Mass Effect: Andromeda

Loving this game. This was the Mass Effect I was waiting for. The exploration of planets, the thrill of seeing something new. Tasting the unknowns - something that ME1 tried to accomplish and which was totally forgotten in ME2/3. Meeting new races, which does not speak your language, starting from scratch and building the civilisation. I'm grateful that I'm not story locked like in ME2.

Yes. It has flaws, the fuzzy animations and such, but terrain and space are gorgeous. Story is decent and I like the characters.

It has also heavy requirements. 1440p all ultra gives about 57-62 FPS on OCed 1080 Ti. But it's worth it.

Not regretting buying it.
I don't know what you did in Mass Effect 2 but there were plenty of things to explore and unique side quests on many planets. I liked those a lot. They were much more meaningful and higher quality than those poor ME1 planets.
 
The TAA in this game looks great, sometimes I forget I'm not using 4K DSR!
Although I see a weird fuzzy, smudge effect on certain things and I suspect TAA is causing it. Otherwise great.
 
The TAA in this game looks great, sometimes I forget I'm not using 4K DSR!
Although I see a weird fuzzy, smudge effect on certain things and I suspect TAA is causing it. Otherwise great.

Yea I didnt like FXAA or TAA Much. I turned those off and used Resolution scale (Super Sampling AA). I run it at 125%, and it looks so damn stunning!

There are a ton of faults with this game, no doubt about it (Animations, ok story, Load fucking bug!). I still think this game is a 7/10. I really am digging the combat, and I love how I can respec easily.

Game of the year? O fuck no not even close.
 
II'll go with 7/10 too, but mine is more like a 6.6/10 rounded up.

I'm roughly 30 hrs in, on my 4th explorable planet, doing a completionist run (every freakin' side quest & map icon cleared). I love the Worlds, the Tempest, the exploration, the crafting (apart from the UI) and the effect you have on each world as you make it more viable. Combat is a blast, and the classless system makes it even better. Haven't tried MP yet, but based on ME3's & reviews, I'm guessing it will be one of the best parts of the game.

Hopefully they are working on the animation, models and bugs, so I'll not comment on them for the moment.

My disappointments are the characters, writting and litany of fluff quests. Seriously they have so over-packed each map with icons of bullsh*t quests, that what I enjoyed about the exploration is slowly getting sucked out of the game with each world. The repetitive tedium becomes overwhelming after a while. I think there are 7 explorable planets from what they released on Twitter, and at this rate I'm going to hate the game so much by the last one I will ignore everything but the main quest just to get the game over with. The characters have not had the 'usual' ME affect on me. Only one or two begin to be compelling, but then dont seem to go anywhere... and they're male. As a straight male where the hell are the interesting women? For me, there is maybe one female in the game that I would 'sort of' be interested in romancing, but I didn't use the flirt option with her when it was first available and another option has not come up since. Annoying since the flirt option with every same sex character in the game never goes away. Of course I have not unlocked the loyalty missions yet, so maybe this will change. Regardless, it all adds up to no real desire to explore every dialogue option or replay the game thus far.

Not a bad game by any means, and should improve with patches, but definitely not good in any area most people buy BioWare games for.
 
Sounds like the game is using the version of Frostbite used in Mirror's Edge, which had the "resolution scaling" option. And was a lot more demanding than BF4 and BF1.
 
There's going to be a difference in personal taste but I enjoy the new 'open world' design of each planet compared to previous games.
I like to explore and scan things, reading all the notepads, discovering random crap. Obviously the generic "Scan 20 alien plants" quests are kind of boring, you just complete them as you go. I like reading all the scan descriptions, too. Having an open map gives you more ways to approach combat as well, including the jetpack. In previous games everything was a giant corridor so everything felt like it was laid out for you.

I don't like the Nomad resource scanning at all. Driving around waiting for the resource line to spike. It's SOMEHOW worse than Mass Effect 2's planet scanning... Good job bioware, you outdid yourselves...

Anyway, this game COULD HAVE been "Witcher 3 in space" and it would have been phenomenal. Instead we get something much more watered down, but still decent enough. Still too many technical problems for me, though. I'd say the game is somewhere between "average" and "pretty good".

After a few patches and a $20~$30 price tag it will be a safe bet.

On the plus side, I played about 6 hours today with no crashes. Downgrading the Origin client helped a lot.
 
Last edited:
My disappointments are the characters, writting and litany of fluff quests. Seriously they have so over-packed each map with icons of bullsh*t quests, that what I enjoyed about the exploration is slowly getting sucked out of the game with each world. The repetitive tedium becomes overwhelming after a while...

what's most disappointing is that they lied in the months leading up to release by specifically mentioning how side quests would all be interesting and unique with no fetch quest type of missions...they even compared it to The Witcher...

game producer Fabrice Condominas said:

"We are approaching the completionist aspect very differently, because we’ve done and learned a lot from Inquisition. But we’ve also observed what other games have been doing, like The Witcher. And it was very important for us that the quantity of scope doesn’t downgrade the quality of whatever you are doing there"
 
I'm just a few hours in so maybe I haven't got to the sucky parts yet but I gotta say I think this game is pretty damn good so far. Yes the facial animation is just awful but the story so far is good, the characters are pretty good, the atmosphere is good and the combat is really fun (for an RPG). Don't get me wrong, the characters and story aren't as good as the original trilogy but I don't think it's fair to use that as the benchmark. ME 1-3 are among the best games in history and would be pretty tough for anybody to equal. But ME:A judged by itself is very good so far.

I know it's trendy to hate every game that comes out nowadays and God knows I want to be like all the cool kids but I'm having trouble finding a lot to bitch about here.
 
