The Indie Nerd: Why Mass Effect 2 Had The Wrong Idea *MAJOR SPOILERS*

[chinangel]

my only real problem with the choices thing is that it was promised that we would see results of our choices from Mass Effect 1 in Mass effect 2. However those 'results' more often then not boiled down to whether or not you got an email from person X.

that is not a result, that's being lazy. horribly lazy at that.

 

[DeadMix]

I only chose the dialog I actually liked, and the only time I got stumped was on Samara's loyalty mission (baduuuur, Shepard can't think).

 

[TheFedExPope]

Yep, agree about this. The way the system works (so I hear) is it "tracks your actions when you enter an area." Now I have tried to understand the system and cannot, and pretty much what I gather is if you want to be able to use charm/intimidate dialogue choices on harder parts of the game, you have to keep going down one way. One person described it as a "snowball effect". That's stupid. Everybody has different reactions to things, not simply "I'm a dick to everyone" or "I'm able to see past every person that says assholeish things to me because I am Jesus reincarnate." Hell, my tone in conversations can differ depending on what the other character says. So yes, we need a much better morality system. Actually, how about we do away with it? 'You can't legislate morality' is the saying. Who says you can code it?

 

[imaloony]

I liked how at the end, you needed to assign your team differently or people would die, but if you had half a brain, you couldn't do much damage to your team at that point. My first time through, I only lost two people (Thane, because I thought it was a good idea to make him leader of the second team, and Mordin, who often dies at the "Hold the Line" portion). I think the obvious way to fix this would have been to make the string of choices much longer, extending the final mission into a 2 hour epic, and maybe randomizing what happened to your team so you would have to adapt accordingly.

To be honest, I thought the final battle in Mass Effect 1 was much more epic. A battle on top of Illos and through the depths of the planet, meeting a strange AI, charging through The Conduit to the Citadel, battling your way on the outside of the citadel to the final encounter with Saren before finally putting Sovereign down was just plain epic. Mass Effect 2's ending seemed to have much less of an impact to it, however.

I still liked Mass Effect 2 a lot, liking it more than Mass Effect 1 (In most ways), but I hope they'll iron everything else for the epic conclusion.

 

[Asturiel]

That reminds me of something else, though it's entirely opposite. It seems renegade was also more just the devvies being "BWAHA KILLZ," and then it would just be more "Loose Cannon Cop Interrogation" style. So if you wanted to threaten someone and saw a renegade option, thought "Oh, good," and pressed it, and PROCEEDED TO THROW THEM OUT A WINDOW... that kindof broke roleplaying, too.

Yeah... I decided to take most of the renegade quick time events after I saw the opportunity to headbutt a krogan but that one was just... too far.

The problem is more extensive than just that. You actively HAVE to go all one way to get the later dialog boxes to work, especially on Tali's loyalty mission. You can't do it without being either ALL renergade or ALL paragon.

As true as that is, I would have liked it better if I didn't have those options, if I had to choose between exiling Tali or incriminating her father, THAT would have been interesting roleplay.

my only real problem with the choices thing is that it was promised that we would see results of our choices from Mass Effect 1 in Mass effect 2. However those 'results' more often then not boiled down to whether or not you got an email from person X.

that is not a result, that's being lazy. horribly lazy at that.

This also irritated me, I did however like it when I heard radio people talking about what I did, that was nice

(Also next game Bioware PLEASE make the fucking text in those emails legible, dark orange over light orange DOESN'T WORK!!!!!!!)

OT: I'm a bit confused, from the OP it gives vibes that you haven't actually played the game, considering that there isn't any Paragon or Renegade options during the suicide mission, so I'll assume that you mean just throughout the game.

In terms of those, sometimes they can be cop outs, but other times I feel they are justified, like in the first game, putting points into the skill so that you could get more conversation options because you specifically choose to improve your conversations made sense. The second game failed in this regard, so I certainly liked the first games better, the renegade and paragon options were easier to decipher what would happen as well, thats important if you'd actually like to put some thought into your Shepard (you know instead of using him as an avatar of awesome?).

 

[D_987]

In Mass Effect 2, as you probably know, you go on a "suicide mission" that involves you going to kill some stuff in a way that I don't really care about because that's not what this article is about. If you're interested, look it up or play Mass Effect 2. But anyway. In this, people can die, and will die - or at least that's how it's supposed to be. In the end, it turns out that all you had to due was stick your fingers in your ears and go "I'mma select the blue text now!" or "YEAH, *****, RED TEXT! YEAAAH!" And everyone would survive and be happy.

