inherit
Glorious Star Lord
822
0
16,819
KaiserShep
Party like it's 2023!
9,233
August 2016
kaisershep
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by KaiserShep on Feb 5, 2020 20:13:52 GMT
This is one of the best explanations I've read that shows how lacking the ME2 plot really is... I fully agree and have argued the same thing multiple times. And sadly, exactly this game that ruined the franchise, is touted as the best one... No wonder everything went downhill with the franchise... Because obviously they are trying to do the same thing ME2 did, but failed miserably. Even Andromeda is structurally designed to be like ME2. Actually, I would argue that ME1 is really the template that Andromeda lifts from. Andromeda has a lot more focus on its main story than 2 did in comparison to its companion content, but we're constantly pulled out of focus by a lot of the expansive wandering, doubling down on a problem that existed in the first game. Remember, ME2 had a lot of design decisions that were drastic responses to issues players had with ME1, with 3 then responding in kind to 2, but then players complained, saying how much we wanted a new game to be like ME1, and then BioWare did that.......and here we are.
|
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
Sept 28, 2024 23:55:21 GMT
25,473
themikefest
15,350
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Feb 5, 2020 20:19:11 GMT
Actually, I would argue that ME1 is really the template that Andromeda lifts from. Unfortunately they forgot to include giving the player the choice to/not recruit squadmates, and they forgot to add the power wheel. If anything, MEA took a step backwards.
|
|
inherit
Glorious Star Lord
822
0
16,819
KaiserShep
Party like it's 2023!
9,233
August 2016
kaisershep
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by KaiserShep on Feb 5, 2020 20:32:00 GMT
Actually, I would argue that ME1 is really the template that Andromeda lifts from. Unfortunately they forgot to include giving the player the choice to/not recruit squadmates, and they forgot to add the power wheel. If anything, MEA took a step backwards. To be fair, that's kind of par for the course for most companions throughout the franchise, and that started to a degree with ME2 as well. The most notable example to me is Jack's recruitment. During that final scene at the station's dock, there was a perfect opportunity for Shepard to have dialogue suggesting that coming here was a mistake, and suddenly the prospect of having her on the ship isn't really all that desirable. It would also have been entertaining to just straight up tell her good luck, and leave her behind while the station breaks apart with her inside. As for the power wheel, I disagree that this in itself was a problem. The problem is that too many ability combos make short work of just about everything. Profile favorites don't so much optimize for any particular encounter but change the flavor of the same firefight. ME3, I feel, had the best implementation of overall ability synergy, because not all ability combinations worked best for all encounters, whereas I can stick to the same 3 abilities in Andromeda and mollywhop everything, even fiends. Overall, I think combat mechanics in Andromeda is still vastly superior for the simple fact that it emphasizes mobility over a protracted game of Death Peekaboo.
|
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
Sept 28, 2024 23:55:21 GMT
25,473
themikefest
15,350
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Feb 5, 2020 21:00:44 GMT
The most notable example to me is Jack's recruitment. During that final scene at the station's dock, there was a perfect opportunity for Shepard to have dialogue suggesting that coming here was a mistake, and suddenly the prospect of having her on the ship isn't really all that desirable. It would also have been entertaining to just straight up tell her good luck, and leave her behind while the station breaks apart with her inside. I agree. I would also add a few other that I liked to have not recruited. Regardless, Bioware, for whatever reason, chose to remove that choice in MEA. Never said it was a problem. It's another thing that Bioware chose to remove for whatever reason. I like the power wheel. It was something the player could use or not. That's why I'm curious as to why it was removed. I recall a poster said it was done to make the combat more streamlined. Don't know. MEA's combat was alright especially with the jetpack. How good would it be without it? How good would ME3's combat be if the jetpack was in the game?
|
|
inherit
Glorious Star Lord
822
0
16,819
KaiserShep
Party like it's 2023!
