Things you feel "Mass Effect: Andromeda" does well

So in other words, everyone else has to be limited in their roleplaying experience because you find it to be acceptable?  Gotcha.

Um.... the argument was that it wasn't worth the zots to remove those limitations, wasn't it?

For me to understand that comment, I'm afraid you're going to have to define "zots" (I'm unfamiliar with the term.)

It’s actually quite common in OW games and a lot of it is due to scripts breaking.

We’ll see with Bethesda games they are so huge it’s nearly impossible not to.
Same with GTA. I haven’t played an AC game lately but AC 4 had quite a few issues like that. They were fixed but games like that are notorious for code breaking. Even TW3 had these issues. Bioware was just recently started OW games that’s why you aren’t used to it and AFAIK Ubisoft is still young in that as well.

 It's a slang term for "economically equivalent unit of dev time." David Gaider popularized it's use on the old boards, but it's been falling off here.


I think the idea of using a non-specific term was to get away from whether you're talking about time, money, available staff, or whatever. How game development is constrained varies from day to day, but it's always constrained somehow.

Lol, no.  I'd be okay with the doing away with the "extreme" renegade solutions (though I think many people in fact like that element) but to not be able to address the shear amount of stupid behavior exhibited across the landscape with a more aggressive response is pretty unrealistic.  You obviously never served in the military where the prevalent attitude in dealing with whiners is telling them to shut the hell up and get the f*cking mission accomplished; incompetence and poor decision making is met with a more severe response...particularly when operating in a combat theater.

Incidently, my larger complaint is that I get only logical/emotional or professional/casual responses...not being able to select the desired response where I found fitting screwed with my immersion with certain characters I created.  I would have much preferred to have 3 options 100% of the time than 4 options 50% of the time.  This does not make for a realistic dialogue system any more than the OT's binary system did. 

I would have preferred the DA2 system.

Your argument isn't remotely compelling.  MEA has nothing like a well formed government with established rules of behavior.  Your projecting the values and comforts that you enjoy into a world that's supposed to represent desperation; with survival or extinction the payoff.  If you were actually in a situation like that with members of your loved ones at stake you sure as hell wouldn't appreciate some idiot protesters eating 3 squares a day in the relative safety of the Nexus disrupting operations and wasting your time.  The AI becomes a military one the moment Ryder shows up and starts turning the tide.  He/she isn't doing that through diplomacy; it's being done by violence and force of will.  You can make your first outpost military (I would argue it's the only sane choice given the recent history).  The Heleus cluster is the wild west.  Except we're not the technologically superior Europeans expanding, we're the fractured natives up against an enemy capable of turning all of us into all of them.  I cannot be worried about hurting some feelings or personally doing away with main sources of the problem like Spender and Sloane...particularly if they serve as object lessons for the rest of the AI personnel.  Instead we got: "Aw, did I hurt your feelings...let me give you a hug.  You're a valuable member of the team."  Talk about unrealistic.

It's funny to see you ask that question about "Reese", Whiney McDouchewaffle. I just asked the same question in another thread a few days ago. How did this guy make the cut? This crybaby with the face tattoo, orange hair and clothing coordinated to match? Whoever designed his final look should be barred from such work ever again.

I'd not call this Renegade. I'd call it the only reasonable choice. We were presented with the choice of either being a "little bitch", as our friends on Kadara describe it, or protecting hydroponics by removing the morons. An example of Renegade would been shooting one of the idiots in the leg and then asking who else wanted the same. MET Renegade decisions often employed ruthless intimidation. Just fulfilling your responsibility to the 20K Nexus residents, refusing to be intimidated and held hostage by a crowd of idiots doesn't remotely qualify, in my opinion.

You enjoyed Ryder, which is good. For many of us, though, the choices seemed to typically be A) Be nice (or soft) and get pushed around; B)Be nice (or soft) and respond with childish humor; or hopefully C) Say or do something that any reasonable, professional adult would actually do. I often felt that there were no true choices, as one or more response was so unpalatable as to be a non-choice. Even more often, the presented choices were essentially indistinguishable, differing only in their delivery via either "adult" or "smarmy teenager" tones. It was really bad.

I'm not being confrontational or disrespectful when I say that I'll never see these opportunities for deep RP that you see. Ryder was not my character. BioWare didnt give me the tools to RP Ryder as my character. I feel way more variance with Geralt of Rivia, the ultimate defined RPG-protagonist, than I do with the Ryders. This isn't a new debate, though, so I'm not sure how useful it is for me to comment. After so long and so many PTs, which of us is going to suddenly feel differently, or even present a new perspective?

EDIT: Ugh. I just noticed in which thread we're having this discussion (again). This is the "Did well?" thread. I wouldn't have posted this had I noticed. I'd rather focus on the strengths in this thread; though others are obviously welcome to post whatever. Discussion is the entire reason most of us log-in, and I don't want to see that stifled.