Mass Effect: Andromeda - Part 2 - Out Now!

[SniperHF]

Game ain't even out yet and we're on part 2.



EDIT:

To clarify something:
Before release I was somewhat lenient on discussion of the periphery controversies, but since the game is out soon and people would probably like to talk about it let's keep it on the game itself now.


And don't forget your spoiler tags.
[noparse][spoil]STUFF GOES HERE[/spoil][/noparse]

Click to read more...

 

[NyQuil]

Well, the reviews pretty much guarantee that I'm not going out on the first day to buy it.

I'll give it a couple of months and see how it develops.

 

[Commander Clueless]

Game ain't even out yet and we're on part 2.

So much controversy!

 

[SniperHF]

So much controversy!

To clarify something:
Before release I was somewhat lenient on discussion of the periphery controversies, but since the game is out soon and people would probably like to talk about it let's keep it on the game itself now.


And don't forget your spoiler tags.
[noparse][spoil]STUFF GOES HERE[/spoil][/noparse]

 

[Blitzkrug]

The one thing that confuses me is how the romance options work.

I did a bit of peeking and it appears as if each twin gets like 1 straight romance option and the rest are scattered between gay, both ways, or non-romantic. (Not gonna say who out of spoilers)

Now i don't want to keep that whole SJW argument from the last thread going, but would have not made more sense from a diversity perspective to go anything goes in terms of that? seems kind of restrictive to lock certain characters into certain orientations.

Probably will have to do my first run as a chick

 

[V13]

From what i've read it pretty much sound like Dragon Age : Inquisition but in space.

Not that Inquisition was a bad game but it pretty much suffered the same things that i've been reading in the Mass Effect : Andromeda reviews so far.

Note that i haven't played Andromeda and i'm only going by the reviews and a 1 hour stream i watched the other day. But it all does feel very similar to Inquisition just in another setting (outer space)

 

[Super Cake]

Played a few missions and it is alright so far.

Can't comment on the story so far being that i haven't really played that many missions to the point where i can make a judgment on the story.

 

[Oogie Boogie]

Even with the negativity behind it, I'm still looking forward to it.

 

[Dugray]

Does anyone actually... Talk like that? Subtlety thy name is hammer to the head.

 

[Birko19]

Animation and story writing a side, BioWare should learn that if you come out with a bang, better keep that protagonist to the end, and once done, don't try to create a complete separate story and a different protagonist within the same series. If Dragon Age sequels have not matched the original, nothing is going to top the ME trilogy in this series.

 

[18Hossa]

The one thing that confuses me is how the romance options work.

I did a bit of peeking and it appears as if each twin gets like 1 straight romance option and the rest are scattered between gay, both ways, or non-romantic. (Not gonna say who out of spoilers)

Now i don't want to keep that whole SJW argument from the last thread going, but would have not made more sense from a diversity perspective to go anything goes in terms of that? seems kind of restrictive to lock certain characters into certain orientations.

Probably will have to do my first run as a chick

Theyve talked about it before and their main point is that its not realistic at all to make every character attracted to the player as thats not realistic at all. They wanted to incorporate their orientation into the characters, and not just checkboxes to fill quotas.

Amazon shipped it a day early and I've played about 3 hours so far and am enjoying it. Just about to land on Eos for the first time.

 

[Surrounded By Ahos]

Theyve talked about it before and their main point is that its not realistic at all to make every character attracted to the player as thats not realistic at all. They wanted to incorporate their orientation into the characters, and not just checkboxes to fill quotas.

Amazon shipped it a day early and I've played about 3 hours so far and am enjoying it. Just about to land on Eos for the first time.

No, I loved how in DA2 everybody was Hawkesexual and you could romance any of them. As either gender. Made total sense.

 

[Commander Clueless]

No, I loved how in DA2 everybody was Hawkesexual and you could romance any of them. As either gender. Made total sense.

It's a video game. You center the experience around the player character.


Why not let players play out the game the way they want? Restricting things in the name of "realism" in that regard is unnecessary.


We're not talking about major plot points, we're talking about fluffiest of side fluff.

 

[XX]

Does anyone actually... Talk like that? Subtlety thy name is hammer to the head.

There's a lot of "Tell me about" "What about" from Ryder, it makes a significant portion of the (now one way) conversations feel like they were tacked on and not well crafted like the previous games.

Found this guy in the review thread and like his candor:

 

[Oogie Boogie]

There's a lot of "Tell me about" "What about" from Ryder, it makes a significant portion of the (now one way) conversations feel like they were tacked on and not well crafted like the previous games.

Isn't this the same way Shepard would talk though for a good portion of the dialogue options?

 

[Surrounded By Ahos]

It's a video game. You center the experience around the player character.


Why not let players play out the game the way they want? Restricting things in the name of "realism" in that regard is unnecessary.


