[Megathread] Mass Effect Andromeda

[Ilikegreenfire]

I mean i don't mind the good third option between two hard choices, because you usually have to work the hardest to get it, and it connects more to the rest of the world, a reward so to speak. Like with Connors possession in DA O if you want the best solution, you have to be sure you saved the mages in the tower, If you don't then you lose the option. Or with the landsmeet were you can have Anora and Alastar rule while making Loghain a warden, it requires alot of planning and effort but is very rewarding.

Or with the quarians and the Geth. Bringing them together requires a lot of specific actions not just in ME 3 but 2 as well. When you do it becomes on of the most powerful moments in gaming, along with curing the Krogan.

- - - Updated - - -

Gameplay and skills trailer tomorrow

[Derah]

Gameplay and skills trailer tomorrow

/hype intensifies.

[Ilikegreenfire]

I hope the flamer is available in single player, we know the human enj MP character used it in one of the videos.

Melee weapons have been talked about and can even be crafted wounder if that's MP only or single as well. The Asari in the new MP photo has a sword and on twitter they talked about a Krogan hammer

[Nurvus]

She has eyebrows for the same reason Liara did even though few other Asari did. It's a character most players will be interacting a whole lot with, and it's willingly bending the lore about it a bit because having eyebrows makes facial movements more subconsciously convincing when it essentially looks like a human with face paint aside from the tentacle "hair".

Samara (and Morynth) have always seemed to have the most detailed and expressive of all Asari faces - a lot more than Liara.
In fact, ME2 Samara and Morynth seemed to have ME3 model quality.
---

I really understand not having many different races available.
Although one could argue they could just "modulate" over the voice acting to use the exact same voice on various races, the same cannot be said regarding all the ramifications that being one race has on the way other races interact with you, and the goals of that one race.

I don't think they would be able to handle that amount of variables in a story driven game with lots of "hidden agenda" plots like ME.

[May90]

That's a related problem, yeah. My ideal would be that the full consequences don't hit until later, and that the "asshole/violent/selfish" options generally provide greater rewards. Not always, but usually. Maybe not by much, but enough that the cold optimizer chooses that darker path. Doing the right thing should be the less rewarding path, in terms of in-game benefits, because doing the right thing should be enough. Otherwise, you're not "doing the right thing", you're pursuing the best reward for your actions. It's a selfish option that lets you feel good about being selfish.

This is actually something that, I think, wouldn't be received well by many players, including me. The problem with the consequences hitting much later than the action is that you can't reload and change your action, even if you are deeply displeased with the consequences. I agree that it would be more realistic, but it would also lead to people longing to end the current playthrough as soon as possible, to start a new one and make better decisions there.

What I personally would welcome, however, is more no-win situations, in which, no matter how you act, something bad happens. For example, in Thane's recruitment mission, you would have a choice on whether to allow him to kill Nassana or not. If he kills Nassana, then we learn later that, in order to evade taxes, Nassana spent a lot of money on various charities, and, because we killed her and the money supply was destroyed, all people in some sanctuary city died of starvation. But if he does not, then Nassana later escapes the custody and becomes a prominent figure in Eclipse, killing multiple people in her incursions.

Or, the opposite, a win-win situation. If Shepard turns an escaped criminal to the authorities, he/she is relieved to learn that this criminal carried an important information for his syndicate which now will help the authorities to track it down and eliminate it. But if Shepard helps him escape, then the criminal starts working with the Illusive Man, helping fund Shepard's missions.

As it is, sadly, you almost always get rewarded for doing the good thing, and doing the bad thing leads to significant penalties. It is like this in almost all RPGs. KotoR 2 and Witcher series are a bit more complex here: KotoR 2 specifically focuses on how the good and the bad merge together into pragmatic, and Witcher mostly offers the options which do not fall under either banner. But I've yet to see a game in which acting obviously renegade-wise would reward the player just as much, if not more, as acting paragon-wise would.

---

A tiny exception is Fallout games. Quite a few good decisions there lead to horrible outcomes, and sometimes xenophobic/selfish decisions lead to a better result. Helping the ghouls settle in the Tenpenny tower inhabited by very xenophobic humans leads to the ghouls exterminating the humans in the end, and shooting the guy in Megaton who wants to detonate a nuke at the center of it allows you to save the life of the sheriff who, otherwise, gets shot by the guy.