There's going to be a difference in personal taste but I enjoy the new 'open world' design of each planet compared to previous games.
I like to explore and scan things, reading all the notepads, discovering random crap. Obviously the generic "Scan 20 alien plants" quests are kind of boring, you just complete them as you go. I like reading all the scan descriptions, too. Having an open map gives you more ways to approach combat as well, including the jetpack. In previous games everything was a giant corridor so everything felt like it was laid out for you.

I enjoy many of the same things (not reading everything, lol), and had a good time the first couple of planets. But now I'm on my fourth planet and it's the same thing. The planet is different, but all the activities are the same. The hazard has changed, but that's the only thing. No new mechanics that play into the new planet's unique qualities. Scan the same rocks, plants, animals; shot the same Khet at the same generic outposts and the same "other enemies" (sparing spoilers) at their typical locations. There doesn't seem to be any progression brought about by story, environment, or any other variable: just "same sheit different location". It's not a new problem for this genre, or particularly terrible gamplay, but it isn't particularly interesting either. I feel like ME1 did a better job of making things feel alien, fresh and making the player a part of the progression (both in story and character level).

what's most disappointing is that they lied in the months leading up to release by specifically mentioning how side quests would all be interesting and unique with no fetch quest type of missions...they even compared it to The Witcher...

game producer Fabrice Condominas said:

"We are approaching the completionist aspect very differently, because we’ve done and learned a lot from Inquisition. But we’ve also observed what other games have been doing, like The Witcher. And it was very important for us that the quantity of scope doesn’t downgrade the quality of whatever you are doing there"

There is a video on Reddit right now showing snippits of their expo presentations (including that quote) and comparing it to what we got. It also has some pretty big spoilers in it, so I will not post it (ruined some things for me). It reminds me of all the No Man Sky stuff the erupted after its release. That said, if you're going to specifically point it out in your marketing, then you better darn well deliver on it. The internet is not known for being understanding.

I know it's trendy to hate every game that comes out nowadays and God knows I want to be like all the cool kids but I'm having trouble finding a lot to bitch about here.

Quite true, and I try not to be that way. I'm hoping the loyalty missions and end of the game will improve impressions for me, but for now I get where a lot of people are coming from with this release. It needed more time.
 
I'm just a few hours in so maybe I haven't got to the sucky parts yet but I gotta say I think this game is pretty damn good so far. Yes the facial animation is just awful but the story so far is good, the characters are pretty good, the atmosphere is good and the combat is really fun (for an RPG). Don't get me wrong, the characters and story aren't as good as the original trilogy but I don't think it's fair to use that as the benchmark. ME 1-3 are among the best games in history and would be pretty tough for anybody to equal. But ME:A judged by itself is very good so far.

I know it's trendy to hate every game that comes out nowadays and God knows I want to be like all the cool kids but I'm having trouble finding a lot to bitch about here.

There's nothing "trendy" or trying to be cool about criticizing shoddy work, so come down off the high horse. Gamers are more than generous with their praise of good games, just look at the reception Zelda and Horizon Zero Dawn have gotten. They're fantastic games and they are celebrated as such. You can't watch this video and tell me this isn't some bush league garbage (warning: spoilers):



People are hating on the game because it deserves it. Releasing a game in that state is completely unacceptable, and we shouldn't have to put up with it. This looks like some alpha release shit, not a polished AAA game. Fact is, it is a ME game, so it's going to be judged as such. There is an expectation that goes along with the name, and it falls far short of said expectations. The original ME had its share of problems, but at least it had a great storyline and they built a complex and intriguing universe with characters and events that were compelling. ME:A doesn't even have that going for it. The story is generic and nonsensical, the characters are unlikable, and the animations are a massive step backwards from a game that came out a decade ago. All it has going for it are some pretty graphics and a decent combat system, but that isn't why I play an RPG.
 
Eh, as someone who is more then half way through i'd say it's pretty polished.

The bigger issue is that it really just isn't all that fun.
 
There's nothing "trendy" or trying to be cool about criticizing shoddy work, so come down off the high horse. Gamers are more than generous with their praise of good games, just look at the reception Zelda and Horizon Zero Dawn have gotten. They're fantastic games and they are celebrated as such. You can't watch this video and tell me this isn't some bush league garbage (warning: spoilers):



People are hating on the game because it deserves it. Releasing a game in that state is completely unacceptable, and we shouldn't have to put up with it. This looks like some alpha release shit, not a polished AAA game. Fact is, it is a ME game, so it's going to be judged as such. There is an expectation that goes along with the name, and it falls far short of said expectations. The original ME had its share of problems, but at least it had a great storyline and they built a complex and intriguing universe with characters and events that were compelling. ME:A doesn't even have that going for it. The story is generic and nonsensical, the characters are unlikable, and the animations are a massive step backwards from a game that came out a decade ago. All it has going for it are some pretty graphics and a decent combat system, but that isn't why I play an RPG.



I have both Horizon Zero Dawn and Mass Effect Andromeda.
While Horizon is an ok game, MEA dragged me into it much faster.
Also, I have owned Horizon for over a week now, but I have not played it much. I'm level 14 or so. Now I'm putting it on break to play Mass Effect. In fact, Horizon doesn't make much sense. Sticks and stones versus metal machines? How can wooden arrows and a spear do so much damage to metal?
Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but mine is that Mass Effect starts much better than Horizon, and so far a lot more fun for me.
 
There's nothing "trendy" or trying to be cool about criticizing shoddy work, so come down off the high horse. Gamers are more than generous with their praise of good games, just look at the reception Zelda and Horizon Zero Dawn have gotten. They're fantastic games and they are celebrated as such. You can't watch this video and tell me this isn't some bush league garbage (warning: spoilers):
Everyone is jumping on the hate train. Youtubers launched an all out assault on ME:A why? Because it sells. People like to see EA bashing. And they like to see big companies "fail". And it sells to the people on the outside. Who have't even seen the game. And they judge the game on nothing else but the extremely sensationalist opinions from these "vloggers".

