SWTOR, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
GVArcian
GVArcian
2473
2168
|
Post by Arcian on Dec 31, 2018 5:20:57 GMT
No, you like the game in spite of its poor quality - it's not good because you like it. Quality is not subjective. I don't think it qualifies as a bad game. If we base it on gameplay alone, it succeeds. I also defend Andromeda because I'll be damned if I stand by while someone rips a game that has a butt like Cora's, which rivals Mirandas, in it. We're not basing it on gameplay alone, though, but the complete package. When you weigh the game's strengths against its weaknesses, it comes out negative, especially if weighed against previous Mass Effect games.
|
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
24,146
themikefest
14,765
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Dec 31, 2018 12:43:14 GMT
Drack leaves? Is there a video you can post showing that? He won't talk to you at the end and I read in the Wiki early on that he could leave if those decisions were made, so I think, in that case, it's unlikely he stays on as a squad mate for a sequel. So there's no video to prove that he leaves? Can you post a link to wiki saying it could lead to the krogan's departure? So it's just an assumption on your part that he might leave if there's a sequel to MEA Shooting the stowaway's girlfriend is not a big deal. The stupid asari wanted to kill me. So I return the favor. The same in DAO. The stupid elf Zevran tried to kill my Warden. He is killed. Then in ME1, the stupid krogan thought his shotgun would let him have his way. He was wrong. He is dead. What would make a good consequence is if Ryder could throw the stupid peepee asari in the lava for her nonsense. Or leave her on the planet. Better yet, have Ryder remove her from the roster by turning her over to Nexus security to explain why she did what she did. I will admit that seeing him hanging upside down was alright while he crapped all over himself. Liam? Ha. The only reason Ryder is saving people is because the 'I'm not really a cop' Kosta was the one that caused the problem to begin with. What's the worse that can happen? A line of dialogue with a firm tone. Lame. I would have Ryder turn him over to Nexus security so he can explain why he did what he did. In Vetra's case, wasn't it her sister that caused the problem to begin with?
|
|
inherit
6864
0
1,975
aglomeracja
1,178
April 2017
aglomeracja
|
Post by aglomeracja on Dec 31, 2018 13:01:23 GMT
Drack never leaves.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2018 14:53:58 GMT
He won't talk to you at the end and I read in the Wiki early on that he could leave if those decisions were made, so I think, in that case, it's unlikely he stays on as a squad mate for a sequel. So there's no video to prove that he leaves? Can you post a link to wiki saying it could lead to the krogan's departure? So it's just an assumption on your part that he might leave if there's a sequel to MEA Shooting the stowaway's girlfriend is not a big deal. The stupid asari wanted to kill me. So I return the favor. The same in DAO. The stupid elf Zevran tried to kill my Warden. He is killed. Then in ME1, the stupid krogan thought his shotgun would let him have his way. He was wrong. He is dead. What would make a good consequence is if Ryder could throw the stupid peepee asari in the lava for her nonsense. Or leave her on the planet. Better yet, have Ryder remove her from the roster by turning her over to Nexus security to explain why she did what she did. I will admit that seeing him hanging upside down was alright while he crapped all over himself. Liam? Ha. The only reason Ryder is saving people is because the 'I'm not really a cop' Kosta was the one that caused the problem to begin with. What's the worse that can happen? A line of dialogue with a firm tone. Lame. I would have Ryder turn him over to Nexus security so he can explain why he did what he did. In Vetra's case, wasn't it her sister that caused the problem to begin with? Yes, it's an assumption based on something I read months ago when the game was first released. I'm honestly not going to bother to go looking for the quote now (a full year later and it's simply not worth it with you since you'll just move that target and keep nitpicking about it anyways), but I am assuring you I"m not lying or making it up. It probably is based on somewhat faulty information posted on the internet by someone else who was assessing the game without having fully played it. That's one reason why I've said that I wish the people who made these videos would hold their ponies until they've at least played the entire game through once.
