I wonder how much different everything will be on console. If nothing else, we have WAY fewer buttons to push, so maybe it’s a dumbed-down version of everything for us since we’re simple console folk
I might try a gamepad - probably the Steam controller first, to see, but yes, it’s definitely an issue of having to create a 10 foot UI that works on a gamepad with complex RPG crafting and equipment systems, and not wanting to design a separate one tailored to PC’s.
But I’d wager that it’s still bad design even when taking that into account. There’s no need for such tiny lists, some of which feature poorly grouped items. There’s no need ot have to drill down 4 frigging menus to get at what you need. It’s hard to compare items too, I mean that’s always been an issue on consoles, but this is even worse here, and it’s criminal that this kind of issues are solved on PC and they refuse to take the time to implement those solutions, essentially force feeding us this terrible UI 'cause they can’t be bothered to make a proper PC one.
On a Reddit AMA a game tester mentioned that they went through three ui leads, so that would probably explain the problems.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
As eager as I am to get started in the game, what I am not excited about is watching a bunch of gameplay videos of stuff I’m going to be doing myself anyway. Trailer analysis, sure. People noticed a bunch of shit I didn’t. Watching videos of things I might have missed or the results of choices I didn’t make after I finish the game? Great. Just motherfuckers who are not me simply playing and yakking? Nah. But YouTube thinks I’m hankering for 'em.
So no one else got in on the trial?
There’s a 7 day free trial of Origin Access, so you can play the game for 10 hours for free if you sing up now.
How can games have so much content of such good graphical quality yet fail in the ways the RPS article mentioned? Does someone have insights into the development process which explain this?
Unless the clock on that starts after you’ve finished designing your face, I’m afraid I’ll run out of time all too soon.
Personally, that’s how I’ve always played the game - my tactic was basically to advance on the enemy, flank if I could, and if the other two guys wanted to follow and pick up some of my spares, fine by me. So I’m cool with this.
Could be a pain-in-the-ass for me, since I like to use the pause to line up sniper shots and to make sure my tech and biotic powers are aimed at the desired target. But you don’t have that luxury in the multiplayer, which I’ve done a fair bit of with a friend, so I kind of got used to playing a much sloppier game.
I don’t consider it “sloppy” - to me, it’s matter of immersion. Holding my teammates’ hands and telling them how to do their jobs takes me out of the game, as does pausing in the middle of combat.
Making tactical calls as you would in real life when working with a special ops team takes you out of the game… but the brain dead AI getting itself killed and jumping on top of desks so that the enemy can get a clear shot at them, doesn’t? The pausing is an abstraction. Voice recognition locally isn’t fast or reliable enough to listen to voice commands, so you pause the game and highlight where you want your team mates to go, but it’s understood that you’ve ordered them there via voice or the magic of Sci-Fi technology (I think in the game there are even voice acknowledgements).
Mind you it doesn’t really matter anyway, the AI is dumb so ordering them to move to a location more often than not means they stand there in the open to die.
Well… reviews aren’t being very kind right now.
Biggest disappointment: Towards the end of my trial I actually started ot see glimmers of improvement in the writing, especially when dealing with my crew on the Tempest. But it looks like those glimmers never go anywhere. This truly is Disney Afternoon: Mass Effect.
Biggest worry: That they’ve done away with narrative agency. It’s why I play western RPG’s. I want my choices to have an impact on the world, on the characters around me, on my character, on subplots, on the ending.
I’ not very interested in another action/adventure Tomb Raider or Horizon:ZD or a JRPG where the narrative is the same no matter what. They’re ok games too, usually, but I’ve played my fill lately. If I want a good story told to me I’d rather spend my time watching a good movie or reading a book, especially since seldom do games match those mediums for that type of story telling.
There’s been some talk about the female protagonist looking worse than the model it’s based on while the male protagonist looks like its model.
I can see two possibilities; 1) The developers were really PC in that silly way 2) They prefer to let people think they were PC in that silly way rather than say: “Our game’s quality is uneven so while some parts are good and other parts are really shit. Would you like to buy our game?!”
And gamespot with the killing blow:
Fuck me, Bioware, Why?!
This seems odd to me since the entire point of the original trilogy was to make earth-shattering (pun intended) decisions and needing to live with them. I have no doubts this is the truth, but it surprises me they’d go away from that.
Maybe the blowback on 3’s ending was so bad that they decided not to do it. Also, has anyone said if this is going to be a new trilogy/series? or is this just a one-off set in the same universe?
It’s interesting how the Role Playing critiques I am seeing are very similar to the critiques of Fallout 4. Are two A list games with the same issues forming a trend? I hope not. I like story. When Jacob in ME 2 died because I sent him on a mission I literally felt bad about that for days after I stopped playing. I want that from my RPGs.
I’m actually not that surprised that the single player campaign has these issues. The development seemed to have been rushed and they had lost a lot of the original developers. And after the disappointing ending of the last game, I kept my expectations in check.
On the other hand, I’m relieved that the multiplayer is IMO an improvement on the last game. The faster paced combat mechanics is nice, and maybe I’ve just been lucky but I haven’t been having to much latency issues reported by others, especially if I’m playing with friends with good internet connections.
I’ll probably finish the campaign eventually, but right now it doesn’t really seem that appealing. But I’m genuinely excited to play the multiplayer once it goes live.
What I have the highest hopes for is the exploration and building. As I’ve said, it will be fine for me if it’s a science fiction version of Dragon Age: Inquisition. Gather resources, solve problems, build, and occasionally advance the plot. I’m glad to be forewarned about issues like animation, and about the plot being light on meaningful choices, though this provokes the question compared to what? The effects of all choices in BioWare games tend to converge to the same story. I like the way you define your character to yourself in subtle ways, but is it really going to be even more of a false choice than it has always been?
I call shenanigans on that illustration. At least before DA2. Some of the major plot points might have played out similarly, but there’s no denying in previous Bioware titles such as BAldur’s Gate, DA:O, KOTOR, Even DA2 with the exception of the ending, and to a lesser extent Mass Effect, narrative agency was a tangible thing.
In DA:O the beginning was always the same, though your origin story played a significant part on how the world viewed you and how you viewed the world. Regardless the king always dies, but choices after that had huge impacts on the story, it’s characters and the world. From your decisions in the elven conflict, to what you do in Orzamar. Even the resources and the order in which you do things could have big repercussions like never having Sten in your party, losing Arl Eamon’s kid to demonic possession, etc.
The end of that game could go a lot of different ways after the Landsmeet, even if the main plot point of slaying the Arch Demon is the same. Characters could die (including yourself), different people on the throne (including yourself) a half Blight demon child even, with morrigan as it’s mommy!
In Mass effect things could go bad with up to two companions leading to their deaths. Again, major plot points might develop very similarly, but sub plots can change drastically in outcome, all feeding into the main plot as well, though in more subtle ways here, I admit.
Sorry Edit window expired.
Don’t get me started on some of the finest examples form the genre like Planescape tormet, Baldur’s Gate II, Witcher 2 (and 3, especially when it comes to side plots), Pillars of Eternity, etc.
I don’t expect entire swaths of the main plot to be drastically changed a la Witcher 2, especially form big budget AAA games, but there’s gotta be a mix of your actions affecting the world, having repercussions good, bad and ugly, and yes, even playing tricks and making them seem more important that they are too.
Without this element, you end up with pedestrian, average AAA action adventure game. Worse, in ME:A player agency seems to have been relegated to a knocking boots simulator.