[Megathread] Mass Effect Andromeda

[Ilikegreenfire]

I know as much as an expert - the post. You don't and you can't hide behind your opinion because you're afraid of being wrong. If I had to write a story for a class and I kept retconning my story, I would get an f brcause it would be fucking shit.

Just accept that i know more about the industry than you do or at least have a conversation with me as to why I'm wrong. And I extend that invitation to anybody because it's really hard to have an actual video game discussion on this site.

You don't know the difference between fact and opinion, probably time to revisit what you learned in middles school.

[Derah]

I know as much as an expert

Therefore your opinion is more valid than mine? Or makes your opinion an indisputable fact? again, sorry buddy but that's not how opinions work.

You don't and you can't hide behind your opinion because you're afraid of being wrong.

There is no "right" or "wrong" with opinions. Only agreements or disagreements.

If you say Mass Effect Andromeda is a dance-based rhythm game made in japan, that's something that one can say you're right or wrong about.

If you say Mass Effect Andromeda is a bad game, that's an opinion others can agree or disagree with, not a fact one can be right or wrong about.

Just accept that i know more about the industry than you do

Maybe you do (I honestly don't know, I don't know you). But even if that's the case, it still doesn't make your opinion more valid than mine, nor does it transforms your opinion into an indisputable fact. Your opinion is still just an opinion.

or at least have a conversation with me as to why I'm wrong.

*sighs*

How many times must I repeat that I'm not telling you that you're wrong. I'm telling you that what you're presenting as a fact is not a fact, is an opinion. One I disagree with. There's a difference between disagreement and being wrong. If you can't see it, then maybe you're not as qualified as you think you are when it comes to giving opinions on something.

If I had to write a story for a class and I kept retconning my story, I would get an f brcause it would be fucking shit.

Not the same. In a class, you're expected to follow specific guidelines, a specific structure, and pass a specific quota. The teacher is not evaluating how much he enjoys your story or not, he's evaluating whether or not you met the specific goals that were set out for you during the class. Meeting those goals means getting a high grade.

Its entirely possible to write a story that meets every goal, gets a high grade, and is still boring as shit for most people who read it.

Just accept that i know more about the industry than you do or at least have a conversation with me as to why I'm wrong.

For the fifth time, I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying that your opinion is just that, an opinion, not a fact.

You can disagree with opinions. You can't disagree with facts. The way you feel about a company is an opinion. Plus is kinda hard to take your opinion seriously when you use statements such as "I Know more than you do, therefore what I think is a fact that can't be disputed by anyone", or "saying "that's your opinion" is just a lazy copout to criticism".

[Skorpionss]

I doubt they are responsible for that, this screams more like terrible QA department and bad project management. Or they just had to shove it out of the door because the higher ups said so.
And I think SJWs are deplorable and utterly ridiculous most of the time.

As someone that works in the QA department (and what's worse I worked for EA's QA department for a while), I can assure you that every single problem you see was most likely brought up at least once and the higher ups(most likely producers) just didn't give a shit and decided to ship like this anyway.

[Ilikegreenfire]

Well that's just your opinion dood. You may want to learn some people know way more about a subject than you do. Go ahead and call me out when I say a game is bad without saying why, which I haven't because I haven't played it (yet?).

You realize "experts" still have to prove what they say for it to be a fact right? The fact that you think your "expert" opinion makes something a fact without any evidence means you for a fact don't know the difference between fact and opinion.

[Derah]

Well that's just your opinion dood.

Actually no, that's not an opinion. its a fact that you don't know the difference between an opinion and a fact.

[May90]

What? Que? 何？I haven't whined in any game thread. I gave facts on why zelda is a not very cohesive game because the systems actively work against you. 1 game. How about my vocal love for nier? A game I loved so much and yet I can tell you all of its long list of flaws. But uh yeah, heaven forbid I get really active in my hobby, eh?

No, I remember your whining from a WoW thread as well. Everywhere I saw you, you give the same message: "This game is crap, the developers are shit, but I'm gonna play this game to understand just how shitty it is".

And no, you don't have any clue about the industry. If you did, you wouldn't have to resort to "I'm more experienced than you, so deal with it" crap.

[Cosmic Janitor]

Oh my, rarely have I had the desire to shoot a character that soon after meeting them for the first time as I have with Addison. If someone wants me to spoil a possible death of her (pretty please? :P), you'd make my day.

[Ilikegreenfire]

You literally called that conversation shit in your post, that is another fact. Your entire post was implying it was a bad game. From a section of dialogue from a player driven conversation for a single romance of a single character that was intended to be awkward.

