Support NeoGAF

[EatChildren]

Here's a question for all. This game is act one of a trilogy with no ties to the Mass Effect trilogy. So as far as galactic politics goes, what will be the collective frame of reference among the people who populate this universe? And will at some point does anyone see the writers trying to unite their trilogies incrementally?

~Mass Effect 2 frame of reference. Mankind has joined the galactic council. Asari/Salarian/Turian/Human the four dominent politics. Reaper threat dismissed/denied. Geth considered antagonistic. Genophage without cure. Quarians outcasts.

 

[Renekton]

The incumbents will be Andromedans with no ties to the Attican Traverse where ME1-3 happened. The original ME trilogy aliens including humans are invaders/visitors to the world, so little political status quo carried forward.

Likely a clean slate with almost no callbacks to ME1-3 continuity.

 

[crackhead_bob]

~Mass Effect 2 frame of reference. Mankind has joined the galactic council. Asari/Salarian/Turian/Human the four dominent politics. Reaper threat dismissed/denied. Geth considered antagonistic. Genophage without cure. Quarians outcasts.

Pre or post Mass Effect 2?

Also, is there the slight chance that this series could go in the direction of Phantasy Star 3, which was an abortive attempt by Sega to take the lore in a different direction? I see similarities in that. What does this series have going for it that Phantasy Star 3 didn't? It was kind of a bold move on Sega's part, but most fans wanted more expansion of the Algol story.

 

[Big Nikus]

Hm, for the first time I think I should try getting Morinth in my team. It's crazy to think there's a character I've never recruited.

 

[crackhead_bob]

Hm, for the first time I think I should try getting Morinth in my team. It's crazy to think there's a character I've never recruited.

You can recruit Morinth?

 

[EatChildren]

Pre or post Mass Effect 2?

Also, is there the slight chance that this series could go in the direction of Phantasy Star 3, which was an abortive attempt by Sega to take the lore in a different direction? I see similarities in that. What does this series have going for it that Phantasy Star 3 didn't? It was kind of a bold move on Sega's part, but most fans wanted more expansion of the Algol story.

I haven't played Phantasy Star 3 so I don't know what you mean.

IIRC Andromeda begins with the crew leaving the Milky Way during the events of Mass Effect 2. They arrive in Andromeda some 600 years later, long after the Shepard trilogy has come to its conclusion.

As Renekton stated I fully believe it's a clean slate intended to take as little baggage as possible from the trilogy with few if any trilogy specific plot threads to reconcile and instead will focus entirely on being its own thing. While Mass Effect as a trilogy was about exploring and familiarising yourself with an established galactic order that was fighting against an otherworldly threat, Andromeda is the reverse. No order is established beyond that which you have no relation to. You are the invasive presence and entire Milky Way species political arcs can be reinvented.

I also don't feel it'll ever go back to the trilogy content, ever.

 

[crackhead_bob]

I haven't played Phantasy Star 3 so I don't know what you mean.

IIRC Andromeda begins with the crew leaving the Milky Way during the events of Mass Effect 2. They arrive in Andromeda some 600 years later, long after the Shepard trilogy has come to its conclusion.

As Renekton stated I fully believe it's a clean slate intended to take as little baggage as possible from the trilogy with few if any trilogy specific plot threads to reconcile and instead will focus entirely on being its own thing. While Mass Effect as a trilogy was about exploring and familiarising yourself with an established galactic order that was fighting against an otherworldly threat, Andromeda is the reverse. No order is established beyond that which you have no relation to. You are the invasive presence and entire Milky Way species political arcs can be reinvented.

I also don't feel it'll ever go back to the trilogy content, ever.

That's harsh. Mass Effect 3 must have been really polarizing.

 

[TC McQueen]

That's harsh. Mass Effect 3 must have been really polarizing.

That and the fact that two of the three endings are so far apart from each other that there's no hope of any story being told in the Milky Way without canonizing one of them.