As far as I'm concerned, I may yet trigger an actual leaving scene with Drack. I've only played through the game 10 times and it's a big game. In each playthrough so far, something has surprised me and changed simply because I changed my selection in one line of dialogue. These are complex games with many different little triggers that have to 'work together" to trigger certain events. It's one reason we like the MET series - that it can still surprise with something "new" after we've played it several times through. Drack leaving is also something I could see Bioware having cut because, in an open world game, at what point can the game consider Drack's LM never going to be done by the player? Simple answer, you can't. In an open world, the player could go back and complete Drack's LM long after the ending, so if he's already left the squad how does the player do that? So, perhaps it was something changed/removed because the devs thought it more important to allow for 100% completion (as opposed to having situations like in Fallout 4 where certain choices lock out numerous side quests arbitrarily). That's why I'm also assuming that it's possible the reference was about the likelihood of his not agreeing to continue on with the squad in ME:A2. I could see the choices alienating Drack and the Krogan setting up a second game where the krogan become antagonists (much like the exiles are antagonists in ME:A).
As for the rest. It really doesn't matter who caused the problem. There is a consequence to not completing the quest. They are not the consequences you would have prefered, but they aree there nonetheless. The rather absolutist statement that ME LM's have no consequence is, therefore, inaccurate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2018 15:12:19 GMT
Trash. Everything is trash nowadays. I see that word used to describe things often. This is trash. That is trash. Also the council dying did not have a large impact. A few lines here and there, an all human council they didn't even bother to create, and in 3 a ship that looks just like the acension can be seen flying to earth, even if destroyed in 1. Maybe they had a backup. BioWare always said the loyalty missions were optional and would have no impact on the main story. Come on, if they did have a major impact people would say they were recycling the ME2 formula... and they'd probably call it trash. I didn't say Andromeda was trash, I said it was trash relating to that one aspect. That one aspect being choice and consequence. The measuring stick being how choice and consequence affects the experience. I didn't say the council dying had a large impact, and if it came across like that then my bad cause I certainly didn't mean it. I'm currently watching the Lakers getting smashed and venting on Laker forums, so it's not like these are heavily thought out essays. The council affects the plot, so even if choice and consequence can be done better and the council dying doesn't have much impact, you can affect the plot in a way in the first game. Which helps satisfy illusion of control. Which helps satisfy agency, which is important in games. It automatically makes ME1 better in this regard than ME;A. Loyalty missions have negligible impact on the plot. The effect on the whole experience is more though. Because Bioware put such a heavy emphasis on companions, and because companions and their banter and dialogue make up much of the experience in a Bioware game, their absence (if they die) creates a hole in the experience. Therefore they matter. In contrast anyone dying in Andromeda doesn't really create a hole in the experience, therefore the consequences are minor. You're right, choice and consequence wasn't great in ME:T, but it was done better than Andromeda almost by default. Quality is subjective, people have priorities and how a game measures up depends on how it does on its list of priorities. The choice and consequence is a negative to me, in Andromeda. What is quite annoying is that choice and consequence is quite blatently a negative in Andromeda, and worse than the trilogy, and yet we have to have these 3 page arguments every time because people just don't want to admit there's anything wrong with their games. I can agree that one reason the life and death choices you make in Andromeda feel less impactful is because they don't involve the direct life or death of a squadmate. As I said, it was something I recall several fans asking for on the old BSN and I recall Bioware assuring us that no squad mates would be allowed to die during the game. Bioware has a history of making some poor devs choices based on what the fans requested and thought they wanted but later discovered that they didn't want that after all. Same goes for scrapping the P/R dialogue system. I had lengthy discusssions on these boards before Andromeda's release where I was blatantly telling people that scrapping the P/R dialogue system might actually reduce the range of characterizations that could be played. Back then, people didn't believe me; but that IS exactly what happened in Andromeda. Ryder's characterization choices are not a broad as Shepard's because the choices we have, despite having more of them, portray more subtle differences than the P/R system did. A drawback to the P/R system though is that Shepard, at times, would appear to be rather schizophrenic. Bioware still hasn't found the ideal balance in this area. I expect they'll keep making changes to their system until they do (regardless of where or when the next ME game is set).