But did the game really fail? Not by a longshot. I expected a complete shitshow going in based on all the inital hate from previews, and was surprised that it's actually not that bad. Not bad at all. Some animations are shoddy, but that's not nearly representative of the overall quality of animations. And coming right from playing ME3, that had some shoddy facial animations at places as well. This might have a bit more say 10% compared to 5%, which is twice but still not an issue that would ruin the entire game. As I go deeper into it, the glaring animation issues get more infrequent.

I haven't watched the video as I'm at work, but I can tell you as someone who played the game 14 hours so far that anyone telling it's all bad and painting an entirely negative image is at best highly biased, and at the worst outright lying.

People are hating on the game because it deserves it. Releasing a game in that state is completely unacceptable, and we shouldn't have to put up with it. This looks like some alpha release shit, not a polished AAA game.
It has a few bugs true. It shouldn't be acceptable, but comparatively to other AAA releases recently nothing out of the ordinary. You haven't seen alpha if you think this is that. The game actually feels extremely polished in most regards. You wanna see alpha? Check out star citicrap. Actually that's pre-alpha, but they insist calling it an alpha.

Fact is, it is a ME game, so it's going to be judged as such. There is an expectation that goes along with the name, and it falls far short of said expectations. The original ME had its share of problems, but at least it had a great storyline and they built a complex and intriguing universe with characters and events that were compelling. ME:A doesn't even have that going for it. The story is generic and nonsensical, the characters are unlikable, and the animations are a massive step backwards from a game that came out a decade ago. All it has going for it are some pretty graphics and a decent combat system, but that isn't why I play an RPG.
The game actually has a complex and intriguing universe with compelling events. The characters are a bit lackluster so far, maybe that will change later, maybe not. The game has dozens of things going for it, and two or maybe three things going against it. But the mob mentality has people fixated on the negatives and refuse to even acknowledge the rest.
 
Fact is, it is a ME game, so it's going to be judged as such. There is an expectation that goes along with the name, and it falls far short of said expectations. The original ME had its share of problems, but at least it had a great storyline and they built a complex and intriguing universe with characters and events that were compelling. ME:A doesn't even have that going for it. The story is generic and nonsensical, the characters are unlikable, and the animations are a massive step backwards from a game that came out a decade ago. All it has going for it are some pretty graphics and a decent combat system, but that isn't why I play an RPG.

Many of the criticisms of Mass Effect Andromeda are valid but a lot of what's in your post I simply don't agree with. Mass Effect 1, 2, and 3 all suffered from enormous quality problems. Bad textures, bad animations and animation errors. On top of that they each carried the problems that come with porting games to the PC from the XBOX. Mass Effect 1's story isn't even remotely original. What was original is its presentation. The universe's details and characters are what made it compelling. It's actually the thing that's kept the entire series going. I'm fine measuring Andromeda by the same yard stick as the rest of the series. The problem I have is that people aren't looking at those earlier games objectively and seeing the issues common to all Mass Effect games. At least this game doesn't have bad textures, constant clipping problems and so far I've not seen it crash in a specific spot the way the last two did.

As for the story being generic, this is something else I want to address because it isn't true. I think a lot of people are regurgitating this from the various Youtube videos or they raced through the game's main story and didn't do the entire game. I'm not finished with the game by a long shot and I'm 60 hours in. I'm not even that diligent a miner or crafter. The more I go through the story's various side quests and related missions the more threads I find. You pull on those threads and discover there is a lot going on with the story that people simply aren't seeing. Some of it are call backs to the other games and some of it are threads that spawned from earlier in the series. Basically there is fallout from some major quest lines in the earlier games. I won't give anything away and I don't know where everything is headed yet either so some commentary on the matter would be premature. I've found plenty of interesting quests outside the major story arc with a lot of meat in them. At least, so far. The story is better thus far than ME2's or ME3's. There it is and I said it. Is it better than ME1's? No. I don't know that any game ever could match that because it was our introduction to the amazingly detailed universe BioWare created. A universe with so much detail you can easily imagine living in it.

Yes the game has cringe worthy dialog here and there. Yes, there are a few weak points in the story. However, that story is massive in scope and has a lot more meat in it than you might realize at first. I don't know where the story ultimately goes as I've not reached it yet. I haven't watched anything on Youtube about it either. What I do know, is that this game has a more complex story than the earlier games do. It continues those games in a more meaningful way than the simple mulligan to keep making ME games I thought this would be. As for the dialogue, what I said about some of it being cringe worthy is true. There is a good side of the dialog that no one in any of the reviews or this thread has touched on so I'll do it.

A lot of the bad dialog is at the beginning of the game. Why it would be, I don't know. Especially since some of the worst aspects of the game were in the EA Early Access period. They demoed the worst part of the game so far in my opinion. A lot of the dialog is actually far more natural sounding and entertaining than it was in the previous games by a long shot. Want to tell the bad guy you are going to fuck him up instead of being polite and talkative? Well you can here. I think the issue comes down to this: It's a large game with more dialog than most franchises have in their entirety. When you have a lot of writers, or you have a few writers writing a lot of stuff it can't all be good. At least, not in the eyes of everyone who might play the game. The thing is, people do say stupid and cringe worthy shit in real life. I simply chalk up a lot of bad lines to that. So this is one point where I think people have blown things out of proportion.

