Mass Effect: Andromeda

They don't have the guts. And if they did it would be twice as boring as DA:I.
It certainly could work, as the side missions in ME2 were the best thing about the game. If you're saying Bioware in its current state couldn't pull it off... well, perhaps so. Was DA:I that bad?
 
It certainly could work, as the side missions in ME2 were the best thing about the game. If you're saying Bioware in its current state couldn't pull it off... well, perhaps so. Was DA:I that bad?

It wasn't a horrible game, per se, but it got boring and grindy fairly quickly - not even the better and more rich character interactions compared to ME3 could save it. I dropped about 70 hours into the game trying to 100% it and about half way through the story I just got tired of the endless fetch and resource quests.

I haven't touched it in months and have little desire to go back. The remark from the dev team saying they took cues from Elder Scrolls seem to have meant taking all the wrong ones, at least for me. YMMV, though.
 
Last edited:
I hope they will have real in game choices, like in Witcher 3... and it won't be such boring fedex game with mindless subquests and gathering stuff like DA:I was.
 
It certainly could work, as the side missions in ME2 were the best thing about the game. If you're saying Bioware in its current state couldn't pull it off... well, perhaps so. Was DA:I that bad?

DA:I is a good game.

I've told people that there is arguably about 40 hours or so of solid meat there and then at least that much in terms of frustrating puzzles and way too much fetch bloat and nonsense like that. Ridiculous.

I really hope I don't see the likes of that again on any game let alone ME4.


I hope they will have real in game choices, like in Witcher 3... and it won't be such boring fedex game with mindless subquests and gathering stuff like DA:I was.

Good description of the excess.
 
ME1->ME2->ME3 each iteration streamlined the the farm/grind/fetch aspects of a RPG compared to the previous. As long as there isn't regression it seems like it'll be fine.

ME3 really to me was the first in the series where a large part of the game in time spent didn't feel like a chore.
 
ME1->ME2->ME3 each iteration streamlined the the farm/grind/fetch aspects of a RPG compared to the previous. As long as there isn't regression it seems like it'll be fine.

ME3 really to me was the first in the series where a large part of the game in time spent didn't feel like a chore.

Agreed, but the ending felt like waking up with a butt helmet from someone who doesn't know how to wipe properly after an all-night bender. It's shit.
 
ME3 was two-faced. It feels the original team made half of the game (Tuchanka, Rannoch), and a group of people who have never played Mass Effect made the rest (Palaven, Kai Leng, Earth).

I didn't mind the simplified inventory management, but the game sorely needed some puzzles and minigames to break up the non-stop combat.
 
I think there was just poor pacing and planning for a trilogy. Which at the same time is understandable from a project of this type of magnitude, you even see this issue in single games. If you compare the scope of ME3 versus ME1/ME2 it is way too large to fit into one game so it does feel rather compacted especially with the conclusion (basically one massive reveal all to tie loose ends).

What also worked in ME1/ME2s favor is that there was always the next game. Being they decided on capping it at a trilogy is likely what contributed to the cramming in ME3. You suddenly had to at least "visit" these locales and tie up loose ends. If not then you'd have the counter complaints of things being unresolved.
 
ME3 was two-faced. It feels the original team made half of the game (Tuchanka, Rannoch), and a group of people who have never played Mass Effect made the rest (Palaven, Kai Leng, Earth).

I didn't mind the simplified inventory management, but the game sorely needed some puzzles and minigames to break up the non-stop combat.

I think there was just poor pacing and planning for a trilogy. Which at the same time is understandable from a project of this type of magnitude, you even see this issue in single games. If you compare the scope of ME3 versus ME1/ME2 it is way too large to fit into one game so it does feel rather compacted especially with the conclusion (basically one massive reveal all to tie loose ends).

What also worked in ME1/ME2s favor is that there was always the next game. Being they decided on capping it at a trilogy is likely what contributed to the cramming in ME3. You suddenly had to at least "visit" these locales and tie up loose ends. If not then you'd have the counter complaints of things being unresolved.

