Rannoch, Grissom Academy, Tuchanka
For me though...I also like the *small touches* such as kasumi and Zaeed cameo, the effect of loyalty on Grunt.
Hell, I appreciate the fact that a non-Garrus playthrough simply has less banter among the crew...I don't really require BIG things to be happy when doing imports so I was easily pleased with even ME2's relative small lack of import details in the narrative and blown away by what we got in ME3.
But didn't it bother you that the genophage cure was complete, regardless of if you saved of restored its data? That if you killed Wrex, he was simply replaced with Wreav, or Mordin by Wiks? That the Geth still joined up with the Reapers, even if you rewrote their code to realize that was a bad idea? That if Jack was dead, she was replaced by just another random NPC?
The "clone factory" syndrome with ME3 really jaded me. Sure, there were little touches like Eve dying without the cure data, or Wreav being more headstrong. But, for all the information we are given by the game, none of that matters. What if Wreav was better able to control the Krogan population? What if having Eve dead makes Wrex a better commander only if the genophage wasn't cured?
Since we received no details about how our choices played out (and never will, given the ideas being kicked around about ME4 occurring neither "before, during or after ME3" ...?), then the only difference that can be seen is what the game shows us, which is very small, incremental changes.
As I've said in this thread (and others), with ME3 they stated their goal was to create truly unique outcomes, truly divergent stories, since they knew that this was the end of the trilogy and the climax to Shepherd's story. With no future content/games to worry about, they said they wanted to go all out. And ME3 was the end result. Some nods to previous choices, but entire choices ignored in most of the game.
For example... the Rachni. Thought you were making a huge choice in ME1? Thought you were making the galaxy safer if you exterminated them, or being merciful if you spared them? Nope; they'll be Frankensteined no matter what, so you might as well flip a coin during that scene at Feros.
With the DA series, things are much different. There is not the same main character from game to game. We've only seen two returning companions (Oghren and Anders) out of over two dozen characters. The locations are moved significantly from game to game. So the little camels can be even less satisfying, since we aren't giving Garrus a bro-hug or wincing when the Virmire Survivor says they don't know they can trust us. Instead, we hear "Hi, my name is Zevran... we've clearly never met before, but I'm going to act like we are old chums!"
I'd rather see less references to past choices and more developments of these story lines. Choices like who you put on the throne should tell a larger story than "hey, I'm the leader of Ferelden, just popping in here so you can see that... not sure how I heard about one lone mercernary in a whole city and knew they were trustworthy (especially when you can easily make a Hawke that is VERY untrustworthy), but don't worry about that!"
I'd rather here a continuation of the story, about how things are going after ten years. Because apparently nothing is different if Anora rules the throne alone while an unhardened Allistair soaks up ale in Kirkwall like a sponge or if a hardened Allistair and female Warden are ruling the country together. Which is quite depressing. Ditto for Harrowmont and Bhelen, who the epilogue slides in DA:O painted as being as different as night and day in terms of impact.
Does the world need to be dramatically different? Personally, I would say yes. And with giving tons of choice in games, but then defining what a canon going into the next game, the subsequent games could address the "what comes next" aspect to these storylines. We could see the Chantry on the verge of invading Orzammar because the Shaperate outlawed the Dwarven Chantry (a choice many people would not have made). They could address things like the OGB in truly deep and (in my mind) appropriate ways.
Instead, all choices are made shallow. No continuation of the story is shown... instead we are given the canon that no matter what choice you made, the world is the exact same, regardless. Who you put in the throne affects nothing. Who you killed or saved means nothing. What sides you took or what morals you expressed mean nothing... because in order to respect and accommodate everyone's choice, they have to make the resulting game have the least impact and nearly identical outcomes.
Which is the weakest canon there is.
Retour en haut