You touched on what people expect from a Mass Effect game and I think you've got it wrong. Perception is reality and I think people are divorced from reality in regard to how these games are perceived. They don't seem to realize what BioWare excels at and what they don't. The real issue is that BioWare is terrible at animation, texture work, and programing. BioWare is known for good stories but they aren't even good at that when you really dig deep. They have a few gems which set the tone for how they are perceived. Strangely, their successes stand taller than their more numerous failures. What BioWare is actually good at is making compelling characters. BioWare is good at creating a setting and presenting that setting in a way that's almost palpable. Dragon Age 2? Shit story. Mass Effect 2 (main story isn't great, subplots, character arcs are) and ME3's story is a big, sloppy, half liquid turd. If anything I think Mass Effect 1's story, setting, and characters were so compelling that we've tolerated some of the bullshit in later installments because they connect us with that first game and our experience with it. ME2's fun and all, but it's the equivalent of a Michael Bay movie in space with the characters and your team's stories far eclipsing the main one. It's actually part Michael Bay move and part Ocean's Eleven in space without the bank robbery. Instead you have a giant fucking terminator that has a pasty, human SPAM like substance inside it. ME3 was Independence Day in space with some fatalistic aristic BS ending ducked tape to the end of it.

Andromeda, for all it's faults is better than that.

Everyone is jumping on the hate train. Youtubers launched an all out assault on ME:A why? Because it sells. People like to see EA bashing. And they like to see big companies "fail". And it sells to the people on the outside. Who have't even seen the game. And they judge the game on nothing else but the extremely sensationalist opinions from these "vloggers".

Well said. They got the hate train moving based on a couple of issues with the quality. Those issues are valid, but the game is better than people want to give it credit for. People actually watching these videos think they know something because they parrot the opinions of the Youtube crowd who are themselves, "bush league" reviewers. The professional reviews seem to echo what most of us playing the game are saying. 7/10. It's pretty good. Sure there are animation errors and weak points in the story. If you ask me the story is better than ME2 and ME3's. Without the animation issues I'd bump it up to 8/10 or possibly 9/10. I think the bigger problem and the reason why people are hard on the game is that it doesn't have Shepard and company in it. It's like Halo without Master Chief. It's like Metal Gear without Solid Snake or remakes of Arnold Schwarzenegger films. It just isn't the same.

But did the game really fail? Not by a longshot. I expected a complete shitshow going in based on all the inital hate from previews, and was surprised that it's actually not that bad. Not bad at all. Some animations are shoddy, but that's not nearly representative of the overall quality of animations. And coming right from playing ME3, that had some shoddy facial animations at places as well. This might have a bit more say 10% compared to 5%, which is twice but still not an issue that would ruin the entire game. As I go deeper into it, the glaring animation issues get more infrequent.

I couldn't agree more. A lot of the really bad animation errors and problems seem to be at the earlier part of the game. That's actually somewhat baffling and I have to wonder if that's because I experienced a lot of the early game in the trial version which I'm convinced isn't the same build as the retail game. That's not to say I didn't see bad animations early in the game or technical issues with it, but nothing as bad as what most of the Youtube crowd seemed to have experienced.

I haven't watched the video as I'm at work, but I can tell you as someone who played the game 14 hours so far that anyone telling it's all bad and painting an entirely negative image is at best highly biased, and at the worst outright lying.

Mass Effect is a strange beast when it comes to perception. This game was almost doomed to fail in terms of public perception before it ever got off the ground. The issues are both a result of the creative direction or change of direction ME3 suffered from at the end of the original trilogy. The business decisions after that have locked EA/BioWare into a certain course of action for the time being. When ME3's ending dropped, a lot of fans felt burned by the series and cheated by it. Players felt lied to as a result of that ending. It wasn't what we thought we'd get, and it wasn't an ending that made any sense to anyone. Not to mention there was a substantial investment in time and money spent on multiple game. This creates two issues for BioWare and it's EA overlords. 1.) Customers are dissatisfied with the product. 2.) The ending creates issues with continuing the series.

Customer's were upset. This is a revenue impacting problem. Make no mistake about it, those problems come down to making money and any reaction the company has to those issues are about business. Mass Effect is a huge cash cow for EA and they wanted to make more games. This is stuff I've talked about many, many times. The follow up "ending" in the "Extended Cut" DLC was only issued in the name of providing some customer satisfaction. It was damage control to help save the brand and to put the game into a state where people would want to spend money on DLC content. Basically, EA didn't want the cow to die because they want to keep making money off its milk. It's not unreasonable when you think about it. The problem is that some of the creative decisions weren't undone. BioWare and EA were in a bind. If they changed the ending too much, people would get mad. If they didn't change them people would remain mad. They split the difference and that's why the solution was a half measure at best. ME3, despite all its controversy was a successful game and most people agree that it was overall a good game despite the issues. It's like getting to have the craziest and kinkiest sex with the hottest woman in the world anytime you want if your willing to get punched in the stomach after its over.

Again, BioWare had to push on and make another game to continue milking the cow. So then it comes down to how that's achieved. BioWare surveyed the forums to get some customer feedback which is something they have been known to do. For all their faults BioWare really does try and take customer feed back and do something with it. They do have some issues with listening to the wrong people at times but they try more than most companies do. In any case the results of the forum poll were clear. Fans wanted a sequel, not a prequel. A prequel would have been an easy out to milk the series for cash. Honestly, I think a lot of prequel stuff is all a cash grab because some franchise painted itself into a creative corner with an end that didn't allow for a continuation of the sory in the right way. So that option was effectively off the table.

BioWare then had two choices to move forward with the series.

1.) Continue from ME3's timeline and in that universe. I wont' go ever all the problems with this, but it almost certainly required choosing a canon ending and moving forward from it. While I think Control and Destroy endings were definitely reconcilable, it would have come across as another choice that ultimately didn't make any difference. The next problem with this is that many or most of the main characters that we knew and loved were either dead or potentially dead. This creates problems due to the amount of branching in the story. BioWare probably didn't want to tackle that because they already saw how much trouble they created for themselves with ME2's end. The main story had a pretty set ending that wasn't hard to reconcile. However, all of your squad mates could potentially die.