(The third ending would produce a setting that would mostly look the same as one of the two others, just with Reapers showing up from time to time to kick people's shit in.)

 

[Foxhound286]

That's harsh. Mass Effect 3 must have been really polarizing.

Considering how different the state of the Milky Way is in any of the 3 endings, there's no way to continue the story there without making one of them definitively canon. The only feasible way to make a new Mass Effect story-wise, aside from prequels, would be to get as far away from the Milky Way as possible.

 

[Big Nikus]

You can recruit Morinth?

Yep, but you have to kill Samara :/

Considering how different the state of the Milky Way is in any of the 3 endings, there's no way to continue the story there without making one of them definitively canon. The only feasible way to make a new Mass Effect story-wise, aside from prequels, would be to get as far away from the Milky Way as possible.

Or a reboot... But BioWare will never do that.

 

[crackhead_bob]

I'm assuming at some point they would have to revisit the Milky Way to bring things full circle. But for now, they seem more interested in world building in this new trilogy.

 

[Bisnic]

Considering how different the state of the Milky Way is in any of the 3 endings, there's no way to continue the story there without making one of them definitively canon. The only feasible way to make a new Mass Effect story-wise, aside from prequels, would be to get as far away from the Milky Way as possible.

They could just make Mass Effect the sci-fi franchise where you hop from one galaxy to another, exploring the universe.

That, or from now on, Mass Effect will be known as the "Fun TPS/RPG adventures from your neighbor galaxy" franchise from now on.

I'm assuming at some point they would have to revisit the Milky Way to bring things full circle. But for now, they seem more interested in world building in this new trilogy.

You know they never said this would be a new trilogy right? I mean, I'm fully expecting there to be a sequel, but a trilogy? I dunno.

 

[EatChildren]

That's harsh. Mass Effect 3 must have been really polarizing.

Not really. Just imagine you're the developer and you're imposed with the task of continuing a very popular franchise while also trying to find some template that allows for maximum creative freedom. Nobody is going to want to work on a safe franchise game when they could be really trying their own new thing, and unfortunately the more you try to dance around the trilogy's various choices and lore the more restricted your arc becomes.

At the same time they would have wanted to distance themselves from the trilogy. Not out of dislike but because it's over and fans need to suck it up and accept it. The Shepard arc is dead and done and finished and over and there's no more Liara waifu and Reapers and callbacks and my-favourite-character-in-the-sequel. And it's hard to do that when you set your game within the same arc as the trilogy. Fans have expectations and have difficulty letting go, so they needed a clean slate.

And lastly anything taking place during or post Mass Effect 3 has to reconcile the huge breadth of galactic variables that could occur. Entire species could be wiped out. There's no reasonable way to make a game that accounts for all the choices, and the only other option is to undermine them and either set a canon or it so far far far ahead in the future it undermines them anyway.

They kinda dug their own hole there.

 

[Renekton]

I wonder if Humanity is the forefront of ME:A again like in ME2-3. All the early promo materials were about human achievements. Maybe mass market gamers can't really relate to aliens, even if they are very humanoid.

 

[diaspora]

This series has always been about humanity first since day 1.

 

[dr_rus]

I also don't feel it'll ever go back to the trilogy content, ever.

Oh, I can see them going back to Milky Way in the 3rd trilogy - if the series will survive this long. Something along the lines of Andromeda trilogy descendants traveling back to Milky Way putting them some ~2000 years after the events of the OG trilogy meaning that everything has changed and whatever happened back then makes almost zero relevance now.

 

[Renekton]

Well at least it was a backdrop or sideplot at best in 1 until the help council moral choice. Cerberus and Exogeni were comical non-factors, we didn't have Human Reaper nor the final conflict set in London.

 

[Bisnic]

Oh, I can see them going back to Milky Way in the 3rd trilogy - if the series will survive this long. Something along the lines of Andromeda trilogy descendants traveling back to Milky Way putting them some ~2000 years after the events of the OG trilogy meaning that everything has changed and whatever happened back then makes almost zero relevance now.