But there aren't that many cases like this, just a few instances.

Just because sci fi exists doesn't mean real physics get thrown off the window, though?

If Shepard had used biotics in that scene I'd have bought it, but he didn't. He just used sheer physical force to headbutt a creature that weighs a ton and has a plated skull.

It already looks weird when muscle dude Shep does it, it looks laughable when 60 kilo woman Shep does it.

There have been incidents with people dealing significant damage to bulls or lions by punching them. Given that in Mass Effect universe the genetics has advanced beyond anything we can dream of nowadays, a 60 kilo trained woman headbutting a Krogan doesn't seem unrealistic in the slightest.

[Endus]

This is actually something that, I think, wouldn't be received well by many players, including me. The problem with the consequences hitting much later than the action is that you can't reload and change your action, even if you are deeply displeased with the consequences. I agree that it would be more realistic, but it would also lead to people longing to end the current playthrough as soon as possible, to start a new one and make better decisions there.

I absolutely disagree with this. While I freely admit that I reload constantly in games that allow it, it's something I consider an abuse of game mechanics that ruins the flow of the story. I do think the choices should be CLEAR, and some games have had poor conversation choice systems (Fallout 4's default system, for all I love about the game, is godawful in this regard), but if you choose something which has consequences that were unexpected and potentially unwanted, I think that's a good thing.

For one, it makes choices matter. You'll want to be cautious about what you do, knowing the "wrong" choice could blow up in a bad way. If you make the choice you feel was right and things go south, you at least have the moral high ground.

For two, it preserves narrative flow. I'd rather NOT reload the same conversation 3-4 times to get the response I want every time. If I'm rude to someone in an early conversation, so they won't help me in a later crisis, that's great.

It also creates a lot of room for replay value. You aren't reloading to see every outcome, so you're getting the full experience of one character's playthrough, and then you can play through with a different character, with a different outlook, and see how that changes things, in somewhat unpredictable ways.

What I personally would welcome, however, is more no-win situations, in which, no matter how you act, something bad happens. For example, in Thane's recruitment mission, you would have a choice on whether to allow him to kill Nassana or not. If he kills Nassana, then we learn later that, in order to evade taxes, Nassana spent a lot of money on various charities, and, because we killed her and the money supply was destroyed, all people in some sanctuary city died of starvation. But if he does not, then Nassana later escapes the custody and becomes a prominent figure in Eclipse, killing multiple people in her incursions.

Or, the opposite, a win-win situation. If Shepard turns an escaped criminal to the authorities, he/she is relieved to learn that this criminal carried an important information for his syndicate which now will help the authorities to track it down and eliminate it. But if Shepard helps him escape, then the criminal starts working with the Illusive Man, helping fund Shepard's missions.

I'm also a fan of Pyrrhic victories. You get what you wanted, but the consequences that spring from that make that "win" turn to ashes in your mouth at a later date. It needs to come off as a solid "win" in that early stage for it to fall apart properly, though. It's an underused trope, IME.

A tiny exception is Fallout games. Quite a few good decisions there lead to horrible outcomes, and sometimes xenophobic/selfish decisions lead to a better result. Helping the ghouls settle in the Tenpenny tower inhabited by very xenophobic humans leads to the ghouls exterminating the humans in the end, and shooting the guy in Megaton who wants to detonate a nuke at the center of it allows you to save the life of the sheriff who, otherwise, gets shot by the guy.

But there aren't that many cases like this, just a few instances.

Yeah, the Fallout games are actually a standout in this regard. There's quite a few quest chains where you can just say "fuck it" and do the horribly evil thing and it's SO much easier and at least as rewarding.

[Tenjen]

oh one more thing, i do hope most of the responses to your 4 choices aren't telltale levels of similarity.

[DesoPL]

I wonder now, what factions will be in ME:A Multiplayer, since seems it will be the same like in ME3, which sounds cool for me.

[Deleted]

Bunch of talentless SJW hacks did it again. Female beauty triggered them so they are giving you that dog instead.

[FobManX]

Man Jayde Rossi is gorgeous. How do they mess that up...

[Elim Garak]

Man Jayde Rossi (under layers of makeup and right lighting) is gorgeous. How do they mess that up...