So BioWare had to not only pick and ending for us, but there wouldn't be much benefit to doing so as they'd have to drop most of the characters to back out of the story branching problems they created. Choosing an ending is a slap in the face to customers who were always given the impression that their endings were canon. Synthesis was totally incompatible with moving on since it was just bad, terrible nonsense. Still some people liked it and forcing an ending might have created disatisfaction with some customers. BioWare has always touted player choice and going against that was a bad PR move at the least. I think people would have forgiven that if and only if they managed to continue the story, universe and characters as we knew it in some way. At the end of the day doing so was such a clusterfuck that it needed a do over. Mass Effect Andromeda is that do over.

2.) the game in a time and place where the events of ME3 wouldn't make any difference. Another galaxy gets that done. It also returns the game to its roots of exploration and gives it the frontier feel many of the worlds in that game had to them. ME2 and ME3 were far more settled and civilized feeling than the earlier game. Emphasis on exploration was taken out and sort of added back in via DLC. It was the easiest and perhaps the smartest business decision to make the move to another galaxy. The problme is that they are starting over and following in the foot steps of a beloved (even if controversial or polarizing) series. That's never easy. People are attached to the original series. Its a bit like having a pet for a long time that dies on you and getting a new one. The new pet isn't the same as the old one. While you may grow to love the new pet it still isn't the same. The original trilogy is basically the first car you ever loved or something like that. There may be many more afterwards but none you'll feel exactly the same about.

Then there is how EA handled the game. They embargoed the reviews until very late and made people pay to get it on EA/Access. This already made people judge it based on what that usually means for games. That mess, combined with some quality issues started the hate train of shitty Youtube bitches throwing their two cents in rolling. It hasn't stopped since.

It has a few bugs true. It shouldn't be acceptable, but comparatively to other AAA releases recently nothing out of the ordinary. You haven't seen alpha if you think this is that. The game actually feels extremely polished in most regards. You wanna see alpha? Check out star citicrap. Actually that's pre-alpha, but they insist calling it an alpha.

I've been the most vocal about saying the issues are par for the course. I don't think they are acceptable, but it is par for the course. We've allowed game developers to get away with this shit for far too long.

The game actually has a complex and intriguing universe with compelling events. The characters are a bit lackluster so far, maybe that will change later, maybe not. The game has dozens of things going for it, and two or maybe three things going against it. But the mob mentality has people fixated on the negatives and refuse to even acknowledge the rest.

I agree completely. I will say that the characters do get better over time. Garrus in ME1 was a block of wood until you get into the game and talk to him over time. Its not even really until you get into his loyalty mission that there is much of a character to connect with. This one is the same way. It's funny because I didn't much care for most of the ME1 characters at first either. It wasn't until I had gotten deeper into the game that I started to like them. I didn't like Kaiden all that much. I always felt like he wanted to do butt stuff with BroShep. Still, when I couldn't save both he and Ashley at the same time I did feel a sense of loss. It was like, I didn't like Kaiden but he's one of the crew. I felt like Saren had to answer for that. It's funny how the characters grow on you without you necessarily realizing it.

Again, characters are what BioWare does best. All their games do it. Dragon Age, Mass Effet, and SWTOR all have characters you either love or hate. Each character does what it was designed to do. Get farther into the game and I think you'll agree that BioWare still "has it" when it comes to characters. They do have one or two that aren't so great. Jacob is a prime example of that. This game may do the same thing but ultimately I'm starting to like the crew. Their ongoing Nomad conversations are fucking hilarious at times.

As for the other positive aspects of the game, they are numerous as well. In most all areas its improved over the rest of the series. Overall I'd say the quality of the game is higher despite the animation issues.

It only gets better I think.

Indeed it does.
 
If you ask me the story is better than ME2 and ME3's...

I haven't started the game yet but I find it hard to believe that this new enemy (Kett) can even come close to the amazing Reapers...the Kett seem like generic baddies...the Reapers weren't your typical video game/movie villain, they were very smartly written and their plan was brilliant- one of the best villains in gaming history...the Reapers are what made the game so great for me...yes Shepard and his squad were interesting but every hero needs an amazing villain and the Reaper threat delivered
 
I expected a complete shitshow going in based on all the inital hate from previews, and was surprised that it's actually not that bad. Not bad at all.

This was actually an advantage of being aware of the predictable internet backlash when I started playing the game. It tempered my expectations from "omg new mass effect!" to "ok, let's see if it's really as bad as these people say", and it isn't. At all. So that just made me appreciate it more. I'm "only" 17 hours in, but I'm loving it. After the surprisingly lame intro section, once the proper game kicks in, it just is Mass Effect, only bigger. It's not quite the equivalent of what The Witcher 3 was compared with its predecessors, but TW3 is my favourite game of all time, so that's a high bar.

Also I played through ME1 and 2 back-to-back immediately before Andromeda released (skipped 3 partly because I last played it late last year, and partly because it's in large part a slightly sucky ME2 expansion), and if you think Andromeda is in any way a step backwards then you clearly haven't played either of them recently. They're truly great games, no doubt (except 3), but even 2 has many technical and quality issues, and not just because of their age. I do miss Shepard though. I liked how that character had an established military career and felt like s/he belonged in charge, whereas Ryder is this wishy washy noob who stole the job as if it unexpectedly came out of the goblet of fire.
 
I haven't started the game yet but I find it hard to believe that this new enemy (Kett) can even come close to the amazing Reapers...the Kett seem like generic baddies...the Reapers weren't your typical video game/movie villain, they were very smartly written and there plan was brilliant- one of the best villains in gaming history

I was definitely not clear about what I meant in that part of my post. The Kett are definitely no substitute for the Reapers or the Collectors. The Reapers were so massively powerful, alien and cool. The Collector's were freakish in their appearance and their motives were hard to understand or relate to. Harbinger trash talking Shepard and having a screwed up fetish for him/her was also part of that. The fact they were agents of the Reapers and formerly Protheans were nice plot developments as well. The Kett are too "human" to evoke the same kind of feelings that you'd get from the earlier antagonists. There are certain things about them I do like. The visual style of their weapons and technology is a nice change from what we've seen before. It's definitely unique and that helps make things new. In fact, being able to talk to them and throw insults and shit at some of the boss types is great. Even so, it just isn't the same.

