Why Mass Effect Andromeda is Well written.

That's all you can say after he explained his reasoning?

>MEA
>well written

ME3 is better written than MEA, MEA was pathetic on the writing front and alll of your examples of (((good)) writing are actually examples of contrived and poor writing.

Dutch is back?

Welcome back, Dutch!

I hope you had some lessons in trolling class, otherwise this is gonna be boring.

i didn't find the plot in the OT that well executed either, it was mostly just serviceable, with occasional great moments but also occasional boring, cringey or nonsensical moments. the tone wasn't always my favorite either, for example i really didn't care much for the tone in ME2 at all and to this day it's still my least favorite game in the franchise. where the OT succeeded the most was presentation and polish, which were very poor in MEA. polish can and often does mask most writing sins, and unfortunately MEA didn't have much in the way of polish which made its shortcomings stand out a lot more.

overall i found MEA's writing to have its ups and downs, which is exactly how i found the OT games as well. to me the game didn't reinvent the wheel, but did deliver the "standard" bioware experience that i've come to expect.

the biggest problem is that the OT had horrible narrative cohesion. They really did not plan out the games that closely...and it shows. Though given the realities of game development it might be impossible to plan out a trilogy like that.

And then there is the fact that the plot bent over backwards to stroke Shepards...ego.

It seems like any opinion that isn't yours is redundant.

i did enjoy DA 2...but you're right about the golem.

Hell maybe your points up there explains why i dislike Isabella so much.

I'm going to assume, based on the bolded part, that you believe the colony on Kadara would have succeeded and that the inhabitants of the Nexus would have survived without the timely arrival of the Pathfinder. Is that your conclusion, based on the game you played?

Of course I haven't played the game! Not a single second!

The opinions here that mattered to me, I listened to. After DAI, I was not going to buy any Bioware game without some peer review. I pre-ordered that pile of crap, played through it once, tried to play a new playthrough a couple times and just got hopelessly bored. Their take on "open-world" gameplay was worse than Skyrim, and I hate Skyrim. The whole platforming element was such a wonderful hidden "feature".

So, I appreciate your focus on what worked. My take from your post was that the plot had a good skeleton that had some internal consistency and strengthened the story by clever use of narrative device. Again, haven't played so can't really comment, but I do believe you have an argument to that degree.

The dialogue that I have watched in videos - and yes I have watched more gameplay than the cringe animation videos, I have watched story portions of gameplay. It is not terrible, but it is uncomfortable, and very hard for me to relate to in the context of what they are up against, regardless of their age and experience or lack thereof.

It's all too.... casual, I guess.

Well summarized, colfoley . I would agree on the points you have made more or less in their entirety.
Quite a well put-together, well thought-out, and well formatted wall of text.


ME:A kept me interested and dying to find out what happened next. I actually like the basic premise around ME:A's plot more than the OT's but the OT's plot definitely has more... weight to it, so to speak and even more gravity to pull you in. That being said, ME:A was a much needed break from the doom and gloom of the OT. The lighthearted, jolly band of miscreants vibe helped heal old wounds that the OT left in my soul. The characters immediately jumped out at me (Vetra!!! ) and I fell in love with Ryder's crew in very much the same way as the OT. That being said, no one in ME:A immediately jumped out at me as much as Garrus and Tali did, albeit in ME2 which obviously isn't a fair comparison and ME1's characters were CoD-level bland, imo. Andromeda handled the introduction of new characters faaar better than ME1. I love the OT and I love Andromeda, and each have their individual strengths and weaknesses.

To me, all of the shit ME:A caught (technical issues not withstanding) is based around ME:A not being the OT and that seemingly sent people for one hell of a loop. With as many people complaining about endless sequels these days, its unbelievable to me that they demand more of the same. I can't quit wrap my head around it...
The funniest part of all or this is that for every complaint I've seen about ME:A, I can pick out the exact same failures in the OT with ease. (Makes sense as they are all BW games after all.)

All in all, I don't even think ME is the best story ever told with they best characters nor do I think BioWare develops the best stories and characters in gaming. Hell, BioWare fails pretty atrociously at character modeling and animating human/human-like faces in all their games (hence the infamous BioWare face memes), but what ME and BW do excel at, is drawing me in and keeping my ass glued to my seat as I need to progress through their games, and to me, that is what makes them special.

Interesting. So I guess sure, in that sense, you'd have "survived."