Fixed!!!!!1

[Derah]

So upon closer examination of the gameplay trailer I noticed that ability cooldowns are now individual instead of global.

THANK.GOD.

One of the very few gripes I had with the combat revamp when moving from ME1 to ME2, was that using any ability put all other abilities on cooldown, making it impossible to chain your spells.

Andromeda seems to be taking a more elegant approach, where each skill has its own cooldown, but to prevent overpoweredness via spamming 9 different skills, you can only have 2 skills active at any time (Presumably being able to swap them out on the fly when out of combat). Finally able to do cool shit like a biotic charge followed by a biotic push.

Human-shaped-biotic-battering-ram-is-a-gooooooooooooooo

[hellhamster]

Fixed!!!!!1

What's your beef with the makeup and lighting man, she is objectively female perfection personified. It's a crime against humanity Bioware HAD to model her like that.

[Derah]

What's your beef with the makeup and lighting man, she is objectively female perfection personified. It's a crime against humanity Bioware HAD to model her like that.

Mostly because the main focus of criticism is a piece of concept art from a character kit. With poor lightning, goofy facial expression, unfocused eyes, awkard angle, and several other issues.

In the actual game, from actual screenshots, with actual shading, and proper angles and expressions, she looks significantly better than the fugly side-by-side comparison.

[hellhamster]

Mostly because the main focus of criticism is a piece of concept art from a character kit. With poor lightning, goofy facial expression, unfocused eyes, awkard angle, and several other issues.

In the actual game, from actual screenshots, with actual shading, and proper angles and expressions, she looks significantly better than the fugly side-by-side comparison.

He was talking about Jayde Rossi, not the Neverwinter Nights rejected model.

[Derah]

He was talking about Jayde Rossi, not the Neverwinter Nights rejected model.

Then he has a point about her as well.

I can assure you, that's no natural photo. That one has heavy layers of makeup posing, shading, the right angle to capture her features the best, etc etc.

Just as she is an objectively beautiful woman without a shadow of doubt, I can also say to you that a staged picture done by a professional photoshoot with the proper conditions will ALWAYS look objectively better than a generic snapshot taken in the heat of the moment from a bad angle with poor lightning and an unfocused expression. And this is universally true regardless of how attractive the person being photographed is.

The picture on the left is the former. The in-game render is the latter. This doesn't mean the in-game render is of poor quality, it just means that the sample is in the worst possible conditions.

In actual gameplay footage, Fem!Ryder looks pretty much dead-on like her model. With only microscopically minor differences (mainly her jaw line is thicker and stronger, no doubt inherited from her dad, who has a Lantern Jaw of Justice™ himself). Differences that can be adjusted as needed with the character creator if strong jaws are not your thing.

[Witchblade77]

What's your beef with the makeup and lighting man, she is objectively female perfection personified. It's a crime against humanity Bioware HAD to model her like that.

because its not real. do you have ANY idea how much difference makeup and lighting makes? apparently not.

the only thing that is off in that picture of Sara is the eyes, and even that is more likely than not is a weird angle. shape of the mouth is right, jawline is right, nose and cheekbones are right, overall shape is the same. but that's the thing about shallow people. you don't see beyond the shallow differences.

[Derah]

because its not real. do you have ANY idea how much difference makeup and lighting makes? apparently not.

Apparently not indeed.

For the uneducated, this should help illustrate just how drastic a difference makeup, lighting, and angles can make when taking a photo. And before you whine, ALL of these are the same women on the left (in the raw, no makeup, poor angle, poor shading and background, shit lighting, etc) and on the right (All of the above conditions met)

http://theberry.com/2010/10/12/a-mak...ove-10-photos/

- - - Updated - - -

its up its up its up!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Lillpapps]

Apparently not indeed.

For the uneducated, this should help illustrate just how drastic a difference makeup, lighting, and angles can make when taking a photo.

You are acting as if these don't exists when creating a 3D model. You have complete freedom when creating the face, you can add as much and any type of "makeup" to make the face look good. Since it's an image that was release to create hype they could have also spend more than 2 seconds to focus the eyes and light the scene properly.

[Jastall]

Liked that combat trailer a lot. Seems we'll have a lot of options, and combat seems very fluid and fast-paced. Also, I feel like I'm going to have a lot of fun with that Krogan hammer.