The Kett are actually cheap copies of the Collector's. They are genetically modified versions of the native Heleus species. The only terrifying thing is that they retain their memories. They are simply stripped of all emotion and brainwashed the old fashioned way into being loyal Kett followers. In a broad sense they are very similar to Collectors. The Kett are certainly more "relatable" in a sense, they aren't as terrifying as the truly alien Reapers or Collectors were.

I'm talking about the strength of the story as a whole. Specifically the threads which lead you to learn why the Andromeda Initiative was launched, the creation of SAM and the Ryder's history. Even diving into some of the side quests can lead to interesting threads. Cerberus connections, connections to earlier Mass Effect characters, etc. There is a lot to like about the game's story. So far there is nothing I don't like aside from the fact that the Kett are "pretty standard bad guy aliens." The more I learn of the story and how it ties into the other three, the more I'm enthralled by it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Q-BZ
like this
I haven't started the game yet but I find it hard to believe that this new enemy (Kett) can even come close to the amazing Reapers...the Kett seem like generic baddies...the Reapers weren't your typical video game/movie villain, they were very smartly written and their plan was brilliant- one of the best villains in gaming history...the Reapers are what made the game so great for me...yes Shepard and his squad were interesting but every hero needs an amazing villain and the Reaper threat delivered

The problem with the reapers is they started off as this awesome, enigmatic foe in ME1, sort of lost their way in ME2 (which they hardly even appeared in) with the terminator reaper, then by ME3 Bioware had written themselves into a corner where they had become utterly overwhelming and unassailable to the point that they required the pathetic deus ex machina to beat. Which isn't to say the Kett are in their league, but, well, the reapers had their own issues.
 
This was actually an advantage of being aware of the predictable internet backlash when I started playing the game. It tempered my expectations from "omg new mass effect!" to "ok, let's see if it's really as bad as these people say", and it isn't. At all. So that just made me appreciate it more. I'm "only" 17 hours in, but I'm loving it. After the surprisingly lame intro section, once the proper game kicks in, it just is Mass Effect, only bigger. It's not quite the equivalent of what The Witcher 3 was compared with its predecessors, but TW3 is my favourite game of all time, so that's a high bar.

Also I played through ME1 and 2 back-to-back immediately before Andromeda released (skipped 3 partly because I last played it late last year, and partly because it's in large part a slightly sucky ME2 expansion), and if you think Andromeda is in any way a step backwards then you clearly haven't played either of them recently. They're truly great games, no doubt (except 3), but even 2 has many technical and quality issues, and not just because of their age. I do miss Shepard though. I liked how that character had an established military career and felt like s/he belonged in charge, whereas Ryder is this wishy washy noob who stole the job as if it unexpectedly came out of the goblet of fire.
I finished ME2, and was halfway trough ME3 when Andromeda came out. So I can compare them more objectively. And I can tell Me3 is not sucky at all. It's a slightly more polished ME2 in fact, but with a worse story and a terrible ending. But the character moments are best in ME3, and noone can argue that away from that game.

As for Ryder I don't know actions speak louder than words but some of the lines you speak are cringe worthy. Completely unworthy to a person in that position. That everyone should know even if the responsibility just fell on you last minute. But sometimes there are good lines as well, that I can get behind 100%.
With shepard 90% of the lines were like that. But with Ryder I often get the "Not what I'd have said" feeling. But then again sometimes there are lines that are "Not what I thought but that also works"

The problem with the reapers is they started off as this awesome, enigmatic foe in ME1, sort of lost their way in ME2 (which they hardly even appeared in) with the terminator reaper, then by ME3 Bioware had written themselves into a corner where they had become utterly overwhelming and unassailable to the point that they required the pathetic deus ex machina to beat. Which isn't to say the Kett are in their league, but, well, the reapers had their own issues.
Well actually ME2 serves to introduce the leader of the reapers Harbinger. And it does that pretty well. So you can't say they don't even appear in it. Maybe not personally, but you don't speak to sovereign personally in ME1 either.
The death of the cult of the reapers came in ME3 when they scrapped the dark energy motivation for their attacks, and came up with the bullshit they came up with.
 
The problem with the reapers is they started off as this awesome, enigmatic foe in ME1, sort of lost their way in ME2 (which they hardly even appeared in) with the terminator reaper, then in by 3 Bioware had written themselves into a corner where they had become utterly overwhelming and unassailable to the point that they required the pathetic deus ex machina to beat. Which isn't to say the Kett are in their league, but, well, the reapers had their own issues.

The terminator thing could have worked if it was to be the pilot of a Reaper or something to that effect. Indicating that inside all Reapers was a twisted version of the race the Reapers harvested to create it. Again it wasn't my first choice but it could have been better with some minor modification. This is kind of the impression I got when we learned that's how Reapers were basically made. I figured the ships we saw were actually just shells and contained within were life forms of some kind, or at least one life form mimicking the people used to make it. If done correctly it could have had a certain creep factor to it. It never made sense to me that they would harvest genetic material to produce something that looks like the Leviathan race that spawned them.