[Derah]

Oh my, rarely have I had the desire to shoot a character that soon after meeting them for the first time as I have with Addison. If someone wants me to spoil a possible death of her (pretty please? :P), you'd make my day.

Agreed. She's not just the queen of the uncanny valley, she's just a plain unpleasant person, and if she happens to die, no tears will be shed over here.

If she happens to die, but there's a way to prevent her death, I actually wont move a finger to prevent it and just let it happen.

[corebit]

While I also think that is true, the game is shit optimized on PC too... At least compared to Battlfield 1 for example, where I can reach a steady 60 fps on 4k full ultra, High FXAA... In ME:A I struggle to reach 50fps(if I look down at the ground), but mostly hovers in the 30fps area, with drops to 25 or lower...

AAA PC games are now mostly console ports, and the devs don't bother to optimize on PC. PC version may have more graphics customization sliders on the surface, but they mostly perform the same. That's why we often see those PC/Xbone/PS4 comparison videos and see they are near identical most of the time.

Just accept that i know more about the industry than you do or at least have a conversation with me as to why I'm wrong. And I extend that invitation to anybody because it's really hard to have an actual video game discussion on this site.

How can you say that with a straight face when you didn't even know whether Manveer Heir was a writer or a designer, and claim to know why the doctors left Bioware, when all they've stated were their own personal reasons.

[Ilikegreenfire]

Oh my, rarely have I had the desire to shoot a character that soon after meeting them for the first time as I have with Addison. If someone wants me to spoil a possible death of her (pretty please? :P), you'd make my day.

I doubt she will die, the entire nexus management is like the f team, Tann was 8th in line for his position, they kill her off there may be no one else to do her job lmao

[Witchblade77]

As much as it pains me to say it........ no, that book is also not objectively bad. I hate it, for reasons far too long to list here, but whether we like it or not, the book has its audience.

For me, the book is shit. For you, the book is shit. That makes it a subjectively bad book. Neither you, nor I enjoy it. In fact, there's plenty of other people like us who also never enjoyed it. But there's also quite a few millions who DID enjoy it. So it can't be objectively bad.

Getting shot is objectively bad. I've been shot, I didn't like it. Plenty of other people have been shot, they didn't like it. I don't think there's a single person in the history of humanity that can say "man, I can't wait to get shot again, that was SO awesome".

well... the fact that it has an audience doesn't change the terrible writing though. I mean... http://www.thestranger.com/blogs/slo...shades-of-grey I suppose it can fit into "so bad, its good" category. but it goes far beyond my personal enjoyment or lack of thereof.

that said awkward exchange being written as awkward on purpose is actualy an example of good, rather then bad writing :P at least IMO.

[corebit]

We cannot. The default faces can't be modified at all. And the customizable presets are barely customizable at all. The most you can change is hair, hair color, eye color, facial hair for male characters, tattoos, scars, and skin color. You can slightly modify some minor details like eye positioning, and mouth size, nose size etc, but the faces remain in the basic shape they are. This character creator is about as deep and detailed as Wow's character creator. Which is a bloody shame, because I was truly and really impressed with the char-creator in Inquisition.

This is really disappointing to hear. Not back-breaking, but it's a big minus for me. I'm the type of guy that spends hours on the character customization screen. I never play default Shepards or default protagonists from DA because they don't feel like mine, and so far the custom Ryders all look butt-ugly.

[May90]

well... the fact that it has an audience doesn't change the terrible writing though. I mean... http://www.thestranger.com/blogs/slo...shades-of-grey I suppose it can fit into "so bad, its good" category. but it goes far beyond my personal enjoyment or lack of thereof.

that said awkward exchange being written as awkward on purpose is actualy an example of good, rather then bad writing :P at least IMO.

Well, here we have to ask: what is a purpose of a book? If someone enjoys that book, then the book is good in their eyes, meaning it is good for someone, meaning it can't be objectively bad by definition.

A product is only as good as people enjoy it. It doesn't have some kind of inherent value, its quality solely depends on the personal preferences.

[Derah]

well... the fact that it has an audience doesn't change the terrible writing though.

Terrible for me, and terrible for you, and terrible for a lot of people, but not terrible for the audience who bought and enjoyed the book. That makes it subjectively bad. You and I hate it, and we both have plenty of reasons to do so, but unless every single soul who's ever lived hates it, its not "Objectively bad".

Getting shot is objectively bad. I doubt there's a person out there that says "man I can't wait to get a cap on my ass again".

that said awkward exchange being written as awkward on purpose is actually an example of good, rather then bad writing :P at least IMO.