I don't know about that, all endings have a pretty permanent major change.

Destroy ending : Dead Reapers, galaxy will continue as always
Control ending : Reapers still there and living among us
Synthesis ending : Everything is both organic & synthetic
Refusal ending : Everyone dies and the cycle continue

I mean, whether it's 500 or 2000 years, no matter which ending was picked, the effects are still going to be there, it's not like all 4 endings will end up with the same future.

If it were just me, I'd pick Destroy as the default one to make things simpler and just go with it if we ever go back to the Milky Way. Screw the fans potential raging, we're probably going to be 15-20 years after the end of ME3 when we reach that point, so whatever. Deal with it I guess.

 

[DevilDog]

I wonder if Humanity is the forefront of ME:A again like in ME2-3. All the early promo materials were about human achievements. Maybe mass market gamers can't really relate to aliens, even if they are very humanoid.

Yeah I think they're going the ME1 route where things are kind of more balanced. However, as you said #can'trelate will force them to put humans on ads. Which adds up with the setting.
These recruitment trailers are sort of an ARG, it makes sense to focus on humans. For now.

Oh, I can see them going back to Milky Way in the 3rd trilogy - if the series will survive this long. Something along the lines of Andromeda trilogy descendants traveling back to Milky Way putting them some ~2000 years after the events of the OG trilogy meaning that everything has changed and whatever happened back then makes almost zero relevance now.

That is not such a bad idea. You can show through text how each ending played out and you can start fresh on the Milky way as well.

If andromeda is a trilogy, holy shit, we may go back to the milky way galaxy in 2027 or even later than that.

 

[EatChildren]

Andromeda will end with the death of all Salarian, Asari, and Turian. And all sentient Helius Cluster species annihilated. Leaving only MANKIND and some Krogan bros to populate.

 

[Heckler456]

Kind of tangentially related: A cool interview with Mike Laidlaw about DA:I. He really shows how self-aware developers are regarding the faults of the games they develop.

 

[Xando]

Andromeda will end with the death of all Salarian, Asari, and Turian. And all sentient Helius Cluster species annihilated. Leaving only MANKIND and some Krogan bros to populate.

I wonder if they're gonna revisit the Genophage topic in ME:A

 

[Bisnic]

I wonder if they're gonna revisit the Genophage topic in ME:A

Considering it wasn't cured when the Arks/Nexus launched... I bet, but not as much as before. I'm sure the first time that a Krogan meets a Turian or Salarian ingame and he clearly show that he hates or don't trust them, that someone will have to explain why so newcomers to Mass Effect understand...even though everybody in the Mass Effect universe knows why lol.

Krogan : "I don't trust you salarians".
Ryder : "Oh right, they sterilized you with the Genophage because blabla"
Peebee : "Why do you have to explain that to him or us? Everyone knows".
Ryder : "..."

 

[Patryn]

Here's a question for all. This game is act one of a trilogy with no ties to the Mass Effect trilogy. So as far as galactic politics goes, what will be the collective frame of reference among the people who populate this universe? And will at some point does anyone see the writers trying to unite their trilogies incrementally?

Your initial premise is wrong. Bioware has said multiple times that this is NOT part of a new trilogy.

You know they never said this would be a new trilogy right? I mean, I'm fully expecting there to be a sequel, but a trilogy? I dunno.

It's not just that they haven't said it's a new trilogy, it's that they actively said it is NOT a trilogy.

Fans keep thinking it is, but people need to accept it: THERE IS NOT A NEW TRILOGY OF GAMES.

 

[Maledict]

Yeah, that's one of the things that depresses me the most. As flawed as it was the trilogy aspect of the original was one of the things that made it stand out, and become such an amazing series -Mordins death in 3 wouldn't have the impact if it weren't for 2, etc. The ability to have *my* Shepherd carry on through each game was really important to me. The way Dragonage does it with different characters and settings each time but some call backs isn't anywhere near as good, and I worry that's the route they are taking.