I definitely agree with the sentiment that the Reapers went from being interesting and terrifying into something that makes no fucking sense. The Reapers were shown as being sentient and super intelligent to being fucking retarded pawns of some stupid starbrat AI that had motives that seemed to be the result of a logic flaw in its software. Their motives exposed in ME2 didn't make a lot of sense either. The idea of "making meat paste" out of sentient species to preserve them is fucking retarded. I love the games but the logic that stemmed out of ME2 and 3 is where the games really started to go off the rails. So far there is no writing in Andromeda that approaches that level of idiocy. It isn't ME1 but it sure as fuck not as bad as ME2 and 3. I will say that I'm not yet done with the story. I'm probably 60% of the way through the main arc. I've got no idea how the story will end so I can't say that my opinions on it will remain the same after all is said and done.
 
I finished ME2, and was halfway trough ME3 when Andromeda came out. So I can compare them more objectively. And I can tell Me3 is not sucky at all. It's a slightly more polished ME2 in fact, but with a worse story and a terrible ending. But the character moments are best in ME3, and noone can argue that away from that game.

Agreed. The character moments in the base game trump anything in ME2. The Citadel DLC adds amazing stuff into the game. The party in that should have been the game's ending if Shepard lived. Placing Shepard's name on the wall in the Normandy with the surving crew looking on should have been the ending if Shepard died.

As for Ryder I don't know actions speak louder than words but some of the lines you speak are cringe worthy. Completely unworthy to a person in that position. That everyone should know even if the responsibility just fell on you last minute. But sometimes there are good lines as well, that I can get behind 100%.
With shepard 90% of the lines were like that. But with Ryder I often get the "Not what I'd have said" feeling. But then again sometimes there are lines that are "Not what I thought but that also works"

Some of what Ryder says is exactly what I would have said. I tend to pick the logical stuff about 60% of the time and use the more emotional responses when I think the situation would call for it. I've seen some pretty good lines. One of the Kett Ascended guys was running his mouth about destiny and blah blah blah.... Ryder said: Yeah, except I'm going to fuck your shit up." That was perfect. The choice of "Come here asshole." let me know that it was going to be the tone I wanted to use. There is some cringe worthy stuff but ny in large I think the dialog is pretty natural. What I've typically chosen is anyway. The system that adjusts the tone of the auto-dialog in certain circumstances has been pretty spot on for me though. The only thing that upsets me is when you don't have the option to punch someone or take a more brash action to stop something you don't like the way you would with Shepard. Shepard was a Spectre and above the law. On the other hand, Ryder isn't, but he's in an alien galaxy on the frontier where he doesn't have any real oversight. When dealing with the exiles and the like, I think the reactions could be and sometimes should be more extreme.

Well actually ME2 serves to introduce the leader of the reapers Harbinger. And it does that pretty well. So you can't say they don't even appear in it. Maybe not personally, but you don't speak to sovereign personally in ME1 either.
The death of the cult of the reapers came in ME3 when they scrapped the dark energy motivation for their attacks, and came up with the bullshit they came up with.

In a way Harbinger was a better character than Sovereign. I just wish we could have boarded him and fucking killed his ass from the inside. That would have been a much better final mission. I felt cheated by not having a final confrontation with the bad guy who talked shit to me for two fucking games. I don't think the crucible nonsense should have been necessary or at least it shouldn't have been space magic. I think if it was in the game at all it should have been used as a transmitter to send a reset signal or a signal to put the Reapers into hibernation or something. At that point you could have gone in conventionally with ships and destroyed them. Alternatively, I think that a united galaxy should have been able to beat the Reapers conventionally with Normandy and Shepard taking on Harbinger.

They didn't need the Deus Ex Machina bullshit. Frankly, the dark energy plot still could have been abandoned (probably shouldn't have been) without making the game's story retarded.
 
Ryder's dialog isnt what bothers me, it's the basic conceit of how s/he gets the job in the first place. It's very Iron Fist. I would rather play as someone who had earned it (which is Cora, basically). I know that wouldn't allow for the tensions between the characters or whatever, and I suppose earning your title is half of the point of the story, but it's still a weak place to start.
 
I give them a pass on the "logic" of the story line. I put it in the same category as Star Wars movies where you just have to set aside the analytical part of your brain and just enjoy the fantasy and the story. I mean a giant Reaper storms into the Citadel and nearly destroys it and by ME2, the council is all like, "nah, never happened". Or Shepard dying in space and floating around out there for a couple years but they find him, bring him back to life, good as new. Or that Garus could hold off battalions of mercenaries single handedly from a perch in a building with a sniper rifle. There are plenty of things in the ME games that you could poke logic holes in but I find that if you don't worry about them and just enjoy the ride, it is one of the best rides in video game history. The story, the atmosphere, the characters, the relationships. I don't know of another game like it that built such an emotional connection with the player. That's what made ME great, not Oscar worthy story writing or acting.

So yeah, there are things wrong with the ME games but there is so vastly much more right about them. ME1-3 are the greatest video games in history in my opinion and I'll be playing them as long as I'm physically able to. I don't care if I totally understand the reasoning behind trying to build a human shaped Reaper, I'll just enjoy the sheer epicness of the suicide mission and the 35+ hours of gaming bliss I enjoyed leading up it.

In a way Harbinger was a better character than Sovereign. I just wish we could have boarded him and fucking killed his ass from the inside. That would have been a much better final mission. I felt cheated by not having a final confrontation with the bad guy who talked shit to me for two fucking games. I don't think the crucible nonsense should have been necessary or at least it shouldn't have been space magic. I think if it was in the game at all it should have been used as a transmitter to send a reset signal or a signal to put the Reapers into hibernation or something. At that point you could have gone in conventionally with ships and destroyed them. Alternatively, I think that a united galaxy should have been able to beat the Reapers conventionally with Normandy and Shepard taking on Harbinger.

They didn't need the Deus Ex Machina bullshit. Frankly, the dark energy plot still could have been abandoned (probably shouldn't have been) without making the game's story retarded.