Agreed. They abided by the "show, don't tell" rule. The exchange was meant to be awkward, and awkward it was.

[Ilikegreenfire]

This is really disappointing to hear. Not back-breaking, but it's a big minus for me. I'm the type of guy that spends hours on the character customization screen. I never play default Shepards or default protagonists from DA because they don't feel like mine, and so far the custom Ryders all look butt-ugly.

In my Opinion face one Scott looks pretty good, I used face 6 as a template for my trial character, and he came out looking pretty good

[Deleted]

There is no such thing as "objectively bad writing". Good and Bad are subjective concepts, beholden to personal taste and preference. What some people can call good, others can call bad.

As much as it pains me to say it........ no, that book is also not objectively bad. I hate it, for reasons far too long to list here, but whether we like it or not, the book has its audience.

For me, the book is shit. For you, the book is shit. That makes it a subjectively bad book. Neither you, nor I enjoy it. In fact, there's plenty of other people like us who also never enjoyed it. But there's also quite a few millions who DID enjoy it. So it can't be objectively bad.

Getting shot is objectively bad. I've been shot, I didn't like it. Plenty of other people have been shot, they didn't like it. I don't think there's a single person in the history of humanity that can say "man, I can't wait to get shot again, that was SO awesome".

Just because you can have an opinion on something doesn't mean it can't be done objectively well or bad.
Same applies to writing, you have to follow a certain structure and other shit, otherwise it's indeed "bad writing", if you happen to like it anyway, then that's is just you liking it anyway.
It doesn't matter whether a book/story/movie has an audience or not.

I can't, for example, introduce a character with a weakness that can ignore said weakness with no problems whatsoever when it comes down to it.. that's a flaw and "bad writing". A mistake, just like a car that stops working because the manufacturer messed it up. You can still like that car, but it's a bad car because it doesn't work.

[Witchblade77]

Terrible for me, and terrible for you, and terrible for a lot of people, but not terrible for the audience who bought and enjoyed the book. That makes it subjectively bad. You and I hate it, and we both have plenty of reasons to do so, but unless every single soul who's ever lived hates it, its not "Objectively bad".

Getting shot is objectively bad. I doubt there's a person out there that says "man I can't wait to get a cap on my ass again".



Agreed. They abided by the "show, don't tell" rule. The exchange was meant to be awkward, and awkward it was.

we may have to agree to disagree here, becasue there IS such thing as objectively bad, even if someone still enjoys it. for example when someone sings offkey - they are objectively bad singer. even if someone still enjoys their singing. just by sheer amount of people that exist the chance of anything having an audience may be slim, but there is still a chance. having an audience doesn't make something good.

enjoyment is subjective. to take your analogy of getting shot and running with it... some people enjoy pain. no, they really do. does this change pain from objectively bad to objectively good though?

[Derah]

we may have to agree to disagree here, becasue there IS such thing as objectively bad, even if someone still enjoys it. for example when someone sings offkey - they are objectively bad singer. even if someone still enjoys their singing. just by sheer amount of people that exist the chance of anything having an audience may be slim, but there is still a chance. having an audience doesn't make something good.

enjoyment is subjective.

I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree indeed. You said it yourself, enjoyment is subjective. I can't call "universally bad" something that was enjoyed by someone. If I didn't enjoy it, I will say that it was bad for me. At least that's my view when it comes to creative works. I mean, some people enjoy murder, but murder is still very much a bad thing :P

to take your analogy of getting shot and running with it... some people enjoy pain. no, they really do. does this change pain from objectively bad to objectively good though?

Ohh and on this case, no, pain is not objectively good either just because some people enjoy it. Pain is just subjective. Some people enjoy pain, some people hate pain.

Gunshot wounds specifically however, are pretty much universally loathed (not so much for the pain they inflict, but for the crippling devastation they can create upon the body, along with the whole thing about death)

[May90]

we may have to agree to disagree here, becasue there IS such thing as objectively bad, even if someone still enjoys it. for example when someone sings offkey - they are objectively bad singer. even if someone still enjoys their singing. just by sheer amount of people that exist the chance of anything having an audience may be slim, but there is still a chance. having an audience doesn't make something good.

enjoyment is subjective. to take your analogy of getting shot and running with it... some people enjoy pain. no, they really do. does this change pain from objectively bad to objectively good though?

How do you define a quality of something, if not by whether people like it or not? What is the objective criterion for the quality of a product?

And no, pain is not objectively bad either, it is a property of our organism that let us survive as a species for as long as we have.