I can get behind with what you're both saying. I feel that if BioWare was given another 6-9 months the end result would have been much better, and IMO, the series as a whole deserved better.
 
Damn!

Now that's how you do a game trailer!!!

4f361778_960px_shut_up_and_take_my_money_1024x1280_by_amnoartist-d8z92vq.jpg
 
They don't have the guts. And if they did it would be twice as boring as DA:I.



I agree, it's completely stupid. I think there was plenty of room for new threats in the existing framework, like the Leviathans getting a big head and wanting to dominate the lesser races again, or perhaps a new undiscovered aggressor race that evolved independently of mass effect tech set a few years after 3 after much of the rebuilding has been done.

But nope, rather than challenging themselves to fix things BioWare wants to distance itself as far as possible from the ending of 3, taking the easy way out, as I've said many times before.
It won't happen because BioWare would have to choose a canon ending. They hate doing that because it makes player choice seem even less relevant than it already is.

The control and destroy endings would be easy enough to reconcile and not make either canon. The pout like a child and do nothing ending can't work for obvious reasons. The morally offensive conformist gene rape of the Galaxy on the other hand creates too many problems to use either. It's incompatible with the other options.

To me EaOware has little choice but to either force a canon ending or change the setting entirely. They obviously choose the latter.
 
I actually liked each successive game more than the last. They really improved gameplay in each successive game. The first game the actual gameplay was more like a chore than actual fun. The endings, well it was disappointing that there is very little actual difference and they weren't very well fleshed out.

As for what happens in the endings, well it was pretty much what I expected. The Reapers were coming to put an end to all life in the galaxy and there really weren't that many ways it could have gone down.

I'm excited for Andromeda and I'm glad they're not making a direct sequel. It will be interesting to see a different part of the universe and meet new characters. They could easily just set it in the MIlky Way after Mass Effect 3, but with different characters. But a new galaxy lets them have all the freedom they want. But as ever, I'm waiting for the reviews to hit the net.
 
It won't happen because BioWare would have to choose a canon ending. They hate doing that because it makes player choice seem even less relevant than it already is.

The control and destroy endings would be easy enough to reconcile and not make either canon. The pout like a child and do nothing ending can't work for obvious reasons. The morally offensive conformist gene rape of the Galaxy on the other hand creates too many problems to use either. It's incompatible with the other options.

To me EaOware has little choice but to either force a canon ending or change the setting entirely. They obviously choose the latter.

All good points, and ones that completely slipped my mind while I posted what you responded to.

I can imagine the deafening roar of butthurt on the internet if EA decided to make destroy canonical, given how the overwhelming majority of people I see defending or preferring space magic or sacrificial puppeteer endings in ME3 article comments.

Again, it's a shame they don't have the balls, their tears would have been delicious. (or would mine have been delicious for someone else, had they hypothetically chosen different?) Broken Base, indeed.

But as ever, I'm waiting for the reviews to hit the net.

I have my doubts that it will be any good, but I have zero doubts that there will be at least $60 worth of day one DLC!
 
All good points, and ones that completely slipped my mind while I posted what you responded to.

I can imagine the deafening roar of butthurt on the internet if EA decided to make destroy canonical, given how the overwhelming majority of people I see defending or preferring space magic or sacrificial puppeteer endings in ME3 article comments.

Again, it's a shame they don't have the balls, their tears would have been delicious. (or would mine have been delicious for someone else, had they hypothetically chosen different?) Broken Base, indeed.



I have my doubts that it will be any good, but I have zero doubts that there will be at least $60 worth of day one DLC!

Well ultimately when you get down to it, the difference between Control and Destroy endings comes down to what happens to Shepard and how hard it is to rebuild / repair the Mass Relays. The various differences could be handled in dialog pretty easily the way Renegade / Paragon endings have been handled in the past. What happens to Geth or the Quarians and Krogan are actually not as problematic as one would think. You can more or less explain the survival of any one or all of those species in various ways which could come across as credible. Geth are manufactured and are primarily software. Building more with a few survivors makes a lot of sense. Quarians could still be few in number but could have survived. Krogans, same thing. They are especially long lived anyway. Arks and generational ships as plans to ensure the survival of the species can easily be used to cover for rendering the choices at the end of ME3 as meaningless as ever. Which in this case is really not a bad thing. Again dialog can pretty much clear that up with whatever save file you have from ME3 getting imported, or the use of a "Genesis" style DLC / add on.