As for your problem with 3-page arguments, some of that is that you don't want to admit that the people arguing with you are making less absolute assessments than you are often prepared to give them credit for while , at the same time, making several absolute implications yourself. I still say, as far as consequences go, much of it is that we don't know how Bioware might have worked the choices we made in ME:A1 into ME:A2 and ME:A3. Some of the those minor choices in ME:A1 could yet have major implications in future games. We're only in the first chapter of the book. We won't know the consequences until the final chapters are on the table. Shepard's story is complete/done, so we know the consequences of the choices we made in ME1. What impact did the council choice have on ME1 itself? None at all. We didn't see that impact until ME2 and ME3... and we were disappointed with it. In ME:A, there is a similar choice left on the table - did you accept the kett's deal to back off during the fight. It had little impact on the fight itself, but Bioware shas set it up as meaning more in a future game by having her walk towards the camera in an ominous way. We won't know whether the impact of that choice meets our now expectations until Bioware finishes the story they were at least intending to tell us. If ME:A2 gets derailed by the fans, we'll simply never know.
|
|
inherit
Scribbles
185
0
30,191
Hanako Ikezawa
Fan from 2003 - 2020
22,332
August 2016
hanakoikezawa
|
Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Dec 31, 2018 15:25:58 GMT
I don't think it qualifies as a bad game. If we base it on gameplay alone, it succeeds. I also defend Andromeda because I'll be damned if I stand by while someone rips a game that has a butt like Cora's, which rivals Mirandas, in it. We're not basing it on gameplay alone, though, but the complete package. When you weigh the game's strengths against its weaknesses, it comes out negative, especially if weighed against previous Mass Effect games. In your subjective opinion.
|
|
inherit
The Pathfinder
638
0
Sept 22, 2017 23:01:09 GMT
9,372
Serza
Rendering planets viable since 2017
6,272
August 2016
serza
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
13152
|
Post by Serza on Dec 31, 2018 15:28:32 GMT
I was about to argue that you're not being much more objective than Smiles, if you're gonna go that way...
But I was beaten to it.
|
|
inherit
The Smiling Knight
538
0
Mar 28, 2024 17:20:59 GMT
21,868
smilesja
13,712
August 2016
smilesja
|
Post by smilesja on Dec 31, 2018 17:11:47 GMT
But I and people on this forum dont think that it’s a bad game. No, you like the game in spite of its poor quality - it's not good because you like it. Quality is not subjective. According to who?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2018 17:57:35 GMT
But I and people on this forum dont think that it’s a bad game. No, you like the game in spite of its poor quality - it's not good because you like it. Quality is not subjective. Please detail to me what specific objective quality tests (i.e. tests not based inherently on anyone's opinion of the game) has Andromeda failed? Food quality can be objective (i.e. the food fails to meet specified safety standards set by government agencies) or subjective (people don't like it because they don't like the taste). Is there even any Q&A standards set by a government agency regarding video game quality? If so, again, which of those objective tests did Andromeda fail to meet? Any opinion of Andromeda's quality is just that - opinion and IS subjective. You are of the opionion that Andromeda lacks quality simply because you don't like it. That IS a subjective quality assessment, not an objective one. Even consensus on something doesn't magically turn it into an objective quality assessment. The majority of Americans like sugar sweetened beverages but that doesn't make them objectively a good quality food.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
133
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2018 18:31:21 GMT
For various reasons, I've done 14 unique runs in Andromeda, mostly to have both Ryders play each one of the seven character classes. But it also gave me the opportunity to change a few of the decisions in each of the runs … past the first two, which started out as my "canon". Subsequent runs, I made discrete, deliberately different choices, some resulting in changing my "canon" along the way, because of the results (or if you will, consequences) were better than my initial choices. Others … my first choice remained my preferred choice. So that by the end, my "canon" was somewhat different than when I started, but I was fairly confident in my final choices … and I was aware of the consequences of my choices. How that carries over to MEA2 is TBD.
