The biggest problem with Mass Effect's dialogue

Comparing apples to apples, if you look at just Mass Effect 1, the best lines are from Sovereign. I don't remember any lines from "Vanilla" Shepard (middle option). I usually rolled Paragon with occasional Renegage thrown in and can't say I remember any great lines, although Renegade Shepard always came off as slightly psychotic to me so I rarely chose that options.

In ME:A, I can remember some pretty good lines but it could that I play it more recently...

how many lines can you remember from the OT?

I mean it could b just be my shitty.memory talking but i do not judge a game based on how well i remember the dialogue.

Do you want me to write them or something? I mean, I don't see how that would be useful since I could literally search the internet, so you will have to trust my word, if you want to. I don't think you understood what I was saying, MEA writing is kinda bland, not anything special, it doesn't stick with you, not a whole lot, while MET is the total opposite. I still don't forget Shepard's speech during the refuse ending, powerful stuff. MEA just lacks the same punch. That's why I said at this point I don't care much for DLC, I enjoyed the game, but it's not something that left its mark in my gaming life, it's just there.

I won't speak for von uber but I hold many of the same opinions, so I'll answer that from my perspective. It appears that Suikoden is Jason Schreier. There's little evidence that he isn't and a ton of evidence that he is. (Suikoden being Schreier's favorite game and me continually calling him "Jason" and him never refuting it.) So the problem is that Jason is a gaming journalist, he has a platform, he has an audience, and he hasn't played the game. His opinion shouldn't be taken seriously because, even if he isn't Jason Schreier, he's throwing around opinions without having full knowledge, and that's not only bad journalism, it's a severely under-informed opinion.

While I knew that gaming journalism is mostly a cesspool, I'm now wondering how deep it is. Do the journalists who offer opinions actually play the games they're writing about, or are they just riding the wave of whatever the loudest voice are saying? Because if all the writers are just doing that, it inflames players, it may kill the franchise, and that's unfair to everyone involved. Except for the writers who get clicks.

Yes, there are issues with the dialogue, and no one will ever agree on an appropriate time to make a joke, but that's all subjective. Can the writing the be objectively better? Yes. But I also want to discuss this with people who've played the game and done something other than toss the controller aside after a few hours.

Not at all, but I think you might. You said, hey, Andromeda has no memorable moments, here let me compare to three games worth of character building and increasing drama and story tellilng.

Not just on dialogue,

Remember the shitty side quest of the first mass effect, where you just go out on random  planets, do a side quest where sometime the action of shepard where explain in a text box instead of being shown. Picking up turian badges or asari symbol were certainly not interesting either. The envinronments whatever from the outside and the inside were highly repetitive.

Or the super side quest of mass effect 2, when sometime there was no narration for some of them on the random planets, some of them were explained in an email send to you before, and the results and consequences where also explain in a e mail. 

I remember the blue sun side quest, when you go on the planet, you only saw one blue sun seeing your shuttle coming, goes back to the base and then it ends. No dialogue whatsoever, you just clean the base, pressed a button and that was it.

Yet many people love to claim that mass effect andromeda do the side quest the worst way...

Meeting the elder of the angara religion, the power play between krogan clans on elaaden, the gang wars between sloane kelly and the collective, confronting the angara AI, the criminal investigation on both eladen or Eos, the first human birth of Andromeda etc., I mean Those side quest were quite interesting.

Now don't get me wrong there is some bad side quest like scanning minerals or bodies, but most of them can easily be avoided and are separated in the files "task", but Andromeda has some memorable side quest. For the first and second mass effect, the second you were outside companion quest or main planet, you were there for a long list of boring secondary quest, especially for ME 2.

So you admit MEA's writing is bland because the writers didn't pull out anything as memorable as the MET? Fine by me.

I don't know how to get rid of that blue bar, but anyway--I imagine that if you have the potential of getting shot all the time-you'll have to lighten the mood somewhat or otherwise you'll go insane. Granted I've never been in this situation and hope to god I never have to-but I see no problem with a couple of jokes here and there when your getting shot all the time. lol that was amazing- kind of reminds of Battlefield Bad Company 2 banter. It'd would easily fit well with there discussions-while "off duty". 





  

Difference is, ME1 was released in 2007 and ME2 in 2010, while MEA came out in 2017.

You would expect more from a game that came out this year as opposed to games that came out a decade ago.

I have no idea how you've gotten that from Monica's post.

People here want this forum to be an echo chamber for positive/optimistic discussion of MEA.