The "act like a child and do nothing" ending shouldn't really be entertained. It's cool the developers put it in there given all the crying about people hating all three choices being presented. To some extent I understood it but that's basically a troll ending on the devs part. Ignoring it would make sense to me. Synthesis is one ending that creates a ton of problems. First off, anyone who defends that ending is a socialist, communist or a fucking Nazi. They are the type of person who would end up being assimilated by the Borg, turned into a Cyberman or converted into a Dalek willingly. Basically you pull a Davros on the whole galaxy. Its a huge "WTF?" moment and I'm glad the DLC adds the ability to comment on what a stupid choice that is. You fight for three games championing genetic diversity, individuality and personal freedoms only to throw it away in the last 15 minutes when it matters most. Making unilateral decisions that squash freedom and force genetic reformatting on the Galaxy is as appalling as eugenics or genocide. This ending is terrible not only for its content but the fact that it goes against the grain of the game's themes and its central character. While we ultimately have some choices with Shepard, he or she is essentially the same person. Paragon and Renegade Shepard's always have the same basic goals in mind. The differences boil down to methodology and how they achieve their goals. One is altruistic choosing the high road while the other seems to feel the ends justifies the means.

Basically the space magic of turning every living thing into a cybernetic organism complete with glowing Tron lights is fucking retarded. The ending being utter bullshit even in science fiction is the last of its problems when you get down to it. Naturally it poses problems for a number of reasons if the story were to continue using it as a cannon choice. Everyone has to have the glowing circuit paths on them and your carrots get a little harder to eat. Shitting out flash ROMs would probably hurt too.

All joking aside this ending is too radically different in scope and meaning as compared to "destroy" and "control" to be reconciled into a shared continuity where dialog explains away the differences. The fourth ending should immediately be discounted as it prevents moving forward. Mass Effect 2 can technically end with Shepard's death and while that's a valid clear of the game it isn't a save game that can be imported into Mass Effect 3. That fourth ending should be treated the same way. Effectively ME2 has lots of cannon endings and one non-cannon ending. With a lot of time, vague dialog and some dialog or cut scene changes Control and Destroy endings are compatible in a future story the way they have always been. What happens to Shepard can simply be ignored ultimately. Again I think BioWare had the right idea moving into another galaxy being keenly aware of how they fucked up. I don't personally believe that is a bad choice given the circumstances. BioWare doesn't have to violate their anti-cannon ending policy and we can effectively ignore the previous trilogy outside of the occasional homage or nod to the previous installments.

You can easily tell who wrote what parts of ME3. Drew Karpyshyn and company did Rannoch and Tuchunka while Mac Walters and Casey Hudson handled everything from Thesia onward. According to Drew Karpyshyn's blog post which is or isn't legit depending on who you ask tells a tale of peer review and quality control in the writing process that seems evident in some places and absent in others. I've seen Casey Hudson and that beret wearing weirdo being compared to beer snobs who are the type to appreciate a beer most normal people know tastes like carbonated anal leakage. They are the same kind who judge your dislike of ass beer as a problem with you rather than the beverage. Your either not sophisticated enough to appreciate what they like. They key will be introducing new characters and expanding on the mythos and universe while retaining a familiar feel. Based on the trailers, I think this game will have a distinct feel but I can't say for sure if it will be familiar enough. The only hope I have for this game is the fact that BioWare is taking a long time to develop the game. In fairness BioWare has been good about dealing with criticism and taking it to heart. They do listen, even with EA as its overlords they do try. Dragon Age Inquisition and SWTOR (for better or for worse) are examples of the company listening to its customers.