9,233
August 2016
kaisershep
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by KaiserShep on Feb 5, 2020 21:13:48 GMT
The most notable example to me is Jack's recruitment. During that final scene at the station's dock, there was a perfect opportunity for Shepard to have dialogue suggesting that coming here was a mistake, and suddenly the prospect of having her on the ship isn't really all that desirable. It would also have been entertaining to just straight up tell her good luck, and leave her behind while the station breaks apart with her inside. I agree. I would also add a few other that I liked to have not recruited. Regardless, Bioware, for whatever reason, chose to remove that choice in MEA. Never said it was a problem. It's another thing that Bioware chose to remove for whatever reason. I like the power wheel. It was something the player could use or not. That's why I'm curious as to why it was removed. I recall a poster said it was done to make the combat more streamlined. Don't know. MEA's combat was alright especially with the jetpack. How good would it be without it? How good would ME3's combat be if the jetpack was in the game? The power wheel was actually ditched in favor of pacing in combat. Considering the sheer level of mobility, I can see why they'd go that route. I have to say that the inclusion of the jumpjet is a mixed bag. I like being an attack chopper Vanguard that can fly up in the air then biotically charge like a missile, but I feel like its inclusion was too big an influence on a lot of map design, particularly the vaults. There was just too much platforming, I felt, and it made the environments feel weird and unnatural, in the sense that it was just a straight up game level and not a facility people actually used that we ventured through.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
Sept 16, 2024 15:46:24 GMT
9,324
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,875
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Feb 5, 2020 22:54:59 GMT
Unfortunately they forgot to include giving the player the choice to/not recruit squadmates, and they forgot to add the power wheel. If anything, MEA took a step backwards. To be fair, that's kind of par for the course for most companions throughout the franchise, and that started to a degree with ME2 as well. ME1, even. Ever try to not bring Tali? Concerning the platforming in vaults, I guess they were trying to make those sequences have a distinct style and feel, rather than just a look. Maybe the Jardaan could fly short distances? I'm gonna keep believing that until something contradicts it.
|
|
inherit
Glorious Star Lord
822
0
16,819
KaiserShep
Party like it's 2023!
9,233
August 2016
kaisershep
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by KaiserShep on Feb 5, 2020 23:33:59 GMT
To be fair, that's kind of par for the course for most companions throughout the franchise, and that started to a degree with ME2 as well. ME1, even. Ever try to not bring Tali? Concerning the platforming in vaults, I guess they were trying to make those sequences have a distinct style and feel, rather than just a look. Maybe the Jardaan could fly short distances? I'm gonna keep believing that until something contradicts it. At this point, my bare minimum would at least be to somehow avoid the LOUD TRIUMPHANT MUSIC that plays when Tali introduces herself. Like, calm down, score, it's just a backalley meet and greet. As for the Jardaan, I like to think that they pretty much floated around like remnant bots, or had hoverchairs like Professor X in the X-Men cartoon.
|
|
Ascend
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 370 Likes: 492
inherit
3282
0
492
Ascend
370
February 2017
ascend
Bottom
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Ascend on Feb 6, 2020 1:49:33 GMT
This is one of the best explanations I've read that shows how lacking the ME2 plot really is... I fully agree and have argued the same thing multiple times. And sadly, exactly this game that ruined the franchise, is touted as the best one... No wonder everything went downhill with the franchise... Because obviously they are trying to do the same thing ME2 did, but failed miserably. Even Andromeda is structurally designed to be like ME2. Actually, I would argue that ME1 is really the template that Andromeda lifts from. Andromeda has a lot more focus on its main story than 2 did in comparison to its companion content, but we're constantly pulled out of focus by a lot of the expansive wandering, doubling down on a problem that existed in the first game. Remember, ME2 had a lot of design decisions that were drastic responses to issues players had with ME1, with 3 then responding in kind to 2, but then players complained, saying how much we wanted a new game to be like ME1, and then BioWare did that.......and here we are. Can't say I agree, but you already knew that... I would say that Andromeda is practically a more sandbox/open world ME2, and not ME1 with ME2 elements. ME2 was chosen as the core for Andromeda. This game is ME2 at its core for basically everything. It's ME2 revamped to the "current" generation, with some added elements of the other games. Why would they choose ME1 as a basis if ME2 is the more popular of all the games? The best way to describe Andromeda is; an open world ME2 without the good ME2 characters. It's the same story structure as ME2. It begins almost the same as ME2, except this time you don't die, but actually survive the fall to a planet. Your father dies instead. In both cases death is used as the excuse as to why you're suddenly more powerful or have more abilities. In contrast, in ME1 you're made 'special' by a story element rather than death, which is the