Um...what? That's not true at all, technically you're right, in that the Paragon and Renegade choices effected your loyalties (for example the Miranda and Jack situation) but the system is not based, at all, to my knowledge, on your overall moral standing. It's based entirly on the weapon upgrades, ship upgrades and squad loyalties you have. Even then they throw random chance into the mix.

And that actually really, really pissed me off because it reduced morality in the game to a stupid, stupid thing that encouraged you to, rather than accept the ambiguity that is morality, be an extremist, and actually kindof rewarding you for being stupid and ignorant and thick-headed to other people's opinions and insights, and rather just staying on a very "paragon" or "renegade" route.

It's true, but it's a point that can't really be addresed at the momment. Alpha Protocol did an ok job with it, but the issue with that system is that all it really changes are cosmetic details apparently. At the end of the day how do you really expect the developers to coprehend moral ambiguity? How do you expect them to code a system that adapt to every little choice you make? They can't, so we have the current, limited system, because of the current hardware limitations.

There's a couple of Art Flash games on Newgrounds that I've really come to like, entitled "Loved" and "Every Day The Same Dream." Both have very clear-cut choices, but no real definition of what these choices do. Loved is about obedience and disobedience and such, while Every Day The Same Dream is kindof anti-corporate, boring 9-to-5 style thing as far as I can tell. I like them both because they both really work, and that they don't cop out with an ending like "HAH YOU WIN" in just a specific, stupid way, and as far as I can tell, there isn't ANY winning - but there really isn't any losing, either.

Again, another pointless paragraph - why did you explain this point and what does it have to do with Mass Effect in the first place - a short indie game and a multi-million currency franchise have different target audiences, and different obligations to the player entirely...

I can understand the option of saving everyone, but it should be hard, and should take effort, rather than being all about multiple-choice questions. Hell, I can think of how you could do it right now. A party member you have with you gets trapped with a bunch of enemies, really really strong enemies that are really really annoying and hard to beat, and you can either run or save them. Of course, you might be low on healing, they might be dead already, they might be your favorite party member, et cetera. Without any silly choices, and some shitty dialogue system, you're making decisions by yourself on morality. And if someone dies while you're going to save someone else, or you don't save them, it's not the fault of some multiple choice shitty-ass dialogue. It's all your fault, and that's how it should be.

That's a really, really bad mechanic. As a player I don't want to be forced into something like that - it's a bullshit move. I'd rather feel like I have some control, rather than the developer forcing me into such a situation without giving me a say in the matter. Besides, such a system is based on gaming-skill, rather than the personality-moral gameplay style Mass Effect is known for, thus, such a system would impede on the enjoyment of casual players.

Maybe I'm rambling, but, overall, I really think that Mass Effect 2 would've been much better if it was actual moral choices, rather than multiple choice questions on who you're going to support during an argument.

Well that wasn't the point you were trying to make in the first paragraph; did you think the system used in Dragon Age worked better?

 

[Another]

I can understand the option of saving everyone, but it should be hard, and should take effort, rather than being all about multiple-choice questions. Hell, I can think of how you could do it right now. A party member you have with you gets trapped with a bunch of enemies, really really strong enemies that are really really annoying and hard to beat, and you can either run or save them. Of course, you might be low on healing, they might be dead already, they might be your favorite party member, et cetera. Without any silly choices, and some shitty dialogue system, you're making decisions by yourself on morality. And if someone dies while you're going to save someone else, or you don't save them, it's not the fault of some multiple choice shitty-ass dialogue. It's all your fault, and that's how it should be.

That's a really, really bad mechanic. As a player I don't want to be forced into something like that - it's a bullshit move. I'd rather feel like I have some control, rather than the developer forcing me into such a situation without giving me a say in the matter. Besides, such a system is based on gaming-skill, rather than the personality-moral gameplay style Mass Effect is known for, thus, such a system would impede on the enjoyment of casual players.

I agree that that would be a very bad and frustrating mechanic.

I really really like game choices in RPG's being driven by the dialog. For me an RPG is about ROLE PLAYING a character, not making sure i never miss a shot just so my team can stay alive. If this mechanic were in existence i would be playing in easy mode, or be trading in a lot more games out of frustration. I play games to have fun, not to wonder why my teammate just died and restarting for the 30th time.

And for me the dialog system works fine. I don't play games out of a "oooh! this choice gets me an awesome ending later!", I make the choices based on what I think the character should do based on the personality i want them to have. Makes for a more immersive experience in my opinion. For example I played my Shepard as being kind to her friends and allies, but being brutal and unforgiving to her enemies. Ended but with 40% Renegade and almost 100% paragon.

And I knew Shepard could die but I had no idea till recently that my teammates could have too. Go me!