 

[Poodlestrike]

Guys, they haven't said they won't have save import, or even a continuous cast, just that the games won't be in a trilogy format.

It's about the plot structure, that's it.

 

[Patryn]

Guys, they haven't said they won't have save import, or even a continuous cast, just that the games won't be in a trilogy format.

It's about the plot structure, that's it.

Exactly. Dragon Age doesn't do trilogies, it does save importing. I fully expect that they'll set up something equivalent to the Dragon Age Keep after Andromeda.

They're just not doing save importing for this one because they're hoping to bring in a new audience.

Yeah, that's one of the things that depresses me the most. As flawed as it was the trilogy aspect of the original was one of the things that made it stand out, and become such an amazing series -Mordins death in 3 wouldn't have the impact if it weren't for 2, etc. The ability to have *my* Shepherd carry on through each game was really important to me. The way Dragonage does it with different characters and settings each time but some call backs isn't anywhere near as good, and I worry that's the route they are taking.

Honestly what they're setting up with (DRAGON AGE TRESPASSER SPOILERS!)

Spoiler

---------Solas---------

may honestly have more impact for me than Mordin dying, so if they ape what DA does I'd be happy.

 

[EatChildren]

They talk about it a bit in the Game Informer feature and it really comes down to lessons learned from making both Mass Effect and Dragon Age franchises and the barriers and challenges they ran into constructing narratives that involve save imports.

They haven't at all stated that future Mass Effect games, should they exist (they do imply they want to do more though), won't include a save import. They've recognised that the save import aspect exists, and specifically noted they've improved the technology in tracking choices and data.

What they're not promising is that Andromeda is part of a semi-focused and character/cast specific arc like the Shepard trilogy was. They're absolutely open to the notion of an Andromeda 2 starring the Pathfinder and reoccuring cast, but they're also open to other directions that can use save import data in interesting ways. Or in short; with Mass Effect they outright committed to a trilogy starring Commander Shepard. With Andromeda they're not committing to any sequels or reoccurring protagonist at all, but openly acknowledge interest in future Mass Effect games and the use of save content imports.

Unless Andromeda tanks I don't see how we'll lose out an Andromeda 2. In the GI article they state there were a number of ideas and concepts (like ship flight) they couldn't quite get right in time for Andromeda and would be open to trying again in new games. They're openly open to new Mass Effect and want to continue with the series. And Andromeda, unlike the Shepard trilogy, takes place in only a single cluster of the entire new galaxy.

 

[diaspora]

Dragon Age as a series is far better written, with stronger lore, with a much more cohesive overall narrative. If it follows that format it'll only improve.

 

[Dandy Lyin]

They talk about it a bit in the Game Informer feature and it really comes down to lessons learned from making both Mass Effect and Dragon Age franchises and the barriers and challenges they ran into constructing narratives that involve save imports.

They haven't at all stated that future Mass Effect games, should they exist (they do imply they want to do more though), won't include a save import. They've recognised that the save import aspect exists, and specifically noted they've improved the technology in tracking choices and data.

What they're not promising is that Andromeda is part of a semi-focused and character/cast specific arc like the Shepard trilogy was. They're absolutely open to the notion of an Andromeda 2 starring the Pathfinder and reoccuring cast, but they're also open to other directions that can use save import data in interesting ways. Or in short; with Mass Effect they outright committed to a trilogy starring Commander Shepard. With Andromeda they're not committing to any sequels or reoccurring protagonist at all, but openly acknowledge interest in future Mass Effect games and the use of save content imports.

Unless Andromeda tanks I don't see how we'll lose out an Andromeda 2. In the GI article they state there were a number of ideas and concepts (like ship flight) they couldn't quite get right in time for Andromeda and would be open to trying again in new games. They're openly open to new Mass Effect and want to continue with the series. And Andromeda, unlike the Shepard trilogy, takes place in only a single cluster of the entire new galaxy.

