The Witcher 3 and Mass Effect Andromeda thread

well no one is stopping you from gushing, you are attempting however to stop people from criticizing MEA especially in regards to a comparable RPG game

It's not comparable. It is radically different in its structure. Solo game with a fixed protagonist vs a party-based game with a flexible protagonist. It is a HUGE difference in design and resource allocation.

Some aspects are similar, such as quests. Maybe if people di dnot downplay the things that Andromeda does both differently and better than the witcher it would be easier to engage in a discussion.

But when I tried to highlight how important it is that Liam is there with you from Day 1 of the game, that you actually have to build rapport with him before you engage into his Quest discussed in the article, people say things like: Well, it did not matter to me, because Keira spoke to me on the radio and it was an equivalent companionship banter/jokes.

Actually, the article writer does not even compare Keira to Liam. He compares it to SAM, a game-convenience device to help a player along. Of course it has a NEUTRAl tone, it is there for the whole game, and has to be as non-irritating and neutral as possible. Keira on the radio is one-quest person, she can have as much personality as they want to add, and it will come in a short burst, a sprint. A side-quest NPC is always a sprint, a companion writing is for a marathon.

Witcher may be praised for what it does include, but it is NOT consistently and appropriately criticized for what it's missing, while with the Andromeda it is only criticized for what it's missing.

When I say that Witcher is missing the flexible protagonist and companions, people just shrug and say "that's how the game is". But if you are to say that Andromeda is missing better developed NPCs in the sidequests, you find it inacceptable for me to shrug and say "That's just how the game is"?

It is not garbage!!! It is a terrific game with a wonderful story line and a cast of funny, loveable characters.

And the two games are FUNDAMENTALLY different. In Andromeda you play your own hero, with a party. In Witcher you play a fixed protagonist from someone's novel without other characters accompanying you. For a short time you switch the protagonist to another fixed protagonist related to him.

That's a completely different gameplay and approach to narration. It's absolutely not the same. Witcher is more like Eastern games than BioWARE games.

The story line is cliche riddled and unimaginative, the characters range from dull to actively painful to talk to.

The party/solo combat systems are just gameplay differences,and not large ones at that.  They both relay on the interplay between normal attacks, powers, and equipment for the majority of their combat.  There are even moments in TW3 where you do have companions, and while their AI and damage output is negligible, I can say the same for MEA where their only point is still occasionally prime an enemy for detonation and provide banter.

the differences in protagonist styles are also not really that big of a matter.  No matter what you do, Ryder is defined in ways that the player cannot control, to a greater degree than any other BioWare protagonist.

They really aren't that different in a lot of aspects.  The differences in party vs solo combat at fixed vs less fixed protagonist do not make these two games fundamentally different.

You're wrong I do notice the companion AI, I notice them hovering above boxes, shooting the wrong way, charging in recklessly, even Jaal who is supposed to be a sniper, limited power usage, and a slef preservation instinct that kamikaze pilots would find extreme.

Ryder has less emotional range than Geralt does, however that is more a testament to how good the writing for Geralt is more than anything else.  Its an accomplishment to take someone supposedly stripped of emotions and give them range and material to work with, his interactions with his fellow witchers, friends, and lovers are all amazingly done, the scene where he admits his love to Triss is hands down some of the best writing I've seen.

The Main story of Andromeda was laughably predictable, no interesting moral dilemmas, the factions were worse than the cookie cutter mercs of ME2, the Roekaar and the Milky Way Exiles were worefully underdeveloped, the Kett were knock off of better Sci-Fi series, the Remnant as well.  Some interesting questions are raised, but they are not dealt with, they seem to want to shove off all the interesting amterial for later on in DLC or new games.

The characters sure weren't full of background that's damn clear.  You've got "I'm a mom to my sister" x18234 times with Vetra, "I want to be an asari" x43253 times with Cora, "I want to make friends and have no concept of the consequences of my actions" x223124 times with Liam.  Through in some predictable character arcs, for the three who had an arc, with the likes of Peebee, Kallo, and Gil.  They are dull, dull, dull.  There's no Mordin's or Jacks to deal with here.  The fact that I agree with you that the DA2 cast is better is really all the needs to be said. 

The war between good and evil is being waged in this thread.

I really liked how the companion AI was handled in Andromeda. I tried all the companions, and it felt like the group was always in action, and I had no problems going through the game with any of them. I thought it was great.

