Why do people like Mass effect story?

[BlueLight]

First off i guess we should try to keep the spoilers to a low for anyone like me that hasn't even beaten the first game but unlike me, is picky about spoilers.

So my dad and step mom recently got Mass effect on steam and i had played the game years ago but only got to the first planet. Since they started playing it i decided to try it again and the first thing that struck me is that the story telling to be frank is horrible. I'm on a different first planet and i have done some side missions in space, but nothing too advance. While i can see that the game might have a good story and that it's likely only going to improve in the long run, i still am getting annoyed by it. I think the elements that are annoying me the most are the humans in the game.

Take Shepard himself (herself) who is your window into this universe. His (Fuck the pronouns; no more!) conversations are your conversations into this lore; but when ever i get to a conversation tree i dread it because there is a chance i will be required to say something that has 3 options which are the Good, Neutral, and Bad to go about the conversation; but lets be fair this is the part that annoys me. The part that gets me is that the Good, and the Neutral conversation picks seem about 50% of the time to be the same. Okay well that's a nit pick, let me continue, conversations that you pick will have a 1 word summary of what you're about to say, and what's said doesn't fit that summary. then the renegade points... when i ever i get them it makes no sense why i got them. I'm playing a good character but still. In fact this was a problem you got from KOTOR but there i think they were off setting the problem by massive amount of ways to get either points. When you save the doctor from the thugs, i have always gotten renegade points even though i tried that part at least 3 times with the goal of not getting any points. While in KOTOR the problems, you can see work through their mind set and figured out why you got light side or dark side even if it wasn't intuitive. For instance at the sith training planet, you get off your ship, and then a sith basically asks you what he should do with 3 wannabe sith recruits, the basic two options are force them to walk around the camp naked; and kill them. Well i'd personally consider the former a dickish thing to do, but the lesser of two evils and OMFG i just got light side points for doing that. If i do the latter rocks fall, lightening strikes and the recruits are dead and you have more dark side points. I think i've gone on long enough to move to the second part of why i hate the humans.

humans are self entitled dicks. I guess my problem is that the back story is building up the fact that humans are gaining a lot of power in the council really quickly but it's easy to tell that humanities only goal is to get a fucking seat on this council just so they can try to pass laws that would benefit humanity. The problem is that this is their only goal. I'd except that they'd be more than willing to pass a law that would crush the entire government if it gave them some advantage to humanity. I don't have a problem with humans being out of themselves, but i do have a problem with the extreme that BIOware took them. Their no longer people, or even scummy people. Their just down right scum and as much as Shepard is the best in humanity, i have to say that his competition isn't even a challenge

Any thoughts or comments.

[Grape Me]

I would say first off it might be best to finish off ME and then go through the whole trilogy before giving such an opinion. That way you sort of understand and get to experience the story as a whole. What I think I understood from your post is that you disagree with the moral choices and dialog within the game? Well that is where I think the whole Mass Effect series shines, is in the dialogue. The interaction between characters is ME's strength, getting to learn more about your crew, the galaxy, and allowing effective character development. In others areas, such as combat, I would say that Bioware fails to deliver (although in ME2 and ME3 it was pretty well done). The RPG elements in the first Mass Effect were good, I like the old school style. Mass effect 2 and 3 were much more limited in that regard but I think it was to make it simpler for some players.

Originally released in 2007, Mass Effect 1 is different in many ways to its successors. While they tried to emphasis the game’s action credentials, Mass Effect 1 is unashamedly nerdy in terms of both its sci-fi setting and its role-playing elements. Although you’re dealing with the same characters and universe (well, galaxy) the tone is noticeably different and feels decidedly more honest given BioWare’s background as the studio behind the likes of Baldur’s Gate and Star Wars: Knights Of The Old Republic.

Mass Effect 1 is by far the most ambitious and imaginative of the three games, not just in terms of is structure and freedom but also its storytelling. The range of options during your final confrontation with antagonist Saren remains one of the most impressive in all gaming and there’s nothing in the subsequent games that’s in any way it’s equal.

And yet in terms of gameplay Mass Effect 1 is clearly the worst by a significant margin. Even ignoring the Mako sections the on-foot, third person combat is much less refined than later sequels – even with a few tweaks here in this new version. It’s not actively bad, but unlike the sequels it’s merely a means to an end… something exciting to do between dialogue encounters.

In Short: A good value compilation for what remains a stunningly ambitious mix of interactive storytelling, compelling action, and sci-fi spectacle.

Pros: The progression of your character from one game to the next works excellently well, with a solid combat system and a pantheon of memorable characters.

Cons: The controls in Mass Effect 1 (some combat) and the ending to Mass Effect 3 are weak links.

[Suraru]

I kind of like Mass Effect because humans are dicks, and Bioware got that right. There are good humans here and there, but them majority are assholes trying to get power. Just look at governments today!

I love the story because it's correct, for the most part, to what would happen in those situations. The characters are in character, I guess is a way to say that.