As far as dialog choices, I discovered that certain dialog choices could mitigate some of the fallout of my decisions. Specifically Drack. In most of the runs, I picked the Salarian pathfinder over the Krogan scouts. Pick the wrong dialog options after that and Drack is really, really pissed at Ryder … and you don't see Kesh's egg clutch. But pick a different dialog choice (while in New Tuchanka) and Drack gets over it. You still don't get to see Kesh's egg clutch, but Drack stops being mad. Whether that changes things in MEA2, IDK … and maybe the devs don't know either … probably TBD at this point. Maybe the Behemoths become a huge problem in MEA2. Or maybe Drack decides to hang close to Kesh and her "youngins" and tells Ryder to piss off, wrt new adventures.
I don't know if Ryder ripping Liam a new one will have any follow on consequences … hopefully Liam learns from it, though I doubt it. But I did thoroughly enjoy Ryder chewing Liam out. Liam was initially all butthurt over it, but then his Angara friend was totally OK with it, because she, unlike Liam, understood the necessity of Ryder's actions. I guess that might mean to some that there were no consequences … like I said, TBD.
I agree that BioWare is still searching for the right balance in its character responses. Lack of P/R allowed me to, over the course of 14 runs, explore pretty much all the dialog options. Did most of them make much of a difference? No … hence work yet to be done on BioWare's part. But because my choices were not angel and psycho, I was a lot more willing to experiment. I didn't like psycho Shepard, so other than one run, all 19 MET runs were with a paragon Shepard … which limited my choices. We'll see … eventually … what lessons BioWare learned from its first installment of MEA.
Oh … and as far as the OP game analysis was concerned, I thought it was well done. I agreed with most of it … in some cases, like the music, I didn't disagree as much as I didn't care. I always turn the music way down, so I can hear the dialog clearly … mostly because of MP. I'm a big fan of music, I have a pretty broad collection, but that has never been a priority for me in a video game. That said, MET … there were music elements really tugged at the heart strings.
But my takeaway from Raycevick is that he put the time and effort into MEA necessary to create a fair review. Also, I don't think he hated the game, I think it was more disappointment of what might have been, if the internal issues within BioWare had not existed. And that's where I fall. Andromeda could have been much better … with lessons learned and some of the internal strife addressed, the next installment will probably be much closer to what I'm looking for in an ME RPG. So MEA was a start, far from perfect, but I look forward to the next installment.
|
|
Cyberstrike
N4
is wanting to have some fun!
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
XBL Gamertag: cyberstrike nTo
PSN: cyberstrike-nTo
Prime Posts: 1,732
Prime Likes: 467
Posts: 1,853 Likes: 3,000
inherit
634
0
May 14, 2017 17:50:43 GMT
3,000
Cyberstrike
is wanting to have some fun!
1,853
August 2016
cyberstrike
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
cyberstrike nTo
cyberstrike-nTo
1,732
467
|
Post by Cyberstrike on Dec 31, 2018 23:06:47 GMT
He loses me in the end, which just seem like sour grapes over Mass Effect 3 and corporatized conspiracy theories over the transition to Andromeda vs anything else as the primary issue as to why the game feels off. I always compared it to being a Forced Awakens -style game, the sort of soft reboot that doesn't tread new ground but tries to fit in the shoes of it's legacy. If anything, that is the real problem; it's risk free on purpose over anything else to be nostalgic over itself. Honestly, it is not BioWares best game, but it is better than most give it credit. Sadly all folks remember are assholes on the internet making fun of facial animations and cherry picking poor line reads maliciously.
It's not like other BioWare games have dodgy facial animation and some poor lines reads either.
I would say MEA is more akin to spin-off/sequel like Star Trek: The Next Generation than Star Wars: The Force Awakens. It's set if a different time and place in the same universe with the connections being more of the aliens, the in-universe technology, and references to the previous games than the continuing adventures of the same characters 30 years later.
|
|
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: 3,179 Likes: 4,063
inherit
Always teacher, sometimes writer
370
0
4,063
linksocarina
Teaching Mode Activated
3,179
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 Dec 31, 2018 23:28:00 GMT
He loses me in the end, which just seem like sour grapes over Mass Effect 3 and corporatized conspiracy theories over the transition to Andromeda vs anything else as the primary issue as to why the game feels off. I always compared it to being a Forced Awakens -style game, the sort of soft reboot that doesn't tread new ground but tries to fit in the shoes of it's legacy. If anything, that is the real problem; it's risk free on purpose over anything else to be nostalgic over itself. Honestly, it is not BioWares best game, but it is better than most give it credit. Sadly all folks remember are assholes on the internet making fun of facial animations and cherry picking poor line reads maliciously.