I'm kinda torn between how I'd like to see them do Andromeda 2. Both formats have their pros.

I really enjoy how Dragon Age does things, with a new protagonist every game... it lets you see different sides of the setting that a reoccurring protagonist doesn't allow. For example, I really wanted to play a civilian in the ME universe as I find the military focus a bit limiting in terms of the personality of Shepard.

That said, I'm also kinda hoping they will do a few games with Ryder because you form a stronger attachment to the character if you play them over the course of several games.

 

[Maledict]

Dragon Age as a series is far better written, with stronger lore, with a much more cohesive overall narrative. If it follows that format it'll only improve.

Heh, completely opposite opinion from me! I enjoy DA, but I find it's lore generic and unfulfilling, and the import saves function just doesn't have anywhere near the impact the ME save carry overs did.

I mean, I can understand why they aren't doing the same as the original trilogy - it was a huge amount of work, massively restricted their narrative choices, and by the final game they were telling people to treat it as a stand alone game. And I can understand that - it's practically impossible in a trilogy narrative to give the player meaningful choices in the first game of the trilogy, as you won't be able to carry them through to the end - look at how the decision on the human council ended up working out from ME1.

It's just a shame as it's one of the things that made ME unique for me, and one of the reasons I loved it so much. Yes it was flawed, but it was also unique and had great depth for that - stuff which doesn't happen for me in Dragon Age at all.

 

[DevilDog]

Dragon Age as a series is far better written, with stronger lore, with a much more cohesive overall narrative. If it follows that format it'll only improve.

lol no. I don't know about the overall narrative since I haven't played DA2, but the rest is just no.

Also it will be easier for devs to write a game without the dialogue choices, so if they follow this format things will only improve. #logic

 

[diaspora]

lol no. I don't know about the overall narrative since I haven't played DA2, but the rest is just no.

Also it will be easier for devs to write a game without the dialogue choices, so if they follow this format things will only improve. #logic

DA2 had issues but the writing and narrative weren't the problems though. The lore and narrative design of the series starting from the elven empire leading to the Breach is both consistent and well thought out which generally can't be applied to ME wherein its strength lies in the character writing.

And yes, things will improve if they make it impossible to write yourself into a corner with choices.

 

[DeadlyParasite]

(The third ending would produce a setting that would mostly look the same as one of the two others, just with Reapers showing up from time to time to kick people's shit in.)

I'm not quite sure you interpreted the destroy ending correctly. The reapers are more than dead. It is the ideal blank slate "return everything back to relative normalcy" ending there is. The relays repaired, Citadel rebuilt, life goes on without any horrifying synthesis changes or reaper babysitting.

And no, posturing by the Intelligence that creating new synthetics will bring a return to a reaper like enemy is false. No milky way species have the size, mind control capabilities, and utter capacity in terms of technology to re-enact the reapers.

It's just Bioware's way of trying to mislead you from the fact that it is the only correct choice.

 

[Patryn]

I'm not quite sure you interpreted the destroy ending correctly. The reapers are more than dead. It is the ideal blank slate "return everything back to relative normalcy" ending there is. The relays repaired, Citadel rebuilt, life goes on without any horrifying synthesis changes or reaper babysitting.

And no, posturing by the Intelligence that creating new synthetics will bring a return to a reaper like enemy is false. No milky way species have the size, mind control capabilities, and utter capacity in terms of technology to re-enact the reapers.

It's just Bioware's way of trying to mislead you from the fact that it is the only correct choice.

Yeah, Bioware had to throw in that the Geth and EDI would also die simply to make it not the most obvious choice of all time.

 

[DevilDog]

DA2 had issues but the writing and narrative weren't the problems though. The lore and narrative design of the series starting from the elven empire leading to the Breach is both consistent and well thought out which generally can't be applied to ME wherein its strength lies in the character writing.

And yes, things will improve if they make it impossible to write yourself into a corner with choices.