Cypher. And rather than having the collectors being the mysterious enemy, you have the Kett being the mysterious enemy. They both remain the enemy throughout the whole game. In ME1, the initial enemy is technically not the enemy at all... Rather than looking for people to form a team, you're looking for planets to colonize. In ME1, you're looking for clues to defeat the enemy, i.e. progressing the plot. Rather than having to make those team mates loyal, you have to make the planets viable for colonization. In ME1 you're too busy looking for solutions to attend daddy issues. At least Colonization was a necessity in Andromeda, so it beats ME2 there. Rather than upgrading the Normandy you upgrade the Nexus. In ME1, you upgrade your understanding and knowledge of previous civilizations and the enemy. And so on and so on. Andromeda additionally has the same design structure, meaning, segregated small stories everywhere, forced teleportations everywhere, not being able to board the ship without leaving the planet/station, and the overall arching plot is extremely weak, if not non-existent, and it does not flow, at all. The structure of ME1 is completely different compared to Andromeda, plot-wise, world-wise and design-wise. Since the fundamentals are based on ME2 (which makes sense since it's their more popular game), actually an extremely linear game, it fails at its core because this is now a big and non-linear game which turns the strengths of a corridor game turn into weaknesses. You cannot use the same structure in a linear game for a more open and exploration game. On the basic ME2 core of the game, they tried adding ME1 exploration elements which actually are more like the ME2 Hammerhead missions on much larger maps full of fetch quests. ME1 had a bunch of barren planets which people hated, but I appreciated, considering how empty space really is. ME2 came with the concept of all side-missions and planets needing to be completely unique, which Andromeda yet again follows. At least the Nomad works well this time, but that's one of the few things that they actually tried improving from the ME1 Mako. And lastly they expanded the ME3 combat, which also works well thankfully. ME1 worked, because the main missions had value to the end goal, even after the world opens up. The main missions of the game in the middle act, which were recruiting Liara, investigating the Feros colony, and visiting Noveria were directly connected to the main plot through having a Prothean Expert, receiving the Cypher and chasing Saren's sidekick respectively. In ME2 you're worrying about daddy issues, and in Andromeda I apparently cared so much about the story that I don't even remember what happened in the middle, aside from a bunch of vaults, which structurally work the same as character loyalty. In Andromeda, the lines between side missions and main missions is just as (if not more) blurry as in ME2. And the reason that is the case is because the main plot, as mentioned earlier, is extremely weak, if not non-existent. I'll take one simple example. It basically took 2/3 of the game in ME2 to find out that the Collectors were Prothean husks so to speak. It also took 2/3 of the game to find out that the Kett are basically the Andromedan version of Husks. In ME1, you find out what husks are on the first mission, which is like 1/10th of the game, if not less. That alone should give you an indication of the difference in depth that these games have in their writing. What else did ME2 and Andromeda have? Not much, other than a cliffhanger at the end. There is no equivalent to the ME1 Geth plot in those games for example, among many other things. I see really little evidence that it is based on ME1. The open world argument is quite a shallow one.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
Sept 16, 2024 15:46:24 GMT
9,324
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,875
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Feb 6, 2020 8:12:28 GMT
I'm not sure whether " did Ascend remember it" is a very useful metric.
As for ME1 vs. ME2, your argument is essentially about you not buying into the loyalty mechanic, right? Yeah, it's a bit weird to play the game if you don't. (It's not quite similar to the ME1 race against time being unbelievable, since that's only unbelievable from the player's perspective; Shepard can believe in it without difficulty.) But as our local film critic used to say in his capsule reviews, "buy the premise, buy the flick."
|
|
inherit
Glorious Star Lord
822
0
16,819
KaiserShep
Party like it's 2023!
9,233
August 2016
kaisershep
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by KaiserShep on Feb 6, 2020 10:11:28 GMT
Actually, I would argue that ME1 is really the template that Andromeda lifts from. Andromeda has a lot more focus on its main story than 2 did in comparison to its companion content, but we're constantly pulled out of focus by a lot of the expansive wandering, doubling down on a problem that existed in the first game. Remember, ME2 had a lot of design decisions that were drastic responses to issues players had with ME1, with 3 then responding in kind to 2, but then players complained, saying how much we wanted a new game to be like ME1, and then BioWare did that.......and here we are. Can't say I agree, but you already knew that... I would say that Andromeda is practically a more sandbox/open world ME2, and not ME1 with ME2 elements. ME2 was chosen as the core for Andromeda. This game is ME2 at its core for basically everything. It's ME2 revamped to the "current" generation, with some added elements of the other games. Why would they choose ME1 as a basis if ME2 is the more popular of all the games? The best way to