It's not like other BioWare games have dodgy facial animation and some poor lines reads either.
I would say MEA is more akin to spin-off/sequel like Star Trek: The Next Generation than Star Wars: The Force Awakens. It's set if a different time and place in the same universe with the connections being more of the aliens, the in-universe technology, and references to the previous games than the continuing adventures of the same characters 30 years later.
I don't know. I always say its like Force Awakens because of the 'spirit' of its reboot in a lot of ways. It's a continuation of the main story, but takes a lot of the elements and themes from the original stories to remake it as something new. So sense of exploration, theme of adventure, character ideas being analogous to characters in the original trilogy (two humans, one a biotic, a young Asari Archeologist, Krogan Veteran) we also had lifts from the original game to Andromeda such as the mysterious technological remnants (name not intended) and Jardaan being the Prothean stand-in, the ascension of the Kett akin to the Reapers ascension, and then just mini references here and there for fans. I was never the biggest Star Trek fan, but for my money the 1 to 1 analogy of a lot of the game has lead me to argue its more like Force Awakens vs what I do know about Star Trek. The only unique aspect was the Scourge, but that was sort of explained at this point and makes me ponder what the Jardaan, and for that matter, the Kett, will do next.
|
|
Cyberstrike
N4
is wanting to have some fun!
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
XBL Gamertag: cyberstrike nTo
PSN: cyberstrike-nTo
Prime Posts: 1,732
Prime Likes: 467
Posts: 1,853 Likes: 3,000
inherit
634
0
May 14, 2017 17:50:43 GMT
3,000
Cyberstrike
is wanting to have some fun!
1,853
August 2016
cyberstrike
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
cyberstrike nTo
cyberstrike-nTo
1,732
467
|
Post by Cyberstrike on Dec 31, 2018 23:30:25 GMT
I didn't say Andromeda was trash, I said it was trash relating to that one aspect. That one aspect being choice and consequence. The measuring stick being how choice and consequence affects the experience. I didn't say the council dying had a large impact, and if it came across like that then my bad cause I certainly didn't mean it. I'm currently watching the Lakers getting smashed and venting on Laker forums, so it's not like these are heavily thought out essays. The council affects the plot, so even if choice and consequence can be done better and the council dying doesn't have much impact, you can affect the plot in a way in the first game. Which helps satisfy illusion of control. Which helps satisfy agency, which is important in games. It automatically makes ME1 better in this regard than ME;A. Loyalty missions have negligible impact on the plot. The effect on the whole experience is more though. Because Bioware put such a heavy emphasis on companions, and because companions and their banter and dialogue make up much of the experience in a Bioware game, their absence (if they die) creates a hole in the experience. Therefore they matter. In contrast anyone dying in Andromeda doesn't really create a hole in the experience, therefore the consequences are minor. You're right, choice and consequence wasn't great in ME:T, but it was done better than Andromeda almost by default. Quality is subjective, people have priorities and how a game measures up depends on how it does on its list of priorities. The choice and consequence is a negative to me, in Andromeda. What is quite annoying is that choice and consequence is quite blatently a negative in Andromeda, and worse than the trilogy, and yet we have to have these 3 page arguments every time because people just don't want to admit there's anything wrong with their games. I can agree that one reason the life and death choices you make in Andromeda feel less impactful is because they don't involve the direct life or death of a squadmate. As I said, it was something I recall several fans asking for on the old BSN and I recall Bioware assuring us that no squad mates would be allowed to die during the game. Bioware has a history of making some poor devs choices based on what the fans requested and thought they wanted but later discovered that they didn't want that after all. Same goes for scrapping the P/R dialogue system. I had lengthy discusssions on these boards before Andromeda's release where I was blatantly telling people that scrapping the P/R dialogue system might actually reduce the range of characterizations that could be played. Back then, people didn't believe me; but that IS exactly what happened in Andromeda. Ryder's characterization choices are not a broad as Shepard's because the choices we have, despite having more of them, portray more subtle differences than the P/R system did. A drawback to the P/R system though is that Shepard, at times, would appear to be rather schizophrenic. Bioware still hasn't found the ideal balance in this area. I expect they'll keep making changes to their system until they do (regardless of where or when the next ME game is set).