I cannot judge Geralt’s emotional range. I miss the renegade from MET, but a roguish character and a wide-eyed good-doer really were excellent, and a pleasant change of pace. I just adore both the left-sided and right-sided Ryders, male and female. I liked the obvious youthfulness of the protagonists, as they are normally ageless. I also really like it how switching from a female to male protagonist gives Ryder a different aspect.

I’ve never felt that the companions were dull. I like it when their personality does not wobble all over the place or do 180 degree turns because they fall in love with the protagonist and get redeemed or corrupted in his/her bed. It is actually very similar to Mordin who is a very consistent character throughout the game. Jack, on the other hand, had a cringe-worthy change when romanced. She was the biggest character disappointment in ME2 for me.

In Andromeda, pretty much every companion changed my initial view on them.

I started out being irritated by Liam, but after playing the game, his good-natured altruism won me over so much, that on the second play-through I felt he was dear to me.

I rolled my eyes as Cora was trying to push Asari religion on me, but when she started talking of her garden, and the way she persevered made me like her.

I started really adoring PeeBee’s opening scenes, but her shenanigans later in the game made me cross with her.

I hate Krogans altogether, but I have warmed up to Drack. I don’t know why. I can’t explain it.

I was absolutely in love with Jaal before I started the game thinking he was someone else. Yet, he proved to be actually completely alien to me. I respect that, but I don’t feel warm towards him, despite romancing him, which is imo appropriate.

I really dislike the games that you cannot figure out who is who and what are they after. I love it that you can clearly see the division between the Nexus and the Exiles, and the sub-brunch of the Krogans. The two factions of Kett. The hint of the dissent on the Nexus with the Initiative betrayal. The two factions among the Angara. It all made sense to me, and felt very organic and interesting. It was the world where the viewpoints made sense, save for Kett who were basically your normal orcs/darkspawn whatever other minions of the dark lord.

The remnant was the best faction overall, and reminded me of Gree so much. I can’t wait to learn more about them.

Yes the main narratives cover different thematic material, in places, but they are presented the same way, the most games do it, through cutscenes, dialogue choices, and gameplay

I'm not sure I get the "BioWare needs to outshine CDProjekt and TW3" that has been going on since TW3 was released. There have been plenty of games in years past that were better than what BioWare was making and nobody ever said BioWare should stop making BioWare games and start copying what others were doing pre-2015.

Personally, I prefer both DAI and MEA to TW3, so all those "BioWares needs to do like TW3 and outshine it" come off as insulting and generate a big "DONT" from me.

In fact, I would much prefer if BioWare started to make more games with more than one playable species, less cutscenes but more in-game scripted events, more player character personalities dialogue options for role-playing, larger dungeons and more party-based tactical combat instead of less of all of that.

It's not just the story but how in TW3 it's seen from Geralts eyes only and in Mass Effect they have to wright for the whole squad.

“People”—Geralt turned his head—“like to invent monsters and monstrosities. Then they seem less monstrous themselves.” ----The white wolf.

Game development is a zero sum game. You have resources and you chose where to allocate them. The more diverse your game becomes, the less resources you have to go in depth.

Do you want a voiced protagonist? You just allocated a bunch of money to voice acting. You also severely limited dialogue choices as having 10 possible replies instead of 2 means 5x the money you pay to voice actor. And if those replies actually branch out to more choices...the price rises exponentially.
Do you want a choice of male or female protagonist? You need to allocate time to make sure both genders fit the story. Oh, voiced? Double the VO costs. 2 choices of voices for each protagonist? Quadruple VO costs. Have to fit into a budget? Limit the number of lines, or *choices* the character has.
The bigger the world, the more time you need to spend developing content for it, otherwise you end up with DAI which has crap ton of empty spaces and meaningless fetch quests.

Most people who lament about the good old days of RPGs being gone have to look at the trade-offs that have been made. Better graphics and model design replaced isometric but require a lot more design time. Animation and art costs went through the roof. Voice overs replaced silent protagonist, but gutted the ability to have large number of meaningful replies. The list goes on. So the question is what do people want? You now have a choice of appealing to a broad base or sacrificing the diversity for depth. BW went with former, CDPR embraced the latter. I would not at all be surprised of C2077 will end up with a fixed protagonist - at the moment it is the only way for a AAA title to have any depth as players now expect to have a voiced protagonist in a good looking 3D world.