Recent Posts

I've never understood why so many people (including the devs, unfortunately) conflate armor with fashion (clothing). Armor is combat gear, and throughout MET we assigned weapons and mods to everyone on the squad. Armor, like weaponry, should be treated as combat gear - because that's what it is.

I can suspend disbelief with the best of 'em, but a fictional world devoid of internal consistency makes for a load of nonsense. Since the PC (along with some squadmates) is invariably automatically changed into combat gear (including armor) whenever s/he enters a battlespace, every single member of the squad should follow suit.

Except for the dumbass dust masks on some of them - which will apparently find their way to Andromeda.  Sigh.

On another note - I don't care all that much about customization.  I want every squadmate wearing sealed suits in combat areas, just as Ryder does / will, and I feel that should be a guiding principle in the basic design of the game - not something that isn't considered until after the fact.

I stand corrected, if that is their codex for shielding then it is a fair point. How they are going to explain forward stations protecting you i do not know, the simplest way would of been to claim shielding. 

Im not sure now, officially in the games your shields were damaged (protected you) from heat radiation, according to this codex that should not have happened.

I still would pick a shield that takes time to recharge over wearing armour which will not recharge but provides similar protection due to the freedom of movement if focusing on biotics/ranged. I fully stand by my criticism of armour in a futuristic setting.

When it comes to radiation (toxins) the half mask should be more than enough to filter your breathing which can be enabled in the options to be always on. In regards to high intensity sunlight surely armour would lead you to being cooked faster. If were talking radioactive radiation (ive not looked into Andromedas worlds or what radiation they possess) then yes i agree squad mates should have a sealed suit aesthetic but unless the lore states that armour is lined with anti radiation and is more than a kevlar kind of armour really speaking you should be given a 3rd aesthetic where your characters have no armour but rather something akin to a bio suit (thinking Quarian).

I always thought armour was a secondary thought with shields being the main protection? So those fighting up close wear heavier armour (probably to shield them from grenades, melee etc).

RPGs don't necessarily mean you get to shape everything about the character and the story though. Witcher 3 railroaded me into making decisions I wouldn't have necessarily made if I had another choice, I played through most of FF7 annoyed by Cloud and wishing I could be playing as Tifa (who I liked much better), hell not even Shep was 100% yours, her 6 possibly backstories were pretty defined and you were never able to do something completely evil because she always had to be the hero. 

Seems like you are having a knee jerk reaction over a few lines in an interview and now you want Bioware to give you Bestheda like freedom over Ryder, which was never going to happen. 

All the dissent against Dr. Lexi. Such shameful display. It must be rectified.





Come on mate. If you held a grudge for that, you'd have to hate over half the cast. And the directors probably. And the key grip. That's practically his job when shit gets out of line.

Ok, I've only seen pictures but I lol'd.

"enlighted view"? I think that might be your own biases showing. Perhaps you are not as comfortable with your own views has you think.

Most Sci-Fi presents its audience with the message of the writer and it's up to the audience to take that onboard or not.  It is the opinion of the writer or the thought experiment of the writer, they might present their idea as the one that works in their universe but that doesn't mean the audience must accept it.

The Forever War, for example, is an anti-war novel, that has some interesting ideas on how humanity would use technology to deal with over population and how space travel would affect us. Joe Haldeman is presenting his view on war through this novel, you don't have to agree with this view on war to enjoy his work, ultimately his view is that war will become unnecessary and the end of the novel reflects this. I suppose you could call this the "enlighted view" but again I would say that would reflect more on you, Haldeman is simple using a story to present his opinion, like so many writers. 

The opposite side to this would be 'Starship Troopers' which glorifies war, but can also be enjoyed whether or not you agree with that glorification of war. Again Heinlein view is presented within the story and it's up to the reader to decide if they agree with it or which parts they agree with. In fact Starship Troopers is a hotly debated novel because several elements of it can be interpreted in several different ways, highlighting that Heinlein had a good grip on the complexities of war. 

Game writers may also present their opinion within their work or use their work to provide a window into a world not many people understand. In fact games are uniquely positioned to provide some really great experiences. If we wish game writing to evolve and become better then we must allow this to occur without kneejerk reactions. Our criticisms can be provided once we have something to actually criticise.

Again I say that gamers are far to unaccepting of this natural part of writing. this attitude will stifle the medium. 

I see, so you don't read or watch alot of Sci-Fi then. Fair enough

Have you played any story driven game without politics? Cos I haven't. Media always reflects the opinions of the writers or the thought experiments the writers wish to perform. 

Do you not pay attention to stories?