As for your problem with 3-page arguments, some of that is that you don't want to admit that the people arguing with you are making less absolute assessments than you are often prepared to give them credit for while , at the same time, making several absolute implications yourself. I still say, as far as consequences go, much of it is that we don't know how Bioware might have worked the choices we made in ME:A1 into ME:A2 and ME:A3. Some of the those minor choices in ME:A1 could yet have major implications in future games. We're only in the first chapter of the book. We won't know the consequences until the final chapters are on the table. Shepard's story is complete/done, so we know the consequences of the choices we made in ME1. What impact did the council choice have on ME1 itself? None at all. We didn't see that impact until ME2 and ME3... and we were disappointed with it. In ME:A, there is a similar choice left on the table - did you accept the kett's deal to back off during the fight. It had little impact on the fight itself, but Bioware shas set it up as meaning more in a future game by having her walk towards the camera in an ominous way. We won't know whether the impact of that choice meets our now expectations until Bioware finishes the story they were at least intending to tell us. If ME:A2 gets derailed by the fans, we'll simply never know.
I think people are impatient about the consequences of Ryder's actions and expect everyone one of them to be paid off by the end of the first game, even if showing the LONG TERM consequences of an action wouldn't make a damn bit of logical sense, like who Ryder supports as the Nexus ambassador at the epilogue of the game. Like Shepard's choosing either Anderson or Udina as the Human Representative to the Citadel Council at the end of ME1 doesn't change anything else about ME1.
|
|
maxon
N3
Arse
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 453 Likes: 967
inherit
108
0
Nov 28, 2023 14:23:11 GMT
967
maxon
Arse
453
August 2016
maxon
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by maxon on Jan 1, 2019 1:34:24 GMT
Side question: if everyone here had to do one more play though of Andromeda or Dragon age 2 witch would you choose? DA2 without question - I much prefer the characters and the way they are handled. I, like a lot of people, didn't like DA2 at first but it really grew on me. For me, this is Andromeda's main weakness and is probably the reason I didn't finish my playthrough. So I'd agree with the OP's linked UTube review in regard to characterisation, interaction and development.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,073
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,791
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Jan 1, 2019 3:47:14 GMT
I didn't say the council dying had a large impact, and if it came across like that then my bad cause I certainly didn't mean it. I'm currently watching the Lakers getting smashed and venting on Laker forums, so it's not like these are heavily thought out essays. The council affects the plot, so even if choice and consequence can be done better and the council dying doesn't have much impact, you can affect the plot in a way in the first game. Which helps satisfy illusion of contr ol. Which helps satisfy agency, which is important in games. It automatically makes ME1 better in this regard than ME;A. Wait a second.You're ranking the ME1 council choice over the ME:A ambassador choice, but what's the metric? Can't be consequences because within ME1 and ME:A there aren't any
|
|
inherit
8885
0
Mar 28, 2024 21:16:55 GMT
7,209
river82
4,946
July 2017
river82
|
Post by river82 on Jan 1, 2019 6:26:05 GMT
I didn't say the council dying had a large impact, and if it came across like that then my bad cause I certainly didn't mean it. I'm currently watching the Lakers getting smashed and venting on Laker forums, so it's not like these are heavily thought out essays. The council affects the plot, so even if choice and consequence can be done better and the council dying doesn't have much impact, you can affect the plot in a way in the first game. Which helps satisfy illusion of contr ol. Which helps satisfy agency, which is important in games. It automatically makes ME1 better in this regard than ME;A. Wait a second.You're ranking the ME1 council choice over the ME:A ambassador choice, but what's the metric? Can't be consequences because within ME1 and ME:A there aren't any Yes. The destruction of the council is the consequence in ME:1. That it turned out to have minimal impact in ME:2 and ME:3 doesn't change that within the story of ME:1 by itself, the council being destroyed is more significant to the plot (of solely that game) than the choosing of an interim ambassador is to ME:A. So as far as choices leading to consequences, the choice in Andromeda isn't even in the same ballpark. However, even if you disagree that the council consequence is more significant (which you shouldn't,) that you still get to choose humanity's representative on top of that (Anderson or Udina), which parallels the choosing of the interim ambassador in ME:A, and still puts it above ME:A.
