|
On July 05 2014 06:40 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2014 06:33 Gorsameth wrote:
Still very minor stuff when compared to some of other morality systems like for example KotoR. I think that's actually quite debatable. KotOR's only mechanical influence is on Force Power costs (which are irrelevant in the long run), and in terms of those, the changes by alignments are tradeoffs rather than pure benefits. The cost penalty to using off-alignment powers is actually harsher than the cost benefit for using same-alignment powers, so unless you were already going in purely with the intention of min-maxing and only using same-alignment powers, the net benefit of the alignment bonuses are mixed, whereas ME's alignment bonuses are purely beneficial.
Light side mastery
Guardian: +3 STR
Sentinel: +3 CON
Consular: +3 CHA
Dark side mastery
Guardian: +1d8 damage
Sentinel: Poison Immunity
Consular: +50 to Force Points
Okay, some of the Dark side ones are negligible. The others, not so much.
|
United States47024 Posts
Mastery bonuses are only applied to the main player character in the PC version of the game
Probably why I missed those, lol.
|
Kyrgyz Republic1462 Posts
On July 04 2014 11:39 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2014 06:38 gruff wrote:ME1 was fun but calling the story good is a bit of a stretch. It's every popular space opera fiction squeezed into one game. It's fun though.  It's basically Star Control (aka Ur'Quan Masters). Or the Relevation Space series of books.
Ur'Quan Masters is Star Control II and ME story is more like Star Control III (a hyper-evolved civilization exterminating sentient life for no apparent reason) that everyone hated and forgot, but its ending and explanation are still much more satisfying than ME's.
|
United States47024 Posts
On July 05 2014 06:43 Gorsameth wrote:
they are purely beneficial but the benefit is minor is my point. Your play through wont suffer because you dont choose X.
Same with the choices themselves. Sure paragon might better from a story standpoint but it again has no significant impact on the gameplay of the game.
I mean, both games are easy enough that the effect of alignment isn't enough to make or break a playthrough.
Fundamentally, both games really fail to create an alignment system of real consequence. The purpose of alignment is to create a framework for decision-making that dynamically alters the flow of the game based on the choices you make and how you interact with people (Planescape: Torment does this well). Neither game presents their alignment systems in a manner that actually has real consequences outside of your ability to slaughter your own party members if you choose to.
|
On July 05 2014 07:05 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2014 06:43 Gorsameth wrote:
they are purely beneficial but the benefit is minor is my point. Your play through wont suffer because you dont choose X.
Same with the choices themselves. Sure paragon might better from a story standpoint but it again has no significant impact on the gameplay of the game. I mean, both games are easy enough that the effect of alignment isn't enough to make or break a playthrough. Fundamentally, both games really fail to create an alignment system of real consequence. The purpose of alignment is to create a framework for decision-making that dynamically alters the flow of the game based on the choices you make and how you interact with people (Planescape: Torment does this well). Neither game presents their alignment systems in a manner that actually has real consequences outside of your ability to slaughter your own party members if you choose to.
I think that's generally why I liked Mass Effect's morality more than other Bioware games. They dropped the pretenses that all these morality choices were actually important. You could be a dick, or a nice person, but you were still saving the universe either way.
It was probably the first time I just made "choices" based on whatever I felt like doing. Almost every other game I've played with any kind of morality system ended up being me trying to figure out what kind of rewards I would get at the end of it all.
|
On July 05 2014 07:14 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2014 07:05 TheYango wrote:On July 05 2014 06:43 Gorsameth wrote:
they are purely beneficial but the benefit is minor is my point. Your play through wont suffer because you dont choose X.
Same with the choices themselves. Sure paragon might better from a story standpoint but it again has no significant impact on the gameplay of the game. I mean, both games are easy enough that the effect of alignment isn't enough to make or break a playthrough. Fundamentally, both games really fail to create an alignment system of real consequence. The purpose of alignment is to create a framework for decision-making that dynamically alters the flow of the game based on the choices you make and how you interact with people (Planescape: Torment does this well). Neither game presents their alignment systems in a manner that actually has real consequences outside of your ability to slaughter your own party members if you choose to. I think that's generally why I liked Mass Effect's morality more than other Bioware games. They dropped the pretenses that all these morality choices were actually important. You could be a dick, or a nice person, but you were still saving the universe either way. It was probably the first time I just made "choices" based on whatever I felt like doing. Almost every other game I've played with any kind of morality system ended up being me trying to figure out what kind of rewards I would get at the end of it all.