describe Andromeda is; an open world ME2 without the good ME2 characters. It's the same story structure as ME2. It begins almost the same as ME2, except this time you don't die, but actually survive the fall to a planet. Your father dies instead. In both cases death is used as the excuse as to why you're suddenly more powerful or have more abilities. In contrast, in ME1 you're made 'special' by a story element rather than death, which is the Cypher. And rather than having the collectors being the mysterious enemy, you have the Kett being the mysterious enemy. They both remain the enemy throughout the whole game. In ME1, the initial enemy is technically not the enemy at all... Rather than looking for people to form a team, you're looking for planets to colonize. In ME1, you're looking for clues to defeat the enemy, i.e. progressing the plot. Rather than having to make those team mates loyal, you have to make the planets viable for colonization. In ME1 you're too busy looking for solutions to attend daddy issues. At least Colonization was a necessity in Andromeda, so it beats ME2 there. Rather than upgrading the Normandy you upgrade the Nexus. In ME1, you upgrade your understanding and knowledge of previous civilizations and the enemy. And so on and so on. Andromeda additionally has the same design structure, meaning, segregated small stories everywhere, forced teleportations everywhere, not being able to board the ship without leaving the planet/station, and the overall arching plot is extremely weak, if not non-existent, and it does not flow, at all. The structure of ME1 is completely different compared to Andromeda, plot-wise, world-wise and design-wise. Since the fundamentals are based on ME2 (which makes sense since it's their more popular game), actually an extremely linear game, it fails at its core because this is now a big and non-linear game which turns the strengths of a corridor game turn into weaknesses. You cannot use the same structure in a linear game for a more open and exploration game. On the basic ME2 core of the game, they tried adding ME1 exploration elements which actually are more like the ME2 Hammerhead missions on much larger maps full of fetch quests. ME1 had a bunch of barren planets which people hated, but I appreciated, considering how empty space really is. ME2 came with the concept of all side-missions and planets needing to be completely unique, which Andromeda yet again follows. At least the Nomad works well this time, but that's one of the few things that they actually tried improving from the ME1 Mako. And lastly they expanded the ME3 combat, which also works well thankfully. ME1 worked, because the main missions had value to the end goal, even after the world opens up. The main missions of the game in the middle act, which were recruiting Liara, investigating the Feros colony, and visiting Noveria were directly connected to the main plot through having a Prothean Expert, receiving the Cypher and chasing Saren's sidekick respectively. In ME2 you're worrying about daddy issues, and in Andromeda I apparently cared so much about the story that I don't even remember what happened in the middle, aside from a bunch of vaults, which structurally work the same as character loyalty. In Andromeda, the lines between side missions and main missions is just as (if not more) blurry as in ME2. And the reason that is the case is because the main plot, as mentioned earlier, is extremely weak, if not non-existent. I'll take one simple example. It basically took 2/3 of the game in ME2 to find out that the Collectors were Prothean husks so to speak. It also took 2/3 of the game to find out that the Kett are basically the Andromedan version of Husks. In ME1, you find out what husks are on the first mission, which is like 1/10th of the game, if not less. That alone should give you an indication of the difference in depth that these games have in their writing. What else did ME2 and Andromeda have? Not much, other than a cliffhanger at the end. There is no equivalent to the ME1 Geth plot in those games for example, among many other things. I see really little evidence that it is based on ME1. The open world argument is quite a shallow one. The minutiae of the plot doesn’t really determine its structure. ME2’s intro vs MEA’s differs greatly in that ME2’s opening scene basically gives us a total upheaval of our character’s established setting. Sure, there’s a death in the beginning, but that’s true of most of BioWare’s game intros. I don’t think MEA’s intro really serves to give the same effect as ME2, because ME2 is banking on the familiarity of something players grew attached to and actively dismantled all of it for dramatic effect.. The Geth and Collectors basically function identically between the two games, so I can’t say that the kett really compare more to one or the other here. It’s just that in ME2, the geth are just that side enemy, sort of reduced to the level of the outlaw gangs. The key problem I find in ME1’s structure is that its main plot is actually particularly short and very direct, giving you big objectives rather early. All of this is undermined by how much zigzagging you do that requires just going back to the station to check if anything new is there, yet none of it is plot relevant. The only time you need to return to the Citadel to progress the plot is post-Virmire. ME2 kind of gets around all of this by leaving Shepard twisting in the wind until The Illusive Man comes up with something for you to do. But that’s also what makes it a bit different. ME2’s objectives are mostly just a lot of personal business that eventually triggers an obligatory main mission that literally locks you out of doing anything else.