It's clear the endings to ME3 were hipster garbage. They couldn't have made it worse if they had made it about gay cowboys eating pudding. Fortunately Casey Hudson isn't with BioWare anymore and BioWare knows they fucked up with ME3. It got rushed and turned into the worst game in the series with so much potential left on the table. I don't think BioWare or EA wants to go through the cupcake fiasco again. So I have high hopes for Andromeda, but I'm scared that BioWare just can't deliver. The Mass Effect series wasn't perfect, but there was something about its characters and atmosphere that was so good it's almost freaky. I don't know if lightning can strike twice.
 
I don't absolve Drew Karpyshyn completely though. Apparently he is responsible for Kai Leng from the spin-off books he wrote. I'm not a fan of magical space ninjas with plot armor. Kasumi pushed that line, but her mission was so good it didn't matter too much. The Kai Leng missions were the worst in the game.
 
Well ultimately when you get down to it, the difference between Control and Destroy endings comes down to what happens to Shepard and how hard it is to rebuild / repair the Mass Relays. The various differences could be handled in dialog pretty easily the way Renegade / Paragon endings have been handled in the past. What happens to Geth or the Quarians and Krogan are actually not as problematic as one would think. You can more or less explain the survival of any one or all of those species in various ways which could come across as credible. Geth are manufactured and are primarily software. Building more with a few survivors makes a lot of sense. Quarians could still be few in number but could have survived. Krogans, same thing. They are especially long lived anyway. Arks and generational ships as plans to ensure the survival of the species can easily be used to cover for rendering the choices at the end of ME3 as meaningless as ever. Which in this case is really not a bad thing. Again dialog can pretty much clear that up with whatever save file you have from ME3 getting imported, or the use of a "Genesis" style DLC / add on.

The "act like a child and do nothing" ending shouldn't really be entertained. It's cool the developers put it in there given all the crying about people hating all three choices being presented. To some extent I understood it but that's basically a troll ending on the devs part. Ignoring it would make sense to me. Synthesis is one ending that creates a ton of problems. First off, anyone who defends that ending is a socialist, communist or a fucking Nazi. They are the type of person who would end up being assimilated by the Borg, turned into a Cyberman or converted into a Dalek willingly. Basically you pull a Davros on the whole galaxy. Its a huge "WTF?" moment and I'm glad the DLC adds the ability to comment on what a stupid choice that is. You fight for three games championing genetic diversity, individuality and personal freedoms only to throw it away in the last 15 minutes when it matters most. Making unilateral decisions that squash freedom and force genetic reformatting on the Galaxy is as appalling as eugenics or genocide. This ending is terrible not only for its content but the fact that it goes against the grain of the game's themes and its central character. While we ultimately have some choices with Shepard, he or she is essentially the same person. Paragon and Renegade Shepard's always have the same basic goals in mind. The differences boil down to methodology and how they achieve their goals. One is altruistic choosing the high road while the other seems to feel the ends justifies the means.

Basically the space magic of turning every living thing into a cybernetic organism complete with glowing Tron lights is fucking retarded. The ending being utter bullshit even in science fiction is the last of its problems when you get down to it. Naturally it poses problems for a number of reasons if the story were to continue using it as a cannon choice. Everyone has to have the glowing circuit paths on them and your carrots get a little harder to eat. Shitting out flash ROMs would probably hurt too.

All joking aside this ending is too radically different in scope and meaning as compared to "destroy" and "control" to be reconciled into a shared continuity where dialog explains away the differences. The fourth ending should immediately be discounted as it prevents moving forward. Mass Effect 2 can technically end with Shepard's death and while that's a valid clear of the game it isn't a save game that can be imported into Mass Effect 3. That fourth ending should be treated the same way. Effectively ME2 has lots of cannon endings and one non-cannon ending. With a lot of time, vague dialog and some dialog or cut scene changes Control and Destroy endings are compatible in a future story the way they have always been. What happens to Shepard can simply be ignored ultimately. Again I think BioWare had the right idea moving into another galaxy being keenly aware of how they fucked up. I don't personally believe that is a bad choice given the circumstances. BioWare doesn't have to violate their anti-cannon ending policy and we can effectively ignore the previous trilogy outside of the occasional homage or nod to the previous installments.

