Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Gaming and Hardware Forum' started by ThatZenoGuy, Mar 3, 2017.
They'll never learn, will they?
What is the big deal? I gotta say, I never really followed Mass Effect at all, and I have no clue what's wrong with ME:A right now. Well, except for the few seconds of trailer I've seen where the facial animations are Bethesdian levels of terrible.
You see, this is the problem with graphics. If everything about the world is shown through a first person lens, it's expected that everything look entirely accurate, from faces not being too droopy, to punches being right on.
This is why I prefer isometrics. The Graphics aren't supposed to be how you see the world, they are supposed to be representational not accurate. You can't complain about the poor models, or the unrealistic animations, because they simply represent someone in the environment.
Its a bazillion dollar AAA modern high tier franchise, and the animators can't even make a punch connect.
Its like purchasing a 10 million dollar supercar, and realising the seats are made of cardboard.
I also like her supremely highly trained boxing technique, which involves opening up your defense after the punch and presenting your own chin as openly as possible to let the enemy have the next punch. Very sporting of her.
I also like how she used the force to push him aside without touching him.
That was a good touch.
Yeah, defense doesn't really mean anything in Force boxing, I guess.
I always giggle whenever I hear people using TK powers in fiction.
If I was the person with TK, I'd just yank on their blood vessels in their brain, giving everyone strokes.
*puts on expert hat on*
If anyone is actually interested in the word of a guy who used to be a HUGE Bioware fan, there's basically been a couple of Stalinist purges in both the Mass Effect and Dragon Age franchises. Lots of the original teams and visionaries involved have been cut and entirely new groups have taken their place.
But speaking as a Mass Effect fan who loved the series like Garfield loves lasanga.
What does Charles Phipps hate about this game without even playing it
1. It doesn't in any way address the clusterfuck of Mass Effect 3's endings.
2. It removes all of the politics and history of the original trilogy.
3. There are no carry over personalities from the original game.
4. The entire premise reaks of a colonialist narrative.
5. The idea there's a massive project to build 4 Citadel-sized colony planetoids before the Reaper's arrive versus, I dunno, SHIPS TO FIGHT THEM is lore-breaking to the extreme.
6. The designs of the characters are hideous.
7. No sign of the Quarians or Geth.
8. Choosing your family and past for you removes some of the choices which you had with Shepard.
9. There's no sign of the Paragon vs. Renegade choices which was one of the few things ME had going for it.
10. A return of the damn vehicle sections no one really wanted back.
11. Another massive ancient alien race appears to be the enemy.
12. From a pure shallow standpoint, no attractive human love interests.
13. Lots of questionable design choices like the failed punching shot.
14. No mass effect gates, ergo, it's not FUCKING MASS EFFECT IS IT?
This doesn't feel like anything but a new IP, one I might have LIKED actually, if not for the fact it has a bunch of ME skins over the characters.
Eh, Superman's TK only works from his body forward. In short, you can't pass through a surface, only around it.
While I agree with you, I think it is a bit more complicated than just 'you can do poor models, cuz it's isometric!'. I would say, what really matters is 'style' with isometric and top down games. For example, what I sometimes don't like is this blend of 3D and 2D stuff in some games. If done well, it's awesome, if done poorly ... you can see the transition. Also, todays computers and technology allow you to somewhat show the characters at least with enough detail, to tell them apart, no more 'random' sprites like in really old top-down games - see Baldurs Gate or Jagged Alliance.
Devil's advocate time.
1. Why would it? It takes place (or well, the mission sets off) before the last entry in the orig trig.
2. ...Because it's set in a new galaxy, so they have the freedom to create new things from scratch... Without necessarily fucking with original lore and breaking it.
3. If, and that's a big IF, they continue it with a sequel then maybe we'd get save transfer too. But Mass Effect 1 didn't have this either since it was the first entry in a trilogy. If you dislike MEA for not having save transfer then you'd kinda have to dislike ME1 for the same reason. Even if it takes place after the 2nd game I don't see why the choices we make in those games 'have' to affect this.
7. Quarians aren't exactly all that numerous from what I recall and they ain't on the council so why would they need to be on this mission? As to Geth, why would they be involved in the Andromeda galaxy what so ever?
8. True, but there is such a thing as too much branching. If they can lessen some of the immediate branching so that they can explore future branching in more complexity then I'd welcome it. Apart from some dialogue being different I don't remember much of importance changing from your backstory selections in ME1 anyway.
9. Good riddance. Binary morality is a childish concept and should never be in RPG's with a semblance of nuance in the first place.
14. To be fair, the title of a series might not make sense for future titles but it doesn't mean that the future titles are not proper entries into the series just cause they lack whatever it is that the title of the first game was.
Ass Deffect Androginous
A display of white privilege in Mass Effect!
Eh for me, the appeal of Mass Effect was that you were dumped in a fully-formed universe where humanity wasn't necessarily the big dog and we all had to play nice. It was a "lived in" universe where you had humans trying to learn to get along with the other people as well as a vast complicated bureaucracy as well as history that made things difficult to navigate. For me, you throw most of that out in a new galaxy and I think it's already an uncomfortable topic of colonizing.
I.e. making a settlement on other people's land for the sake of human Manifest Destiny.
There's also the fact I'm really far more interested in the fate of Earth and the existing galaxy than any hypothetical Cecil B Rhodes types.
My biggest problem with Andromeda is that it looks like they are taking away the dark grainy feel of the originals, and I stead making a bright and happier and goofier story which doesn't appeal to me.
Maybe I'm just some sadistic manic depressant but I would like to see some kind of somberness.
I really hate the fact that games don't have the balls to go all the way. The original games took you down the path of possibly committing genocide in order to save the Galaxy, this one just feels like it isn't going to go too far down that struggle.
Instead we get the protagonist whose head looks like a balloon smiling like a dork.
I want genocide and alien experimentation, is that too much to ask?
How is it anything like colonization in the sense of the Spanish/English/Ottoman Empires? I didn't even begin to get the sense that this colonization initiative was looking to capture/control existing civilizations. The Human race's first contact with the sexy-blue-space-babes (what were they called again?) at the Citadel didn't really end with colonization. The A.I. isn't even solely Human, there appears to be a coalition of at least four species (Krogan, Raptor looking people, blue space babes, and humans).
Well, it's settling a new galaxy with no idea of who inhabits it. Basically, showing up in the "Frontier" and declaring its yours now. The fact this is a galaxy inhabited by new races you and the other three are coming to join makes this all the more awkward. Just imagine, for example, if the Asari or Krogan showed up on Earth and said, "don't mind us, we'll just be taking places you aren't using right now." Part of what caused the Human-Batarian conflict was they started colonizing worlds set aside from Batarian expansion.
Human-Batarian war isn't really a good comparison. That's like some retard on Earth pointing to Jupiter's moon (Titan) and saying "dibs," and the moment a Colony ship lands there he sues the colonists for violating his claim to the land.
Just don't buy it buy something else. To me that shit would't matter if the game is actual good but dam I anti buying that. Just don't buy it. Not even to see how bad it is just DON'T BUY IT
Who is Earth and who is the Batarians in that?
The territory was set aside for the Batarians before the Citadel Council let the humans claim it.
Because they're assholes.