|
|
Ascend
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 370 Likes: 492
inherit
3282
0
492
Ascend
370
February 2017
ascend
Bottom
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Ascend on Feb 6, 2020 12:26:31 GMT
I'm not sure whether " did Ascend remember it" is a very useful metric. Well if that's the only real flaw you can find, I guess my case is stronger than you give it credit for. But I agree. Me not remembering something doesn't really say much, except that the game itself is not very memorable to me. It most likely would have been if it had more substance though. As for ME1 vs. ME2, your argument is essentially about you not buying into the loyalty mechanic, right? Yeah, it's a bit weird to play the game if you don't. (It's not quite similar to the ME1 race against time being unbelievable, since that's only unbelievable from the player's perspective; Shepard can believe in it without difficulty.) But as our local film critic used to say in his capsule reviews, "buy the premise, buy the flick." I don't have an issue with the loyalty mechanic itself. Not at all. It is a great way to go for expanding character depth. I was trying to show the similarities in structure and approach of ME2 and Andromeda, and how ME1 is differently structured. The minutiae of the plot doesn’t really determine its structure. The minutiae of the plot doesn't really determine the structure of the plot, or of the game? In either case, you see them as minutiae, I see them as key factors of the game structure. ME2’s intro vs MEA’s differs greatly in that ME2’s opening scene basically gives us a total upheaval of our character’s established setting. Sure, there’s a death in the beginning, but that’s true of most of BioWare’s game intros. I don’t think MEA’s intro really serves to give the same effect as ME2, because ME2 is banking on the familiarity of something players grew attached to and actively dismantled all of it for dramatic effect.. Can't say I agree. ME2 was built to bring in new players, rather than appeasing to existing fans only. ME1 also has a death at the start of the game, Nihlus. But again, it is structured differently. It wasn't the death of Nihlus that made you 'special', it was the Cypher. In ME2, your own death made you special even though the game tries to argue that you already were special as a symbol, even though you don't really need to be alive to be special as a symbol, but that's another story for another time. In MEA, your father dies and chooses you to have all the powers that he had, basically. Slight difference, but same principle as ME2. And I don't think any of this can be classified as 'minutiae', simply because it is the setup for the main character for the rest of the game. That is quite significant. The Geth and Collectors basically function identically between the two games, so I can’t say that the kett really compare more to one or the other here. It’s just that in ME2, the geth are just that side enemy, sort of reduced to the level of the outlaw gangs. At this point I'm wondering if you remember ME1, or even played ME1. In the beginning, the Geth/Collectors/Kett sort of do offer the same function. They are presented as a scary race that attack people and need to be stopped. One difference is that we quite early get to know at least part of the history of the Geth, unlike the Kett and Collectors. And this difference is important. It is the difference between a known entity/group behaving differently than normal, and an unknown enemy doing something we don't want. The Kett and the Collectors fall in the latter category, and the Geth in the former. Both the Kett and Collectors are written in a way where one can easily argue that they are Diabolus ex Machina, rather than an inherent part of the world like the Geth. The key problem I find in ME1’s structure is that its main plot is actually particularly short and very direct, giving you big objectives rather early. All of this is undermined by how much zigzagging you do that requires just going back to the station to check if anything new is there, yet none of it is plot relevant. The only time you need to return to the Citadel to progress the plot is post-Virmire. Why is that a problem though? If there is one thing I find annoying in modern games it's the hand-holding. And you think ME1's plot is short? Even if you think it is, a lot more happened in that 'short' plot than the whole of plot ME2 and MEA combined. Plot being; plot /plät/ the main events of a play, novel, movie, or similar work, devised and presented by the writer as an interrelated sequence. ME2 kind of gets around all of this by leaving Shepard twisting in the wind until The Illusive Man comes up with something for you to do. But that’s also what makes it a bit different. ME2’s objectives are mostly just a lot of personal business that eventually triggers an obligatory main mission that literally locks you out of doing anything else. And you think that is superior? This is akin to forcing you to do enough side-missions before you're allowed to take the next step in the story. Understandable, considering there barely is any main story here.
|
|
inherit
265
0
Sept 22, 2024 10:44:40 GMT
11,985
Pounce de León
Praise the Justicat!
7,916
August 2016
catastrophy
caustic_agent
|
Post by Pounce de León on Feb 6, 2020 13:42:25 GMT
ach, fuck it. (edit woes)
|
|
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: 1,919 Likes: 3,120
inherit
634
0
May 14, 2017 17:50:43 GMT
3,120
Cyberstrike
is wanting to have some fun!
1,919
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 Feb 6, 2020 14:00:15 GMT
There was just too much platforming, I felt, and it made the environments feel weird and unnatural, in the sense that it was just a straight up game level and not a facility people actually used that we ventured through.