|
|
inherit
The homeostatic problem-solving structure
8860
0
Apr 26, 2022 11:22:31 GMT
8,491
Unicephalon 40-D
An unknown possibly hostile flotilla detected at eight hundred astronomical units from the sun!
4,782
Jun 29, 2017 12:57:11 GMT
June 2017
legendcncd
Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
LegendCNCD / AsariLoverFI
|
Post by Unicephalon 40-D on Jan 1, 2019 10:36:58 GMT
Side question: if everyone here had to do one more play though of Andromeda or Dragon age 2 witch would you choose? MEA by far! This is not saying DA2 is a completely bad game, but MEA is so far ahead for me, I have already planned another playthrough (and my signature says it also)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2019 14:18:38 GMT
Wait a second.You're ranking the ME1 council choice over the ME:A ambassador choice, but what's the metric? Can't be consequences because within ME1 and ME:A there aren't any Yes. The destruction of the council is the consequence in ME:1. That it turned out to have minimal impact in ME:2 and ME:3 doesn't change that within the story of ME:1 by itself, the council being destroyed is more significant to the plot (of solely that game) than the choosing of an interim ambassador is to ME:A. So as far as choices leading to consequences, the choice in Andromeda isn't even in the same ballpark. However, even if you disagree that the council consequence is more significant (which you shouldn't,) that you still get to choose humanity's representative on top of that (Anderson or Udina), which parallels the choosing of the interim ambassador in ME:A, and still puts it above ME:A. In ME:A, the parallel decision to save/destroy the council is not the choosing of the ambassador. It's the choice whether or not you cut a deal with the Kett to get the Archon. In the same way, the choice has little impact on the battle itself. In ME1, you still defeat Sovereign whether or not you save or destroy the council. In ME:A1, you still defeat the Archon whether or not you cut the deal with Primus. In ME:A your choice does make the battle easier or harder and the implication of that is not making the deal will cost more lives during the battle (in much the same was as destroying the council cost the lives of the people on the DA.
The ramifications of that deal could be far greater than the impact of the council choice in ME1. You're now in bed with the enemy if you cut the deal even after you've been warned multiple times about how the kett deceived the Angara in the past. Regardless, in defeating the Archon, you've probably just put a more dangerous adversary into power (at least that's what Bioware is hinting in the last scene). If you don't cut the deal, you've made yourself into a more dangerous adversary in Primus' eyes, upping the ante in the inevitable conflict to come. It is a weighty choice that you're making light of simply because there isn't an immediate loss of life involved. Whether or not Bioware will follow through on this choices impact better than they did with the council one in an unknown. The complete comparison of the consequences can only be done once Bioware completes the ME:A story. Again, if they derail and abandon that story, we'll simply never know.