You can easily tell who wrote what parts of ME3. Drew Karpyshyn and company did Rannoch and Tuchunka while Mac Walters and Casey Hudson handled everything from Thesia onward. According to Drew Karpyshyn's blog post which is or isn't legit depending on who you ask tells a tale of peer review and quality control in the writing process that seems evident in some places and absent in others. I've seen Casey Hudson and that beret wearing weirdo being compared to beer snobs who are the type to appreciate a beer most normal people know tastes like carbonated anal leakage. They are the same kind who judge your dislike of ass beer as a problem with you rather than the beverage. Your either not sophisticated enough to appreciate what they like. They key will be introducing new characters and expanding on the mythos and universe while retaining a familiar feel. Based on the trailers, I think this game will have a distinct feel but I can't say for sure if it will be familiar enough. The only hope I have for this game is the fact that BioWare is taking a long time to develop the game. In fairness BioWare has been good about dealing with criticism and taking it to heart. They do listen, even with EA as its overlords they do try. Dragon Age Inquisition and SWTOR (for better or for worse) are examples of the company listening to its customers.

It's clear the endings to ME3 were hipster garbage. They couldn't have made it worse if they had made it about gay cowboys eating pudding. Fortunately Casey Hudson isn't with BioWare anymore and BioWare knows they fucked up with ME3. It got rushed and turned into the worst game in the series with so much potential left on the table. I don't think BioWare or EA wants to go through the cupcake fiasco again. So I have high hopes for Andromeda, but I'm scared that BioWare just can't deliver. The Mass Effect series wasn't perfect, but there was something about its characters and atmosphere that was so good it's almost freaky. I don't know if lightning can strike twice.

Wow, that's a hell of a post. I agree 99.999% with you. Still, any good player worth their salt will fight to save the Quarians and Krogan - they've both had it hard enough without the player throwing in the coup de grace to their species. Then again, I'm a paragon through and through.

With EA's influence, I highly doubt BioWare will deliver, but will eat my words if I'm proven wrong. As a huge fan of the series, I really hope I am. Knowing EA's Executive Meddling, it will most likely be disappointing at best.

Someone buy our esteemed motherboard editor a six pack of his choice. :D
 
http://drewkarpyshyn.com/c/?p=1022

Speaking of full circle, here’s the second piece of big news: as of this past week, I am back working at BioWare again! For those who don’t know, I spent over a decade with BioWare working on many award winning and fan-beloved games like Mass Effect 1&2, Knights of the Old Republic and the Star Wars: The Old Republic Online MMO. A few years ago I left BioWare to focus on my Chaos Born novels, but now that the trilogy is finished,+I’ve decided to come back into the fold. But for those of you who love my novels, don’t worry – I’ll still be writing more of those, too!

Working at BioWare was a challenging but very rewarding job, and it’s good to be back as part of the team. The thing I missed most about BioWare was the amazing people I got to work with, and luckily for me many of them are still there! I suspect a lot of folks are going to wonder if this means BioWare is about to announce a new project+tied to my return. The short answer: no. I originally came to the Austin studio many years ago to work on SWTOR and – at least for now – that’s+what I’m focusing on again.
 
I don't absolve Drew Karpyshyn completely though. Apparently he is responsible for Kai Leng from the spin-off books he wrote. I'm not a fan of magical space ninjas with plot armor. Kasumi pushed that line, but her mission was so good it didn't matter too much. The Kai Leng missions were the worst in the game.

Kai Leng was never a magical space ninja when Drew Karpyshyn originally created him in the novels. The Kai Leng we see in ME3 and that shit created by Dietz could be an entirely new character.
 
Well that's good news for SWTOR. I was actually hoping he was going to go to work on Mass Effect Andromeda.

Yeah, it's a bit of a shame he went back to working on the Old Republic. ME:A needs good writers on it.
 
Its Mass Effect...just yes. This series has been ridiculously good, even ME3 I thought was good despite the 'crappy' ending.
 
Kai Leng was never a magical space ninja when Drew Karpyshyn originally created him in the novels. The Kai Leng we see in ME3 and that shit created by Dietz could be an entirely new character.