DA lore is more consistent, however that doesn't save it from being dull. Mass Effect has incredibly more interesting lore and the inconsistensies are so small they're insignificant. Even if they're there.

Lastly, abandoning choices won't make the writing improve. It might be a smaller workload for the writer, but frankly if the writer isn't good, the quality will stay behind.
And I don't want ME to sacrifice gameplay for story and bloat ME with tons of cutscenes MGS4 style.

 

[diaspora]

DA lore is more consistent, however that doesn't save it from being dull. Mass Effect has incredibly more interesting lore and the inconsistensies are so small they're insignificant. Even if they're there.

Lastly, abandoning choices won't make the writing improve. It might be a smaller workload for the writer, but frankly if the writer isn't good, the quality will stay behind.
And I don't want ME to sacrifice gameplay for story and bloat ME with tons of cutscenes MGS4 style.

Small inconsistencies? The entire growth of humanity into being a galactic superpower is fucking absurd and it's one of the main premises. The evolution of DA's story and how it ties into the lore is far more organic .

 

[Ivory Samoan]

I also don't feel it'll ever go back to the trilogy content, ever.

Have to disagree here, I think that post Ryder's games (2, 3 or however many it is), it will go back reboot styles but post Shepard Trilogy, somewhat far into the future, perhaps with starting with "Tales of the Shepard".

Now let's think here....we're talking an easy ~2027 or so here depending on dev cycles for the Ryder/Andromeda based ME games... so far enough into the future where any sore points about rebooted lore/decisions/codex will be washed away with the sands of time.

We'll be a bunch of old moaners by then, rocking in our collective chairs of "get off my lawn" so it's no stress really, can let the nursing home staff fetch the new game for me from my gaming delivery drone of choice along with a batch of fresh pretzels, heavy salt

 

[DeadlyParasite]

DA lore is more consistent, however that doesn't save it from being dull. Mass Effect has incredibly more interesting lore and the inconsistensies are so small they're insignificant. Even if they're there.

Lastly, abandoning choices won't make the writing improve. It might be a smaller workload for the writer, but frankly if the writer isn't good, the quality will stay behind.
And I don't want ME to sacrifice gameplay for story and bloat ME with tons of cutscenes MGS4 style.

I agree, which is why I've been against the removal of paragon and renegade this entire time. The system forced BioWare to make clear, impactful decisions.

Meanwhile in the Dragon Age games there is no such system, your choices do not matter or have any interesting impact on the world and every conversation with the dialogue wheel is just 5 differently written pieces with a funny emotion symbol that lead to the same outcome.

Emulating the Dragon Age series is the last thing they should do.

 

[Ridesh]

I agree, which is why I've been against the removal of paragon and renegade this entire time. The system forced BioWare to make clear, impactful decisions.

Meanwhile in the Dragon Age games there is no such system, your choices do not matter or have any interesting impact on the world and every conversation with the dialogue wheel is just 5 differently written pieces with a funny emotion symbol that lead to the same outcome.

Emulating the Dragon Age series is the last thing they should do.

Did you play Inquisition?

It's the best BioWare has done in terms of dialogs and choices by far, and I would even say that it's better than The Witcher 3 too.

 

[DevilDog]

Small inconsistencies? The entire growth of humanity into being a galactic superpower is fucking absurd and it's one of the main premises. The evolution of DA's story and how it ties into the lore is far more organic .

There is nothing absurd about the way human integrated. We came in, punched the biggest military in the nose, we got away with it with some respect and worked our way aggresively into a civilized society.
Doesn't mean we wouldn't get obliterated if the Turians decided to attack us.

I agree, which is why I've been against the removal of paragon and renegade this entire time. The system forced BioWare to make clear, impactful decisions.

Meanwhile in the Dragon Age games there is no such system, your choices do not matter or have any interesting impact on the world and every conversation with the dialogue wheel is just 5 differently written pieces with a funny emotion symbol that lead to the same outcome.

Emulating the Dragon Age series is the last thing they should do.