If, say, Bioware had just written it such that not cutting the deal would cost you the life of one squad mate, I'd venture you'd more easily see the weight of that decision. As it was, Bioware promised us they wouldn't kill off squad members, so the weight of that decision gets watered down a bit. Perhaps they should have off'd Kndros and the Moshae if you didn't cut the deal to drive the point closer to home.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,073
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,791
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Jan 1, 2019 15:52:43 GMT
I was never very impressed with the Council choice in the first place. The human-led council was an idiotic idea that deservedly got handwaved away by ME3, and the other two options are, rightly, interchangeable. Kill a president or a prime minister and you get a new one from the same party with more or less the same policies. (It didn't help that the decision to save the council was kind of stupid.) B Of course, we're in purely subjective territory here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2019 19:32:20 GMT
I was never very impressed with the Council choice in the first place. The human-led council was an idiotic idea that deservedly got handwaved away by ME3, and the other two options are, rightly, interchangeable. Kill a president or a prime minister and you get a new one from the same party with more or less the same policies. (It didn't help that the decision to save the council was kind of stupid.) B Of course, we're in purely subjective territory here. I agree. An all human council just because the former council dies in an attack. Surely, they had a line of succession or the ability to install an emergency temporary council with the same mix of races as before. Governments don't last as long as the council has unless they have such contingencies in place. Udina, a lowly ambassador even proposing to seize power is ridiculous and an outstanding soldier like Anderson going along with it is even more ridiculous, especially considering his background with the Turians (other than Saren) that caused him to be proposed as a possible spectre candidate in the first place.
Then you have Joker asking Shepard to make a decision to save the DA or let it be destroyed. Shepard is in no position to make that call since he's unable to see the battle itself (being inside the council chambers). Joker should be asking Hackett for orders on that since it's Hackett who is in command of the Fifth Fleet. Shepard's job in this case is to open up those arms ASAP and deal with Saren. It's Hackett's call as to whether or not to send in his fleet quickly or hold them back.
It's a ludircous set up for the decision, IMHO (purely subjective opinion, of course).
|
|
inherit
1909
0
Mar 26, 2024 12:17:39 GMT
2,365
10k
Cerberus is Humanity! Join us today and receive a limited edition commemorative pin!
1,131
November 2016
10k
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2
|
Post by 10k on Jan 1, 2019 23:05:38 GMT
Side question: if everyone here had to do one more play though of Andromeda or Dragon age 2 witch would you choose? Dragon age 2. Even though that game has major flaws, at least the characters were interesting and everything wasn't portrayed as a big joke.
|
|
Cyberstrike
N4
is wanting to have some fun!
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
XBL Gamertag: cyberstrike nTo
PSN: cyberstrike-nTo
Prime Posts: 1,732
Prime Likes: 467
Posts: 1,853 Likes: 3,000
inherit
634
0
May 14, 2017 17:50:43 GMT
3,000
Cyberstrike
is wanting to have some fun!
1,853
August 2016
cyberstrike
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
cyberstrike nTo
cyberstrike-nTo
1,732
467
|
Post by Cyberstrike on Jan 2, 2019 14:59:33 GMT
Side question: if everyone here had to do one more play though of Andromeda or Dragon age 2 witch would you choose? Dragon age 2. Even though that game has major flaws, at least the characters were interesting and everything wasn't portrayed as a big joke.
Depends on how you play Hawke. Play Hawke as a smart ass and Hawke NEVER takes anything seriously. Ryder even as a smart-ass does know when to be serious,
|
|
ahglock
N5
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Shattered Steel, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem
Origin: ShinobiKillfist
Posts: 2,859 Likes: 3,467
inherit
9886
0
3,467
ahglock
2,859
Feb 21, 2018 17:57:17 GMT
February 2018
ahglock
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Shattered Steel, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem
ShinobiKillfist
|
Post by ahglock on Jan 2, 2019 22:02:09 GMT
Dragon age 2. Even though that game has major flaws, at least the characters were interesting and everything wasn't portrayed as a big joke.
Depends on how you play Hawke. Play Hawke as a smart ass and Hawke NEVER takes anything seriously. Ryder even as a smart-ass does know when to be serious,
/well yeah if you choose to be a smart ass all the time you are, I think the issue is even when trying to be serious Ryder isn't that serious outside a couple moments. Ryder is a very narrow range all leaning to not very serious with a couple serious scenes, Hawke displayed a wider range though you could pretty much exclusively pick sarcastic if you wanted. That being said, I'm on like my 10th play through of MEA right now, I've done 2 of DA2 and I'm not that upset it seems bugged on my setup so I wont be doing a game 3.
|
|