Agreed. But I think we know that the ending debacle of ME3 was mostly due to EA rushing the finished product forcing Bioware to hack together that shit the best they could. You can tell exactly when EA squeezed their balls about it because you can feel the story get lazy once they get to London and you all of a sudden wonder if you're still playing Mass Effect 3 or somehow activated some $9.99 DLC game.
 
Ryder's dialog isnt what bothers me, it's the basic conceit of how s/he gets the job in the first place. It's very Iron Fist. I would rather play as someone who had earned it (which is Cora, basically). I know that wouldn't allow for the tensions between the characters or whatever, and I suppose earning your title is half of the point of the story, but it's still a weak place to start.

Cora may have put in the work but her personality isn't really suited to doing the job from what I've seen. The thing is, Ryder is a blank slate for us. We don't know either of them that well. Their father could very well have seen something in his kid(s) which made them better suited for it. We also don't know hardly anything about Scott or Sarah's military record. We know the twins aren't war hero's the way Shepard was, but that doesn't mean they don't deserve that N7 on the Pathfinder's armor. (Even if they never completed the training for it.) Their father is also a manipulative and selfish guy. He very well could have trained Cora with the idea she was the best option at the time. He may have seen the way Scott / Sarah take handle the squad during the Habitat 7 mission and made a different choice. It could also be that it was Alec's way to attone for being such a shitty father to his kids over the years.

All said and done its kind of a way to introduce the player into it and feel like they are part of the story and are the untrained one. That's in keeping with the RPG genre.
 
Fact is, it is a ME game, so it's going to be judged as such.

Everyone is jumping on the hate train. Youtubers launched an all out assault on ME:A why? Because it sells.

What the public has to be lucid enough to realize is that both of these statements are true. Each person needs to come to their own conclusions about this game, not adopt someone else's.

--

I have both Horizon Zero Dawn and Mass Effect Andromeda.


While Horizon is an ok game, MEA dragged me into it much faster.
Also, I have owned Horizon for over a week now, but I have not played it much. I'm level 14 or so. Now I'm putting it on break to play Mass Effect. In fact, Horizon doesn't make much sense. Sticks and stones versus metal machines? How can wooden arrows and a spear do so much damage to metal?
Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but mine is that Mass Effect starts much better than Horizon, and so far a lot more fun for me.

I finished HZD, including every side quest, and Platinumed the game. I'm 40+ hours into ME:A, and on my 5th explorable planet. They both have their merits. ME:A is enjoyable in many aspects, but HZD is infinitely more polished, focused, well written, beta tested, modeled, rendered, pieced together, and what we expect from a AAA title. ME:A is not a bad game, fun in many aspects, but it comes from a pedigreed Developer and most agree the release build resembles an Alpha more than a Release Candidate "Gold" build. ME:A obviously has some addictive aspects, and a great deal of potential, but it is potential that should have been realized PRE-RELEASE, not post. The state at which these two games were released is incomparable.
 
Last edited:
I said before the internet hate machine was moving full-speed on this one. Over the last week it's become even more clear, the "funny joke-joke" videos are going instantly viral (CrowbCat, Dunkey) and other videos that take a positive spin on the game are sort of stagnating.

Dunk's video has pulled in twice the amount of upvotes in half the time as TB's video on /r/games. TB's is a thorough, 2 hour analysis with a mostly positive view.
This kind of hivemind, circlejerk, "everything is either the BEST EVER or WORST EVER" mentality has really ruined social media for me. Everybody wants to fit in and ride whatever is "trending" at the time.

It's not even a complaint about people hating on Andromeda, lord knows I have already in this thread, but there's a consistent effort to bury any good press on this game. I just wish people were more perceptive to 'shades of gray' opinions rather than jumping on bandwagons. This game is not No Man's Sky and yet it's receiving the same kind of treatment, because it's all the internet knows how to do.

Oh but wait, did you guys see that stupid character Addison said her face was tired? Literally the worst game ever, here's a meme I made about it...
 
The Kett are actually cheap copies of the Collector's. They are genetically modified versions of the native Heleus species. The only terrifying thing is that they retain their memories. They are simply stripped of all emotion and brainwashed the old fashioned way into being loyal Kett followers. In a broad sense they are very similar to Collectors. The Kett are certainly more "relatable" in a sense, they aren't as terrifying as the truly alien Reapers or Collectors were.

I actually don't mind this. I think they had a good idea in ME2, but didn't wrap it up with a satisfying ending. This feels like the same general idea, but done better.
 
Fuck this shit, I just lost about an hours progress because the game stopped auto saving for some reason. Probably because I left one or two enemies standing and instead went ahead with the mission. Guess the autosave script was still waiting for those two enemies to die before triggering any saves.
 
I haven't had that problem. I also tend to create more manual saves than I need to.
 
Oh but wait, did you guys see that stupid character Addison said her face was tired? Literally the worst game ever, here's a meme I made about it...

I'm just waiting for the mod where I can throat-punch her. I legitimately hate that character, terrible face or no.
 
She's so mean for no reason, hopefully it gets explained later in the game. At the moment it just seems silly.

It's not mean, it's flat-out retarded. She demands so much, and you could so easily fuck her over on a whim, but she acts like she has control... It makes no sense at all. So far at least (~20 hours in, and I admit I move very slow) it's incredibly weak writing. Woman or man, as the main character given the option I would have told this person to fuck off and die in a corner the first major interaction they had witth me. "Dear fucktard, you need me more than anyone. I do what I want and you say "good job." Never pretend you are in charge of me again and I will not ruin your life. Sincerely, -Ryder"
 
TotalBiscuit's impressions on the single player...long video- bottom line is that he likes the game...the animation, lip synching issues are there but if you don't focus on it then there's a good game in there...

 
Enjoying it so far. But yeah the facial animations are a fucking joke. Didnt even realize something could be that bad in 2017. Oh yeah, i can't hate cuz...feminism.
 
Back
Top