People complained about the lack of weird alien environments in the MET. BioWare decided to try and fix that and I like the Vaults they reminded me of the 50s sci-fi classic Forbidden Planet which was one the inspirations for Star Trek and Mass Effect.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Sept 29, 2024 0:19:48 GMT
Deleted
0
Sept 29, 2024 0:19:48 GMT
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2020 14:41:58 GMT
At this point I'm wondering if you remember ME1, or even played ME1. In the beginning, the Geth/Collectors/Kett sort of do offer the same function. They are presented as a scary race that attack people and need to be stopped. One difference is that we quite early get to know at least part of the history of the Geth, unlike the Kett and Collectors. And this difference is important. It is the difference between a known entity/group behaving differently than normal, and an unknown enemy doing something we don't want. The Kett and the Collectors fall in the latter category, and the Geth in the former. Both the Kett and Collectors are written in a way where one can easily argue that they are Diabolus ex Machina, rather than an inherent part of the world like the Geth. The sum total of the history of the geth that we learn in ME1 can be summed up in a single info-dump from Tali. What we learn about the Kett comes much more slowly and is in better context with the discovery of an alien race where there is no one around who can just conveniently info dump. It is also somewhat more dependent on the player's willingness to scan and read/speculate about the results of those scan. On Habitat 7 alone, we can learn almost as much about the Kett as Tali tells us about the geth, but a lot of players I've seen just race through the levels and then whine about not having been given background information... something that is hypocritical to their also whining about not being able to explore at the same time. Through the course of the game, we learn much more about the Kett than we ever learn about the geth in ME1... again, smaller bits and pieces and dependent upon the player paying attention, doing the side quests, making the scans and reading them, reading the datapads. It's less "in your face"... more like doing real archaeology. It has nothing to do with the Kett not being an "inherent part of the world." It has more to do with us not being "inherent to that world," and not yet undertanding any of their language to decipher things on Habitat 7... and that they didn't have a convenient "creator" of them that we could just talk with to learn where they came from, etc.
|
|
Ascend
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 370 Likes: 492
inherit
3282
0
492
Ascend
370
February 2017
ascend
Bottom
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Ascend on Feb 6, 2020 15:30:38 GMT
The sum total of the history of the geth that we learn in ME1 can be summed up in a single info-dump from Tali. Not really... When you meet Ashley on Eden Prime, Kaiden mentions that the Geth have not been seen outside the Veil for over 200 years. That line alone, already tells you that Geth are a known "species", and that Geth avoid other races and have been doing so for a long time. Simply by looking at the Geth in that same mission, we learn they are basically robots (the game calls them synthetics), and that they can create 'zombies' known as husks from humans. And Tali didn't even come in the picture at this point. What we learn from Tali later is that her people created the Geth, accidentally made them sentient, tried to exterminate them, where they rebelled and drove Tali's people from their homeworld. Oh, and that they are smarter in larger groups. All that is nice lore, but not that relevant to the main plot of ME1. When was the last time you replayed or watch someone else replay ME1? Because it sounds like memories are a little lacking in certain aspects. What we learn about the Kett comes much more slowly and is in better context with the discovery of an alien race where there is no one around who can just conveniently info dump. It is a better context for a new race. But, as I said previously, the Geth are a known race. The Collectors and Kett are not. So, I have to reiterate; I was not arguing which race is better (although I soon will be), but rather that the Collectors and Kett are more similar to each other than the Geth to either one of them, tying back to the structure of ME2 and MEA being more similar to each other than MEA to ME1. The reason I brought up Diabolus ex Machina, is because the Collectors feel that way. They feel like a race that was shoe-horned in there to have a new enemy in ME2 so the reapers don't yet arrive. The Kett are similar. It feels like they were added just because you need a new enemy in the game. It is also somewhat more dependent on the player's willingness to scan and read/speculate about the results of those scan. On Habitat 7 alone, we can learn almost as much about the Kett as Tali tells us about the geth, but a lot of players I've seen just race through the levels and then whine about not having been given background information... something that is hypocritical to their also whining about not being able to explore at the same time. Through the course of the game, we learn much more about the Kett than we ever learn about the geth in ME1... again, smaller bits and pieces and dependent upon the player paying attention, doing the side quests, making the scans and reading them, reading the datapads. It's less "in your face"... more like doing real archaeology. That sounds more like a lack of focus rather than good game design. If it is vital information, it should be given in a way that the player undoubtedly gets that information. But how much given info about the Kett was really relevant? The only vital one that I recall is exaltation. In ME1 enough information was given about the Geth for them to serve their purpose for the game. Remember that they are not the main enemy of the game, unlike the Kett in MEA (and Collectors in ME2). And even having said that, ME1 still created the Geth to be more interesting. Why? Because after you learn their history, it inevitably makes you wonder if they really were wrong to drive the Quarians from their homeworld, for example. It was the Quarians that wanted to kill them after all... The Kett... They do exaltation as a way for reproduction. But rather than presenting it as solely a necessity for survival and them having another side, they kill any sort of alternate perspective by telling you that they look down on other races, and that they made exaltation a religious ritual. Basically, they made them purely evil for the sake of it. That is in direct contrast to the Geth which even in the first game was hinted that they might not be purely evil, or Saren, who despite being your enemy, wasn't purely evil. Short version. The Geth in ME1 might be simple writing, but it's not lazy. The Collectors and the Kett are lazy writing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Sept 29, 2024 0:19:48 GMT
Deleted
0
Sept 29, 2024 0:19:48 GMT
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2020 15:50:53 GMT
Actually, I would argue that ME1 is really the template that Andromeda lifts from. Unfortunately they forgot to include giving the player the choice to/not recruit squadmates, and they forgot to add the power wheel. If anything, MEA took a step backwards. You gripe endlessly about not having the ability to not recruit T'soni in ME1... but then defend the ability to choose your crew in ME1 over ME2? ME3 gives you as much choice over your crew as ME1 in that you can decide about one crew member. In ME1, you can choose only between Wrex and Garrus and in ME3, you can choose to send Ashley/Kaidan off to work with Hackett. ME2 was the most flexible of the games regarding crew composition... but then, you complain about having to recruit Jack.Therefore, the difference between ME:A and ME1 is the removal of only 1 squad member choice. Hardly a huge step backwards. I really don't have the problem you do with it. Just leave them in their rooms and don't talk to the ones you don't like.
