First time in Andromeda

Alright, that makes sense, but I guess I just fail to see how Ryder is any different. I still had issues with the dialogue choices ultimately not being what I expected to be when Ryder owns their mouth and autodialogue screwing over my roleplaying, but whatever. Am happy that you at least managed to enjoy the game. 

I played Shepard as two extremes, Paragon and renegade, so hers and his personality felt more defined than a more malleable Ryder. But then again, it was my intention to be a Paragon or Renegade, so I am not sure what’s the egg and what’s the chicken. The dream sequences in ME3 were not conductive to RP for me either. Oh, probably, I just did not like them.

I still feel I had an ample ability to headcanon how Shepard felt and what s/he wanted and was like based on the game’s framework, though not as much as I could with Ryder.

I think if I started talking about one of my Ryder’s or Shepard’s without using their last name, other players will not recognize them as their character.

One thing I know for sure, I cannot roleplay a character like Ezio at all. No headcanon at all. What I see is what I get, and I am just watching, not participating. We will all describe Ezio the same way and will instantly recognize each other’s Ezio as the same Ezio in my game too.

Zachariah Mancer was sort of half-way, as his likeable mature personality got imprinted on everything, even if he murdered for more resources and sold out to the mafia. I could head-canon a little, but I think multiple player’s descriptions would not be very divergent and will still be recognizable as the same guy.

If you guys want, you can apply the same test to Geralt. If you swapped Geralts between each other, would you still recognize him as the same guy you’re playing?

For future reference "player agency" refers to whether actions and decisions of the player (choices) affect the world around them. It refers to how much control players have over the actions of the character, and the degree with which those actions alter either the narrative or the world. Control over a character's personality alone isn't "player agency".

Shepard made it clear right from the start of each game that I wasn't in control.

Ryder let me think I was for about 8 hours. And then... not so much.

It's still my favourite ME game, but I somehow doubt I'll finish it.

Nah, character agency doesn't get used as much in games but it's often talked about if you're writing a novel and character development. "Agency" is defined in the psychological sense as "the degree to which an individual has the ability to make decisions about their life." "Personal agency" refers to your ability to act independently and take control of your life, "character agency" refers to the characters ability to do the same and "player agency" refers to the players ability to do the same with their character. Agency always refers to actions and er ... consequences, for lack of a better word, all that's different is who it refers to (player, character etc.)

Also I suspected you might feel the loss of control over Ryder after about 10 hours I also enjoyed the game for about that long, after that the limitations really start to become apparent.

It's not my life; it's the character's life.

I'm trying to separate the thing the player does (the roleplaying of his character and the choice of actions on his behalf) from the things the character does (taking actions in the world in which he lives).

A character can have agency in a novel, even though the story is completely linear and can't be changed by the reader, and a player can have agency in a game when where the character cannot affect the world in which he lives.

These are two different things. Asking that the player be able to affect the character's world doesn't even make sense unless we're talking about installing mods.

I am concerned with player agency. I want to make decisions on behalf of my character, which requires I be the one populating my character's state-of-mind. I decide what he wants to do and how he reacts to stuff and what his opinions are. This is why the paraphrase is bad, because it causes me not to understand why the character is saying things.

This does not require that I be able to make the character do whatever I can imagine, just that I be the one choosing, even if it is among limited options.

It does not matter to me how much the character can affect the world. It matters to me how many different character personalities I can implement.

The writer's vision shouldn't matter at all. As long as the writer and I understand the use of language similarly (whether questions can entail assertions, for example), then I'm free to roleplay my character.

It only fails when the UI obfuscates options (as the paraphrases do) or if the developers choose to have the protagonist act without my input. And then the game will fail litrrally no matter what the writers have the character do. Any action I didn't choose is a bad action, even if I would have chosen it given the option.

ME2 let me do loyalty missions for my own reasons. Perhaps MEA will as well (assuming I stick with the game that long - I have Divinity Original Sin to play).

There's one moment in particular in the game where I really wished there was something more that could be done, and it's with those two scavengers looting the corpse they probably created in Kadara's slum underbelly. These two bums look at someone decked to the 9's in military hardware and tell them to fuck off, when it would be no trouble at all to dunk their faces in that toxic pool just a few yards away.

Which is pretty much equivalent to little to no consequences. In ME3, Shepard could punch a Quarian in a gut because he was angry at him and didn't suffer any consequences.