We're not talking about major plot points, we're talking about fluffiest of side fluff.

Well like you said it's nothing major, I just find it a bit silly. It's not like it ruined the game for me. The repeated areas and bad combat did that.

It just makes them feel less like characters and more like sex dispensers.

 

[XX]

Isn't this the same way Shepard would talk though for a good portion of the dialogue options?

Shepard would ask the same thing, but it would be worded in a way that made it seem like a back and forth conversation. With Ryder, it feels like you're querying a robot.

 

[Commander Clueless]

Well like you said it's nothing major, I just find it a bit silly. It's not like it ruined the game for me. The repeated areas and bad combat did that.

It just makes them feel less like characters and more like sex dispensers.

I see what you mean, but I feel like the ability to make choices for your character like that needn't be restrictive.

Is every character being romantically available to your character realistic? Not in the slightest, but neither is most of what you're doing in the video game if we're being fair.

You make sacrifices in realism for entertainment and for an interactive experience.


Now DA2 had the problem of some characters being pushy about it (Anders getting mad at you for picking someone else, for example) which I thought was a bit annoying.

 

[Leafs at Knight]

Definitely a bit disappointed by the reviews, was expecting 80-83 which it can still get but it is what it is. Still getting it day 1,and will still probably enjoy it.

Reviews are very polarizing though, most mention it excels in combat and then there's a couple that say it sucks, some like the characters others don't, some like the exploration others don'tz the waiting and story seems to be around average though for everyone.

Ill probably be avoiding this thread because most of the negative stuff that has been said and will be said are by people that won't even be playing the game.

Also releasing this game when it did was probably the worst thing, waiting a few months not only allows you to fix technical stuff and character creator but also not being released in one of the best gaming windows ever.

 

[Dugray]

Definitely a bit disappointed by the reviews, was expecting 80-83 which it can still get but it is what it is. Still getting it day 1,and will still probably enjoy it.

Reviews are very polarizing though, most mention it excels in combat and then there's a couple that say it sucks, some like the characters others don't, some like the exploration others don'tz the waiting and story seems to be around average though for everyone.

Ill probably be avoiding this thread because most of the negative stuff that has been said and will be said are by people that won't even be playing the game.

Also releasing this game when it did was probably the worst thing, waiting a few months not only allows you to fix technical stuff and character creator but also not being released in one of the best gaming windows ever.

I mean, a bad game is a bad game regardless of when it's released, but when you compare it to Breathe of the Wild, Nier, Horizon Zero Dawn and some really good indie games out now it's... Just why bother. At an 80$ price point for Canadians it flat out does not stack up to the competition.

 

[Leafs at Knight]

I mean, a bad game is a bad game regardless of when it's released, but when you compare it to Breathe of the Wild, Nier, Horizon Zero Dawn and some really good indie games out now it's... Just why bother. At an 80$ price point for Canadians it flat out does not stack up to the competition.

Well yea delaying it would give it more time, and 75 MC isn't bad it's actually a good score just not great. It's a bad game if you compared it to Zelda, Horizon, Nier, Nioh etc.

 

[Dugray]

Well yea delaying it would give it more time, and 75 MC isn't bad it's actually a good score just not great. It's a bad game if you compared it to Zelda, Horizon, Nier, Nioh etc.

For a big budget triple A title anything under 80 is considered a failure. Million dollar bonuses are won and lost based on that threshold.

 

[Leafs at Knight]

For a big budget triple A title anything under 80 is considered a failure. Million dollar bonuses are won and lost based on that threshold.

Then they should have 2 scores. One that you get bonuses - good game, one that you don't - bad game.

The game will still probably sell a lot, can't judge a game based on bonuses awarded for meta critic averages. Reviewers are a lot harsher now a days also, for the better.

 

[Bjorn Le]

Then they should have 2 scores. One that you get bonuses - good game, one that you don't - bad game.

The game will still probably sell a lot, can't judge a game based on bonuses awarded for meta critic averages. Reviewers are a lot harsher now a days also, for the better.

Reviews are much worse then they used to be. Their aggregate is important because it's something tangible a publisher can show their shareholders, but reviews themselves are more or less worthless from most outlets. The quality of journalism, especially from the major outlets (IGN, Gamespot, Eurogamer, etc.) is just irreprehensibly bad. Some reviews are harsher, but others throw around high scores for little reason. Games like Call of Duty and Battlefield will consistently get great scores with little innovation, because the fan base who buys them will like it no matter what. On the flip side, reviewers knock down other game for dumb reasons if pre-release hype isn't great. In both cases they're trying to appease a vocal fan base. I never really believed in the whole all reviews are paid, but I do believe that scores do not reflect an unbiased reviewers opinion.

 

[syz]

Reviews and criticism are miles ahead of where they used to be. Major outlets used to let a formula determine their scores--Gamespot's renowned "8.6" model.