Have you played any of Obsidian's RPGs?
|
United States47024 Posts
On July 05 2014 07:14 WolfintheSheep wrote:
I think that's generally why I liked Mass Effect's morality more than other Bioware games. They dropped the pretenses that all these morality choices were actually important. You could be a dick, or a nice person, but you were still saving the universe either way.
I just don't see how they dropped those pretenses. There's still a mechanical benefit to extreme alignment, alignment still locks you out of certain speech paths (which are superfluous and generally inconsequential anyway in both games), and all of it is still ultimately just as poorly done as any of their other games.
There doesn't seem anything out of this that seems unique to Mass Effect here. You could have played KotOR the same way, and had the same experience--you just chose not to and therefore felt Mass Effect was better.
|
I think that what Mass Effect added in term of good/evil alignment compared to KotOR comes down to the better dialogues and voice acting. It's much more fun for me to hear the guy act like a douche (even if nothing comes out of it) rather than just read some mildly assholish text. I was more motivated to use the "evil" dialogue options that way. I don't really buy into the RPGs which make every single character except yours have a voice and actually speak.
And as long as games won't have procedural dialogue and quest generation, you won't have awesomely deep and broad dialogue trees that depend on what you've been doing and how you've been answering since the beginning of the game. People need to understand the amount of work and lines of dialogues that would imply.
|
United States47024 Posts
On July 05 2014 07:39 ZenithM wrote:
And as long as games won't have procedural dialogue and quest generation, you won't have awesomely deep and broad dialogue trees that depend on what you've been doing and how you've been answering since the beginning of the game. People need to understand the amount of work and lines of dialogues that would imply.
We had that to a convincing enough degree during the Black Isle era of the late 90s and early 2000s. It's only when CRPGs moved to consoles and placed heavier emphasis on voice acting and animation where that took a step backward.
|
Yeah I agree. I think we may see some more of those games in the future. I hear Divinity: Original Sin is not bad. And I'm looking forward to Project Eternity and Torment Numenera.
|
On July 05 2014 06:43 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2014 06:40 TheYango wrote:On July 05 2014 06:33 Gorsameth wrote:
Still very minor stuff when compared to some of other morality systems like for example KotoR. I think that's actually quite debatable. KotOR's only mechanical influence is on Force Power costs (which are irrelevant in the long run), and in terms of those, the changes by alignments are tradeoffs rather than pure benefits. The cost penalty to using off-alignment powers is actually harsher than the cost benefit for using same-alignment powers, so unless you were already going in purely with the intention of min-maxing and only using same-alignment powers, the net benefit of the alignment bonuses are mixed, whereas ME's alignment bonuses are purely beneficial. Light side mastery Guardian: +3 STR Sentinel: +3 CON Consular: +3 CHA Dark side mastery Guardian: +1d8 damage Sentinel: Poison Immunity Consular: +50 to Force Points Okay, some of the Dark side ones are negligible. The others, not so much.
Thing is, KotOR 2 gave you a bonus ability at the end too. Light Side one cast all light side buffs at the same time, dark one stunlocked and killed every enemy in the game excluding the final boss.
Because that's balanced.
|
United States47024 Posts
Well that doesn't really have a bearing on the discussion at hand because you received that ability even for non-extreme alignment. You didn't have to be 100% light/dark to receive the bonus ability.
|
On July 05 2014 07:28 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2014 07:14 WolfintheSheep wrote:
I think that's generally why I liked Mass Effect's morality more than other Bioware games. They dropped the pretenses that all these morality choices were actually important. You could be a dick, or a nice person, but you were still saving the universe either way. I just don't see how they dropped those pretenses. There's still a mechanical benefit to extreme alignment, alignment still locks you out of certain speech paths (which are superfluous and generally inconsequential anyway in both games), and all of it is still ultimately just as poorly done as any of their other games. There doesn't seem anything out of this that seems unique to Mass Effect here. You could have played KotOR the same way, and had the same experience--you just chose not to and therefore felt Mass Effect was better.
Can't remember anything in Mass Effect that certain alignment would lock you out of. Not having enough locked you out, but the thing was you could always build up both. In fact...being extreme was usually a detriment, because having a good meter in both gave you access to all the items, better stats, and more dialogue options.