[BlueLight]

I would say first off it might be best to finish off ME and then go through the whole trilogy before giving such an opinion. That way you sort of understand and get to experience the story as a whole. What I think I understood from your post is that you disagree with the moral choices and dialog within the game? Well that is where I think the whole Mass Effect series shines, is in the dialogue. The interaction between characters is ME's strength, getting to learn more about your crew, the galaxy, and allowing effective character development. In others areas, such as combat, I would say that Bioware fails to deliver (although in ME2 and ME3 it was pretty well done). The RPG elements in the first Mass Effect were good, I like the old school style. Mass effect 2 and 3 were much more limited in that regard but I think it was to make it simpler for some players.

Originally released in 2007, Mass Effect 1 is different in many ways to its successors. While they tried to emphasis the game’s action credentials, Mass Effect 1 is unashamedly nerdy in terms of both its sci-fi setting and its role-playing elements. Although you’re dealing with the same characters and universe (well, galaxy) the tone is noticeably different and feels decidedly more honest given BioWare’s background as the studio behind the likes of Baldur’s Gate and Star Wars: Knights Of The Old Republic.

Mass Effect 1 is by far the most ambitious and imaginative of the three games, not just in terms of is structure and freedom but also its storytelling. The range of options during your final confrontation with antagonist Saren remains one of the most impressive in all gaming and there’s nothing in the subsequent games that’s in any way it’s equal.

And yet in terms of gameplay Mass Effect 1 is clearly the worst by a significant margin. Even ignoring the Mako sections the on-foot, third person combat is much less refined than later sequels – even with a few tweaks here in this new version. It’s not actively bad, but unlike the sequels it’s merely a means to an end… something exciting to do between dialogue encounters.

In Short: A good value compilation for what remains a stunningly ambitious mix of interactive storytelling, compelling action, and sci-fi spectacle.

Pros: The progression of your character from one game to the next works excellently well, with a solid combat system and a pantheon of memorable characters.

Cons: The controls in Mass Effect 1 (some combat) and the ending to Mass Effect 3 are weak links.

So i skimmed through what you said and i see a few problems about how i presented statements. first the title is a bit misleading since the overall story so far, i'm liking. What i'm not liking is the story telling or the way they present you with information. I've had a silly problem with biowares morality system for a long time, but truth be told, i'd wish more games used them. it's just laughable that bioware adds a 2 direction morality games even though games like ultima 4 (I think) had a morality system with 6 stats, and to raise one stat you might lower other stats. It's just a peeve that the industry has had the ability to do this for 10+ years and hasn't done anything with it. my problem with Mass Effects 1 morality system is that i get points for actions that are completely random and make no sense. at the end of the day, i want to be able to go "I got 3 evil points but i did kinda murder a room full of thugs.". the other major things is the couple words description they give you for what your character will say. Your character will sometimes say something that seems to come out of no where from what you clicked. Gameplay, i'm going to leave alone. I have problems with it but really, if anything is going to make or break my willingness to play the game it's going to be story mechanics.

I do know that Mass Effect 2 improved a lot on 1 but even so, i couldn't pretend to know if the series as a whole is as good or bad as 1.
I'll do a complete read through on your post later and thank you for post a detailed post.

@Suraru
Well my problem with the dick humans is that their so evil, that their cartooner than a comic book villain in a cartoon show. Hell i have no problem with them being evil and asses at the same time. It's just they felt cartoony how they did it.

[Suraru]

Cartoony?

I think they captured them quite well. I mean, just look at US's Congress, they are kind of cartoony...

[IrrelevantComment]

In ME1, theres a side mission where you have to get a woman's husband's body back for her. It's been taken by the military so they can perform tests on it to save more lives from the geth. Getting the body back for her is a "good thing" and gets you paragon points, and I'm just like, "what? how is not saving lives to make a woman happy a good thing?"

[BlueLight]

Cartoony?

I think they captured them quite well. I mean, just look at US's Congress, they are kind of cartoony...

Spoiler (click to show/hide):

One party trying to give free health insurance to everyone while another tries to stop it because they're afraid it will raise prices to unmanageable levels?
Both sides, while on opposite ends of the scale, are trying to get the best in their mind for their nations people.
While you might be thinking of some other issue, that's right now the current main one. Moving on from that, our government is based on the idea that government officials work for the people thus can be removed by the people. However in this game, that doesn't exist. Just look at how many races are unhappy with the ruling races! the ruling races are the ones with the real power. Maybe they should be compared to our government but to me they seem like to different entities. Hell take the NSA; their god damn terrorist, literally! and yet their terrorizing of USA citizens (Just going to stick to USA for now) is to them considered a required action to protect those very citizens from terrorism. The problem is that humans really have no interest in making anything better or even pretending they do which i guess is my real problem.

Again, the humans in Masseffect just seem Cartoony to me. Hell, the things Shepard says sound cartoony.
If you still disagree with me, and if their isn't really anything new presented, i guess we should just agree to go are separate ways. No point in me trying to convert your way of thinking, and to add on to that, i haven't even finished the game so i should likely be the last one talking here.