That character was so bad I was talking to someone about ME3 recently and I entirely forgot who he was. Then I couldn't remember his name when the ninja guy was mentioned. I remember laughing at him during my first play through. Such a terrible character.
 
That character was so bad I was talking to someone about ME3 recently and I entirely forgot who he was. Then I couldn't remember his name when the ninja guy was mentioned. I remember laughing at him during my first play through. Such a terrible character.

Indeed. My jaw dropped when this pissant got the jump on Shepard on Thessia. Palm quickly hit face afterward. Thrusting my Omni-blade into his side afterward was sooooo satisfying, especially on my first playthrough. "This is for Thane and Miranda you son of a bitch!" :D
 
EA sucks........ and not for delaying it! They just suck.
 
Here come the "EA SUCKS" posts....

Meh... I don't get why people get so bent over game delays. I would much rather they take all the time they need to ensure the maximum amount of content is there, and that it releases as problem free as possible. I'm well tired of games getting released in a horrible state because publishers put more value in hitting their holiday release than releasing a quality product.
 
Indeed. My jaw dropped when this pissant got the jump on Shepard on Thessia. Palm quickly hit face afterward. Thrusting my Omni-blade into his side afterward was sooooo satisfying, especially on my first playthrough. "This is for Thane and Miranda you son of a bitch!" :D

When I did my play through on insanity, I found the fight with him at the Cerberus base to be quite challenging. After about the 6th time of dying on that fight I nerd raged. I just wanted to beat the shit out of Kai Leng. In the game I ran right up to him and just hit my melee attack repeatedly. The hilarious part about that is it worked! It was very satisfying to stab that fucker after dying so much, and on the hardest difficulty setting.
 
Echoing the thought that as long as the game is good, I don't care when it comes out. Loved all 3 Mass Effect games so far.
 
I'm bummed but not surprised this slips to 2017. I don't want this thing rushed, either.
 
Its Mass Effect...just yes. This series has been ridiculously good, even ME3 I thought was good despite the 'crappy' ending.

Same. I was disappointed with the end of ME3 at first, but mostly just because the original ending was just... abrupt. They didn't elaborate on what happened to any of the characters or the political structure of the galaxy, which seemed like kind of a letdown after all that work. I got over that, though. The DLC ending made right most of what I thought they did wrong.

Whenever I see someone kvetching about the ending, it always makes me wonder how they thought it should have ended. Do they just want the pablum "reapers die, everyone lives, Shepard gets laid" version that clearly doesn't jive with the themes of ME3?

Anyway, the thing that made Mass Effect what it was is not the story per se, but the characters and the setting. I'll be looking forward to a new one, right up to the point they announce that you play as a space pirate and the whole game revolves around pettier struggles than the original series.
 
I just saw Jack Wall's AMA on reddit and he says he isn't composing for this one either.
 
I'll be looking forward to a new one, right up to the point they announce that you play as a space pirate and the whole game revolves around pettier struggles than the original series.

You just described ME2. That game was short on story and mostly revolved around the rather odd characters you picked up and their petty personal struggles. And that is why I am much more excited for the new Deus Ex than this. I feel this will just be another trilogy to milk the ME name.
 
You just described ME2. That game was short on story and mostly revolved around the rather odd characters you picked up and their petty personal struggles. And that is why I am much more excited for the new Deus Ex than this. I feel this will just be another trilogy to milk the ME name.

By your description, I really meant the opposite of ME2 - more like ME1. I hate the idea of having a vast galaxy to explore that just has tons of useless side quests, but no overriding motivation (for me) to do them.

In mass effect, preventing the Reapers from wiping humanity out is a compelling motivation. Accumulating credits just for the hell of it (a la Elite Dangerous, Star Citizen, EVE) is not.
 
By your description, I really meant the opposite of ME2 - more like ME1. I hate the idea of having a vast galaxy to explore that just has tons of useless side quests, but no overriding motivation (for me) to do them.