I would like for things to go back to ME1 status when it comes to Paragon/Renegade. There should be room to manuever, pls no ME2, and there should be choices that are outside that system. Like Ashley/Kaidan , Council, Rachni.
Goddamn what would ME be if we didn't have the choice to convince Saren to see reason.

 

[DeadlyParasite]

Did you play Inquisition?

It's the best BioWare has done in terms of dialogs and choices by far, and I would even say that it's better than The Witcher 3 too.

I did. There isn't a single meaningful, long term choice made in the game.

Spoiler

Let Hawke or Shroud stay behind and die? Doesn't matter at worst Varric hates you. Drink from the Well of Sorrows or let Morrigan? Doesn't matter since the consequences are erased with the post credits scene. Choose the Mages or Templars? Doesn't matter the other just serves as a comic book villain alternative enemy. Choose the queen or the general to lead orlais? Doesn't matter both end up supporting the inquisition and no meaningful appearance or consequence occurs afterwards. All those judgements you made on your throne in skyhold? No impact to the story beyond an insignificant power boost

Every choice is merely an illusion or so pathetically minor that you'll forget about it. Every dialogue option is just a differently worded emotion symbol that leads to the same conclusion.

Again, nothing I want emulated in Mass Effect.

 

[Patryn]

I did. There isn't a single meaningful, long term choice made in the game.

Spoiler

Let Hawke or Shroud stay behind and die? Doesn't matter at worst Varric hates you. Drink from the Well of Sorrows or let Morrigan? Doesn't matter since the consequences are erased with the post credits scene. Choose the Mages or Templars? Doesn't matter the other just serves as a comic book villain alternative enemy. Choose the queen or the general to lead orlais? Doesn't matter both end up supporting the inquisition and no meaningful appearance or consequence occurs afterwards. All those judgements you made on your throne in skyhold? No impact to the story beyond an insignificant power boost

Every choice is merely an illusion or so pathetically minor that you'll forget about it. Every dialogue option is just a differently worded emotion symbol that leads to the same conclusion.

Again, nothing I want emulated in Mass Effect.

The same can be said of Mass Effect:

Let the Council Die? Doesn't matter, the Council is back to normal (but with different people) in ME3.

Save the Rachni? Doesn't matter, Rachni show up in ME3 regardless, only difference is War Asset points.

Save the Collector Base? Doesn't matter, only difference is in amount of War Assets.

Have Anderson be the councilor? Doesn't matter, Udina is the counciler in ME3 regardless.

Let any squadmate die in ME2? Doesn't matter, there will be a replacement figure in ME3 regardless.

 

[Poodlestrike]

I feel like the criteria you're using for whether or not your choices have an effect is too stringent, IMO. Like, choosing Mages over Templars (or vice versa) results in different quests, characters, dialogue... The plot remains structurally similar, because allowing for significant changes to that increases workload dramatically, but there's a lot more to a story than just the plot.

 

[Ridesh]

And the same could be said about The Witcher 3, nothing matters in the long term.

Earth-shattering choice & consequences won't happen in a AAA RPG with possibility of sequels, unless you want them retconned in the next game, like the Iorveth-Roche decision in The Witcher 2.

It's all about experience the short consequences of your choices, being that the exclusive missions if you choose templars or mage, or what happens with the Iron Bull in Trespasser, and so on.

 

[diaspora]

And the same could be said about The Witcher 3, nothing matters in the long term.

Earth-shattering choice & consequences won't happen in a AAA RPG with possibility of sequels, unless you want them retconned in the next game, like the Iorveth-Roche decision in The Witcher 2.

It's all about experience the short consequences of your choices, being that the exclusive missions if you choose templars or mage, or what happens with the Iron Bull in Trespasser, and so on.

still fucking salty about this

 

[DeadlyParasite]

The same can be said of Mass Effect:

Let the Council Die? Doesn't matter, the Council is back to normal (but with different people) in ME3.