|
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
Sept 28, 2024 23:55:21 GMT
25,473
themikefest
15,350
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Feb 6, 2020 16:03:37 GMT
You gripe endlessly about not having the ability to not recruit T'soni in ME1 Endlessly? So link me to a post when I last said that. I do? Got a link to back that up? Huge? Never said huge. Or are you just buttering up your disagreeing with what I posted? No matter. Bioware removed a choice that was in the previous 3 games. Let's say I do that on my first playthrough. After that playthrough, I decide to post a review of the game mentioning the character I refused to talk with was crap, would you be ok with that? Or would it be better if I talk to the character throughout the game to decide whether or not I like the character?
|
|
inherit
Glorious Star Lord
822
0
16,819
KaiserShep
Party like it's 2023!
9,233
August 2016
kaisershep
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by KaiserShep on Feb 6, 2020 17:20:22 GMT
And you think that is superior? This is akin to forcing you to do enough side-missions before you're allowed to take the next step in the story. Understandable, considering there barely is any main story here. Not at all. If anything, I would sum up ME2's overall storytelling method as largely episodic, and it kind of makes the middle chapter feel like it's spinning its wheels for too long. I think my overall issue with ME1 is that the Race Against Time just doesn't have any sense of urgency in the amount of meandering the other side stories give. Granted, I sort of give it a pass because the entire game felt kind of experimental, like BioWare really wanted to have this Lovecraftian sort of Big Bad storyline, but they also wanted various capers across the galaxy, so it felt a little unfocused. Dragon Age: Origins, I think, pulled this all together a lot better. Personally, I would actually rank ME3 at the top in terms of actual story focus, even if it did kill the grandmas and puppies of players in its ending.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
Sept 16, 2024 15:46:24 GMT
9,324
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,875
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Feb 6, 2020 18:20:15 GMT
You gripe endlessly about not having the ability to not recruit T'soni in ME1 Endlessly? So link me to a post when I last said that. Yeah, you don't post about this that often, although a week ago you did endorse a suggestion to be allowed to kill her off at Virmire. As long as we're on the subject, how come you refer to her as "T'Soni" while referring to all other squadmates by their first names?
|
|
inherit
3439
0
Sept 16, 2024 15:46:24 GMT
9,324
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,875
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Feb 6, 2020 18:25:39 GMT
And you think that is superior? This is akin to forcing you to do enough side-missions before you're allowed to take the next step in the story. Understandable, considering there barely is any main story here. Depends on how "side quest" is defined. It's not really a very useful concept.
|
|
inherit
Scribbles
185
0
Sept 27, 2024 23:23:21 GMT
31,554
Hanako Ikezawa
22,977
August 2016
hanakoikezawa
|
Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Feb 6, 2020 18:34:22 GMT
Endlessly? So link me to a post when I last said that. Yeah, you don't post about this that often, although a week ago you did endorse a suggestion to be allowed to kill her off at Virmire. As long as we're on the subject, how come you refer to her as "T'Soni" while referring to all other squadmates by their first names? Doesn’t respect or like her enough to refer to her by her first name is my guess.
|
|
inherit
2754
0
Sept 28, 2024 23:02:24 GMT
6,000
Son of Dorn
Fortifying everything.