KotOR, being light side meant you could never access dark side options, and vice versa. Being neutral meant you had access neither. And it also limited your gameplay options as well, because you either picked a side from the start to choose your powers/classes, or you made all your decisions to stay on the neutral line to use both (sub-optimally).
|
On July 05 2014 15:49 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2014 07:28 TheYango wrote:On July 05 2014 07:14 WolfintheSheep wrote:
I think that's generally why I liked Mass Effect's morality more than other Bioware games. They dropped the pretenses that all these morality choices were actually important. You could be a dick, or a nice person, but you were still saving the universe either way. I just don't see how they dropped those pretenses. There's still a mechanical benefit to extreme alignment, alignment still locks you out of certain speech paths (which are superfluous and generally inconsequential anyway in both games), and all of it is still ultimately just as poorly done as any of their other games. There doesn't seem anything out of this that seems unique to Mass Effect here. You could have played KotOR the same way, and had the same experience--you just chose not to and therefore felt Mass Effect was better. Can't remember anything in Mass Effect that certain alignment would lock you out of. Not having enough locked you out, but the thing was you could always build up both. In fact...being extreme was usually a detriment, because having a good meter in both gave you access to all the items, better stats, and more dialogue options. KotOR, being light side meant you could never access dark side options, and vice versa. Being neutral meant you had access neither. And it also limited your gameplay options as well, because you either picked a side from the start to choose your powers/classes, or you made all your decisions to stay on the neutral line to use both (sub-optimally).
+ Show Spoiler +The argument between Miranda and Jack (and maybe Tali and Legion as well) requires you to have a certain % of the Paragon/Renegade available up to that point, rather than a set amount. At least that's what I've found when investigating why I could never resolve it, as there is no official consensus.
|
Netherlands45349 Posts
IIRC if you didn't follow either Renegade or Paragon through during your ME2 project
+ Show Spoiler +you would get locked out of Miranda vs Jack and Tali vs Legion, this meant that you could only choose one(and you would get loyalty with that 1). Meaning that if you wanted your whole squad to survive the to the end you had to go to extreme paragon or renegade.
I actually liked ME3's mechanic, it meant that you could be a dick to people you thought were a dick or if you felt like being a dick but still be nice to others, you weren''t forced into options.
|
Have a 50% off Portal 2 coupon on Steam that's tradeable if any are interested. ($19.99 game / 9.995 off the price).
|
On July 05 2014 18:08 Kipsate wrote:IIRC if you didn't follow either Renegade or Paragon through during your ME2 project + Show Spoiler +you would get locked out of Miranda vs Jack and Tali vs Legion, this meant that you could only choose one(and you would get loyalty with that 1). Meaning that if you wanted your whole squad to survive the to the end you had to go to extreme paragon or renegade. I actually liked ME3's mechanic, it meant that you could be a dick to people you thought were a dick or if you felt like being a dick but still be nice to others, you weren''t forced into options.
+ Show Spoiler +You can have non-loyal squad members survive as long as you don't assign them to any task or have them in your party at the final stage. They're certain or at least more likely to die in ME3 (depending on the character), though, and not solving Tali v Legion will prevent you from brokering peace.
|
On July 05 2014 07:39 ZenithM wrote:
I think that what Mass Effect added in term of good/evil alignment compared to KotOR comes down to the better dialogues and voice acting. It's much more fun for me to hear the guy act like a douche (even if nothing comes out of it) rather than just read some mildly assholish text. I was more motivated to use the "evil" dialogue options that way. I don't really buy into the RPGs which make every single character except yours have a voice and actually speak.
And as long as games won't have procedural dialogue and quest generation, you won't have awesomely deep and broad dialogue trees that depend on what you've been doing and how you've been answering since the beginning of the game. People need to understand the amount of work and lines of dialogues that would imply.
KotOR absolutely had voice acting...
EDIT: I realized you meant for the PC after I posted, disregard.
|
20% off voucher on Green Man Gaming, works on Dragon Age: Inquisition pre-order (59.99€).
I don't think I'll get DAI for now, as I've already gotten many games to play with during the Summer Sales, but the game looks promising enough that you folks might be interested. Beware, it requires Origin to play :D
|
Caldeum1977 Posts
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