Save the Rachni? Doesn't matter, Rachni show up in ME3 regardless, only difference is War Asset points.

Save the Collector Base? Doesn't matter, only difference is in amount of War Assets.

Have Anderson be the councilor? Doesn't matter, Udina is the counciler in ME3 regardless.

Let any squadmate die in ME2? Doesn't matter, there will be a replacement figure in ME3 regardless.

Did you save Wrex, maelons data, and cure the genophage using paragon resulting in a future for the krogan where they rebuild peacefully and co-exist with the rest of the galaxy? Or did you kill Wrex, destroy the data, and cure the genophage resulting in a disasterous renegade outcome where it is clearly shown that Wreav will exact war and revenge on everyone who wronged the Krogan? Extended cut shows these vastly different outcomes.

Meaningful and immediate post game consequences as a result of your decisions across 3 games: check.

Did you prevent Tali from being exiled, rewrite the heretics, and choose to save admiral Koris on rannoch? Then you'll get a distinctly choice driven ending in which the geth and Quarians are alive and cooperating. Alternatively your poor decisions force you to choose to genocide either race and get an ending where an entire race is very much dead.

Meaningful and immediate post game consequences as a result of your decisions spanning 2 games: check.

More choice and impact than Dragon Age has ever had.

 

[VenomousCoffee]

You can recruit Morinth?

If you're 'evil' enough when you do that mission, you get the opportunity to kill Samara instead of Morinth. Morinth then joins your crew dressed as Samara. IIRC you have to be really really evil to get the option. I've only gotten it once.

If you do it, you get a nice little easter egg in ME3 too.

Spoiler

In ME 3, Morinth has taken off and gone her own way. She doesn't come back for that one mission like Samara does. But then, on the last mission, when you are fighting on Earth, one of the Banshees will be tagged "Morinth."

 

[Dany]

Spoiler

In ME 3, Morinth has taken off and gone her own way. She doesn't come back for that one mission like Samara does. But then, on the last mission, when you are fighting on Earth, one of the Banshees will be tagged "Morinth."

Yep! I had that happen to me

 

[Bisnic]

Did you save Wrex, maelons data, and cure the genophage using paragon resulting in a future for the krogan where they rebuild peacefully and co-exist with the rest of the galaxy? Or did you kill Wrex, destroy the data, and cure the genophage resulting in a disasterous renegade outcome where it is clearly shown that Wreav will exact war and revenge on everyone who wronged the Krogan? Extended cut shows these vastly different outcomes.

Meaningful and immediate post game consequences as a result of your decisions across 3 games: check.

Did you prevent Tali from being exiled, rewrite the heretics, and choose to save admiral Koris on rannoch? Then you'll get a distinctly choice driven ending in which the geth and Quarians are alive and cooperating. Alternatively your poor decisions force you to choose to genocide either race and get an ending where an entire race is very much dead.

Meaningful and immediate post game consequences as a result of your decisions spanning 2 games: check.

More choice and impact than Dragon Age has ever had.

The thing with Wrex dying or Tali exiling can simply be avoided by picking the Red or Blue choice, which I assume most people choose. Getting the nice "ending" with the Krogans or the Quarians/Geths is too easy in my opinion.

Really wish these Red/Blue choices never existed in the first place. As the games are right now, you want to see bad things happen? Just press the non-colored options.

I'm hoping the colored options are just gone in Andromeda, i want some of my decisions to have an unexpected development. I don't want a situation where my choices are...

*Situation* : Mercenaries have captured a Turian camp, what will you do?
Choice Red : Shoot the tank gas to kill them all and save the hostages
Choice Blue : Negotiate, let the mercenaries go and save everybody
Neutral choice 1 : Shoot a few bad guys, but some hostage dies before all mercenaries are killed.
Neutral choice 2 : Negotiate(but not enough to convince the mercenaries), which ends up with them escaping and some hostage dies.

Make the 4 choices not clear enough on which one(s) is/are the best.