In ME1, theres a side mission where you have to get a woman's husband's body back for her. It's been taken by the military so they can perform tests on it to save more lives from the geth. Getting the body back for her is a "good thing" and gets you paragon points, and I'm just like, "what? how is not saving lives to make a woman happy a good thing?"

Spoiler (click to show/hide):

ah the age old question of what's ethical. So here brings out the point that a liner system, is just questionable for ethics unless your going to teach the players a ethical system that your scale uses. So your using a ethical system called utilitarianism or at least it sounds very much like it. In this systems, you're basically trying to make everyone happy and you care more for the end result than the actions you took to get there. What they are using is more in line with Kantianism; which is made on your actions and let the consequences be damned.

To sum them both up, you have a button in your pocket that will stop the earth from blowing up; however if you push it you're doing something only a ethical scum bag would do, so what do you do?
As a utilitarian, you consider that everyone dying would make them unhappy so you press with in a second. in that ethical system this would be the ethical thing. Actions be damned, just so long as the end result were good.
As a kantian, you would never press that button, because it's unethical. it doesn't matter if your inaction killed every single person in existence, the action would be unethical.

it's been awhile since i've played the game, but from what i remember they jump around ethical systems for the morality system which isn't good. That's the annoying part about it, you have a number line trying to depict ethical actions when anything you could do is unethical just as much as it's ethical. I like the virute system Lord brith used, because it was clear what raised and lowered your ethics scores, and it was directly connected to your game play.

[talin]

(stuff)

Basically you're upset because they are using circular logic such as "It's evil because it's evil." You're wanting to see the characters act because they have a plan or goal behind those actions (even if it doesn't always make the best sense) instead of trying to imitate stereo types of "good" and "evil". You want them to have individual opinions and quandaries that not everyone might catch on to but are there anyway because they are people and have more than just the main plot in their head. Maybe one guy was in a little bit of a hurry because he missed lunch and was starving. Maybe someone else is thinking to them self while gazing at a tool in their hand that might not have everything to do with what they're thinking about.

Am I getting close here?

[Argonaut]

then the renegade points... when i ever i get them it makes no sense why i got them.

This is a minor issue in the first, and maybe the second game. At certain points in the game, it rewards you with both renegade and paragon points, so players who only take neutral actions can gains access to a few of the "only renegade" or "only paragon" options. This system in not present in the third game.

[BlueLight]

(stuff)

Basically you're upset because they are using circular logic such as "It's evil because it's evil." You're wanting to see the characters act because they have a plan or goal behind those actions (even if it doesn't always make the best sense) instead of trying to imitate stereo types of "good" and "evil". You want them to have individual opinions and quandaries that not everyone might catch on to but are there anyway because they are people and have more than just the main plot in their head. Maybe one guy was in a little bit of a hurry because he missed lunch and was starving. Maybe someone else is thinking to them self while gazing at a tool in their hand that might not have everything to do with what they're thinking about.

Am I getting close here?

Basically you're correct. I feel that the humans are evil because the writers wanted them to be assholes but didn't know why... they just wanted them to be assholes. The main villain Serien (I think that's how you spell his name) at this point information wise, is in the same boat but i can believe he's got more to him. Hell i know a bit about the indoctrination theory that surrounded shepard for the end of MassEffect 3 and i'm going to take a wild guess and say he's either been indoctrinated or something where he's fed up with the government. At least in those cases i can understand why he is evil.

[Grape Me]

Bioware came out and told the fans that the indoctrination theory is not true, which is quite sad because its quite genius. Bioware wanted to stick to their weird ass non seneschal ending, which was fine later when they came out with the dlc to give the fans closure.

I would agree, there were a few choices in the game where you have to wonder why they were renegade or paragon. I have to say my favorite choice and dialogue game would have to be The Witcher 2, as you never know what the good or the bad choices are.

[BlueLight]

Bioware came out and told the fans that the indoctrination theory is not true, which is quite sad because its quite genius. Bioware wanted to stick to their weird ass non seneschal ending, which was fine later when they came out with the dlc to give the fans closure.

I would agree, there were a few choices in the game where you have to wonder why they were renegade or paragon. I have to say my favorite choice and dialogue game would have to be The Witcher 2, as you never know what the good or the bad choices are.

While i haven't played the game for a few years now, i think the system in Dragon age (Another bioware game) worked well. Basically your morality bar does not exist. Your actions have direct reaction and aren't (at least to my knowledge) based on some integer value.

They did use the system for party interaction which i'm fine with. The system makes more sense with a relationship.

[Argonaut]

Bioware came out and told the fans that the indoctrination theory is not true, which is quite sad because its quite genius. Bioware wanted to stick to their weird ass non seneschal ending, which was fine later when they came out with the dlc to give the fans closure.

I always disliked the indoctrination theory, and fought against it whenever my friends brought it up. The three choices at the end simply don't make any sense if Shepherd was under the reaper's control.

[Grape Me]

They three choices didn't make any sense before the dlc, and I honestly still find them pretty lame. I would agree that the indoctrination theory was quite a stretch, and if it was true then I would have to question why bioware made such a complex and confusing ending to the trilogy. Also, it would be kind of a cheep way for bioware to explain some sense to a terrible ending.