6,295
Jan 11, 2017 14:17:27 GMT
January 2017
doomlolz
Dragon Age Inquisition
|
Post by Son of Dorn on Feb 6, 2020 18:36:51 GMT
Endlessly? So link me to a post when I last said that. Yeah, you don't post about this that often, although a week ago you did endorse a suggestion to be allowed to kill her off at Virmire You say that like it's a bad thing....
|
|
Ascend
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 370 Likes: 492
inherit
3282
0
492
Ascend
370
February 2017
ascend
Bottom
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Ascend on Feb 6, 2020 18:44:43 GMT
And you think that is superior? This is akin to forcing you to do enough side-missions before you're allowed to take the next step in the story. Understandable, considering there barely is any main story here. Not at all. If anything, I would sum up ME2's overall storytelling method as largely episodic, and it kind of makes the middle chapter feel like it's spinning its wheels for too long. I think my overall issue with ME1 is that the Race Against Time just doesn't have any sense of urgency in the amount of meandering the other side stories give. Granted, I sort of give it a pass because the entire game felt kind of experimental, like BioWare really wanted to have this Lovecraftian sort of Big Bad storyline, but they also wanted various capers across the galaxy, so it felt a little unfocused. Dragon Age: Origins, I think, pulled this all together a lot better. Personally, I would actually rank ME3 at the top in terms of actual story focus, even if it did kill the grandmas and puppies of players in its ending. Fair enough. And I must say, it's good to see someone actually giving credit to ME3 where credit is due. All that people seem to remember is the ending, and maybe Mordin & the genophage. But ME3 did a LOT of things right, especially considering the behemoth of player expectation and the amount of open story and plot points that the other games left for it. I think ME3 achieved the best balance between plot, story, progression, gameplay and characters. It's a shame that for many people, all that is overshadowed by the last 15 minutes. ME2 is a more fun game though. ME3 almost feels depressing all throughout. Some of the best moments in the trilogy happen in ME3. I already mentioned Mordin's sacrifice, but there is another one that I particularly remember really well. For some reason, I've read that a lot of people hated it, while for me, the mission on Thessia was one of my favorites. Yes, it left you feeling REALLY bad in all possible ways, mainly disappointed, powerless and angry. But that's what real loss feels like. We have been too trained to always be winners in games. Even choosing between Kaiden and Ashley on Virmire, it was a loss of a character, but, the mission itself was a success. As far as I remember, Thessia is the only mission in the trilogy, that was really a complete and utter failure, where literally nothing was really achieved. And that is something I have to applaud. What other game has done this?
|
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
Sept 28, 2024 23:55:21 GMT
25,473
themikefest
15,350
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Feb 6, 2020 19:26:31 GMT
As long as we're on the subject, how come you refer to her as "T'Soni" Is there a reason you only mention that and not include that I say Hackett and Anderson as well instead of using their first names? Ok. Here's a post mentioning Vega. Another post mentioning Vakarian. And another post mentioning Miranda's last name. Yeah, you don't post about this that often, although a week ago you did endorse a suggestion to be allowed to kill her off at Virmire. As long as we're on the subject, how come you refer to her as "T'Soni" while referring to all other squadmates by their first names? Doesn’t respect or like her enough to refer to her by her first name is my guess. Why would using the last name of a character mean someone doesn't respect or like them?
|
|
Ascend
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 370 Likes: 492
inherit
3282
0
492
Ascend
370
February 2017
ascend
Bottom
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Ascend on Feb 6, 2020 19:33:09 GMT
And you think that is superior? This is akin to forcing you to do enough side-missions before you're allowed to take the next step in the story. Understandable, considering there barely is any main story here. Depends on how "side quest" is defined. It's not really a very useful concept. That's quite easy to define. Taking ME2 as an example; Anything that doesn't move the plot of stopping the collectors from abducting humans forward, is a side quest. If it improves survival rates or whatever, those are nice to haves, and not the main plot. That would mean that Mordin is a main plot character, because without him, it wouldn't be possible to be invisible to the swarms, and Horizon wouldn't happen. He was vital to the progression of the story. His loyalty mission is a side quest though, just like all loyalty missions. Miranda would be a main plot character since she brought you back I guess, but technically it wasn't required for her to be a squad mate. Still, she's a main character. Jacob is an introduction to Cerberus, technically, nothing Miranda wouldn't be able to do, so, he's currently a plot character technically, but an unnecessary one and functions more as a side character. Garrus is a side character. Grunt is a side character. Jack is a side character. Samara is a side character. Tali is a side character. Thane is a side character. Legion is a side character. All DLC characters are side characters. EDI is more important than the majority of your squad mates... And so is TIM. People love to say that the ME1 characters were bland and shallow, but they had a clear purpose to the main plot. Ashley/Kaiden serve as the trigger for getting the vision from the beacon. Tali serves as evidence to show Saren is guilty and to allow you to pursue him. Liara serves as an expert on the Protheans to help you decipher and interpret the visions from the beacons. Garrus, even though he doesn't forward the plot, functions as the embodiment of frustration towards the council and C-sec regarding the Saren investigation, i.e. frustration towards stagnation of the plot. Wrex is arguably the only one without a clear influence on the plot, other than the conflict on Virmire, where his role of supporting you temporarily turns into stagnating you. And funnily enough, he's considered the deepest one in ME1. Funny how that works.
|
|