In mass effect, preventing the Reapers from wiping humanity out is a compelling motivation. Accumulating credits just for the hell of it (a la Elite Dangerous, Star Citizen, EVE) is not.
Well... In Squadron 42 (you should compare Mass Effect to it instead of Star Citizen) Vanduul are basically the Reapers. They are a big threat to the humanity. That's rather good motivation.
 
By your description, I really meant the opposite of ME2 - more like ME1. I hate the idea of having a vast galaxy to explore that just has tons of useless side quests, but no overriding motivation (for me) to do them.

In mass effect, preventing the Reapers from wiping humanity out is a compelling motivation. Accumulating credits just for the hell of it (a la Elite Dangerous, Star Citizen, EVE) is not.

Agreed, and it is why I am growing tired of open world games these days. A lot of formerly smaller games have gone open world but it just results in a lot of repetitive missions. MGSV is a prime example of this. ME1 was open a bit but very focused on the main plot. I liked the planet exploration, but the side quests were weak. The next two ME games simply killed exploration off and you got the occasional box sized linear map to play through as a side quest. The problem with ME2 is the overall story was shallow and severely dumbed down for the masses. 50% of the plot time was doing nonsensical things, like helping Thane's troubled son and whatnot. The actual story missions themselves did not take up much time. Instead of listening to a bunch of whiny cast members who should have been thrown out the airlock the game should have progressed the actual story more. Someone described the SR-2 Normandy as a space borne mental asylum, and I tend to agree. :)

I still enjoyed ME2/3 a lot, but the first game had the best story by far. The gameplay does feel dated and ME3 is the best in that regard.
 
You just described ME2. That game was short on story and mostly revolved around the rather odd characters you picked up and their petty personal struggles. And that is why I am much more excited for the new Deus Ex than this. I feel this will just be another trilogy to milk the ME name.
And still it is the best of the three by far. I've spent hundreds of hours with ME2 alone, with at least a dozen of playtroughs. While ME3 I'm still at two. One of which was pre-dlc, so it's more like one and a half plays. ME3, was more like gears of war in me skin. Mindless cover abusing and waves after waves of enemies.
 
I thoroughly enjoyed the ME series. Hated ME3's ending like a lot of people, but dealt with it. ME1 is still my favorite, with ME2 coming in a close second. I will miss playing as Sheperd, but I'm glad they are starting a new storyline and quietly taking their time.

I think after Witcher 3, any RPG hoping to be successful has to rethink their sidequests. Fetch quests can maybe amount to 10%, everything has to be meaningful in some way. Bioware is capable, but they're going to have to focus and apply themselves like they haven't in a lot of years. I'm hopeful for this game, but I'm cautiously wary as well. DX: Mankind Divided however I am completely pumped for. I may be wrong, but I've got a fair amount of confidence they are going to have an even better game then HR.

Revardless, 2017 should be a good year for gaming.
 
I thoroughly enjoyed the ME series. Hated ME3's ending like a lot of people, but dealt with it. ME1 is still my favorite, with ME2 coming in a close second. I will miss playing as Sheperd, but I'm glad they are starting a new storyline and quietly taking their time.

I think after Witcher 3, any RPG hoping to be successful has to rethink their sidequests. Fetch quests can maybe amount to 10%, everything has to be meaningful in some way. Bioware is capable, but they're going to have to focus and apply themselves like they haven't in a lot of years. I'm hopeful for this game, but I'm cautiously wary as well. DX: Mankind Divided however I am completely pumped for. I may be wrong, but I've got a fair amount of confidence they are going to have an even better game then HR.

Revardless, 2017 should be a good year for gaming.

Witcher 3 really upped the ante with story telling, especially for side quests. They basically separated out the fetch/monster kill quests via Witcher Contracts so the actual secondary quests were usually story driven. I jumped straight from Dragon Age: Inquisition into W3 and it was night and day in that regard, DA:I had way too much collection/fetch quests for my liking and I felt zero desire to explore/complete them after the first half of the game. W3, I'm done all quests and HoS and am still wandering around exploring and finding new stuff.

Mass Effect with W3 level story would be amazing, hope BioWare is up for it.
 
Back
Top