Mass Effect: Andromeda - Part 2 - Out Now!

[KingBran]

If this game was called something completely different and wasn't associated with ME in any way but had the same exact gameplay / story with different character names it would probably get a much worse reception.

 

[Commander Clueless]

If this game was called something completely different and wasn't associated with ME in any way but had the same exact gameplay / story with different character names it would probably get a much worse reception.

I actually disagree. I think it'd be received more favourably.


Andromeda deviated from the beloved formula, so they pissed off the fanbase (and a pretty large fanbase at that). That gets you a lot of angry reactions.


In a vacuum, Andromeda is an average, paint by numbers RPG that experienced technical difficulties at launch. Sounds pretty much par for the course.

I find a lot of reviews use previous games in the franchise as a benchmark, and this one stacks up poorly to its predecessors.

 

[Whiplash27]

I think the game would have been hyped, people would have bought it based on that hype, and the result would have been the same. Probably less people would have bought it since it wouldn't have been a sequel to one of the most popular gaming franchises of the past generation. Either way, based on what the game promised, it would have gotten lots of hype no matter who put it out.

 

[KingBran]

I actually disagree. I think it'd be received more favourably.


Andromeda deviated from the beloved formula, so they pissed off the fanbase (and a pretty large fanbase at that). That gets you a lot of angry reactions.


In a vacuum, Andromeda is an average, paint by numbers RPG that experienced technical difficulties at launch. Sounds pretty much par for the course.

I find a lot of reviews use previous games in the franchise as a benchmark, and this one stacks up poorly to its predecessors.

Any game that comes out with bugs like that, crashing, boring story, cancelled DLC.

You are right, average paint by numbers "bioware" RPG. Par for the course. If it was a new IP it would have been laughed at and nobody would have bought it. Look at games like No Mans Sky which was kind of buggy but they over-promised a lot and it ended up with horrible reviews and you can find it used in the bargain bin for $5. Andromeda is already in the bargain bin too but got a small bump in score because its got the ME tag.

Its like all those crappy Star Wars games that came out in the late 90's, eary 2000's that were complete garbage but because they were Star Wars and you could play as Anakin or Luke or something there was some nostalgia there for people to at least justify the existence of the game.

 

[Commander Clueless]

Any game that comes out with bugs like that, crashing, boring story, cancelled DLC.

You are right, average paint by numbers "bioware" RPG. Par for the course. If it was a new IP it would have been laughed at and nobody would have bought it. Look at games like No Mans Sky which was kind of buggy but they over-promised a lot and it ended up with horrible reviews and you can find it used in the bargain bin for $5. Andromeda is already in the bargain bin too but got a small bump in score because its got the ME tag.

I don't think it would have had good reviews, but I do think it would have had less backlash. It may have simply faded away into obscurity rather than being torn apart.

It's my observation that the mob that is in the internet is more lenient towards new IPs as they go in with lower expectations and come out with hope for improvements.

No Man's Sky is a bit of a different situation, as that game promised the moon and delivered a space fart. Andromeda promised a new Mass Effect, and delivered a mediocre Mass Effect.

Its like all those crappy Star Wars games that came out in the late 90's, eary 2000's that were complete garbage but because they were Star Wars and you could play as Anakin or Luke or something there was some nostalgia there for people to at least justify the existence of the game.

I see what you're saying here, but Star Wars' appeal goes far, far beyond video games. It's basically a huge cult.

It also didn't stop things like Battlefront getting torn apart, but I'm willing to bet Battlefront would have received less backlash if it was the first of its kind rather than a rebirth of a series.

 

[KingBran]

I don't think it would have had good reviews, but I do think it would have had less backlash. It may have simply faded away into obscurity rather than being torn apart.

It's my observation that the mob that is in the internet is more lenient towards new IPs as they go in with lower expectations and come out with hope for improvements.

No Man's Sky is a bit of a different situation, as that game promised the moon and delivered a space fart. Andromeda promised a new Mass Effect, and delivered a mediocre Mass Effect.

I agree it would have had less backlash. I was talking about the actual scores though. They would have been awful. I don't think "the mob" goes into new IP's with low expectations at all. Perfect example is No Mans Sky which I don't see as a different situation. So different strokes for different folks here I guess but I just think "the mob" is much less forgiving with new IP's mostly because there are so many other similar games out there for pretty much any new game that the new games HAVE to bring their A-game. I understand NMS is seen as a "new" type of game but it's not a new concept at all. The scale of it is what was so fascinating. It was very empty outside of that.

If I didn't know it was a ME game I may never have played it once I heard about it and saw the scores it got. But since it's an ME game its going to have some of that familiarity that will bump its score.

I see what you're saying here, but Star Wars' appeal goes far, far beyond video games. It's basically a huge cult.

It also didn't stop things like Battlefront getting torn apart, but I'm willing to bet Battlefront would have received less backlash if it was the first of its kind rather than a rebirth of a series.

Exactly. That's why COD is finally getting old and Battlefield 1 was so impressive. Now COD is going back to it's roots and people are jacked about it. Lots of SW games get torn apart but my only point was they get a better score because they are SW. If it was 'Spacekid vs Lord Evil Dark Helmet" complete with lazer swords and dogs that walk upright it would be seen as complete trash.

 

[Birko19]

I think the bigger question now is will BioWare be able to bounce back after this? Their Dragon Age series isn't going well either and I would say their new IP looks like another Andromeda (Sort of):



BioWare needs to let go of the whole open world concept, leave that to Bethesda and stick to your story driven roots.

 

[NyQuil]

I remember Skyrim ended up having an impact on DA:Inquisition and they haven't been the same since.

I'm thinking the mixed reviews of DA:2 made them re-think their entire approach.

Which is a shame because there's still a role for theatrical story-driven games.

 

[Commander Clueless]

BioWare needs to let go of the whole open world concept, leave that to Bethesda and stick to your story driven roots.

100% Agreed.

I remember Skyrim ended up having an impact on DA:Inquisition and they haven't been the same since.

I'm thinking the mixed reviews of DA:2 made them re-think their entire approach.

Which is a shame because there's still a role for theatrical story-driven games.

I agree. Part of this might be Old Man Clueless getting all cranky again, but not everything needs to be open world. I love BioWare because I love their story driven games and you don't need to cram a million and one ****** side quests into a game to make it good. There are definitely exceptions, but I feel like the open world craze has overshadowed the market for much better linear games.

Give me the shorter, better experience over the 100 hour grindfest 10 times out of 10.

 

[Birko19]

I agree. Part of this might be Old Man Clueless getting all cranky again, but not everything needs to be open world. I love BioWare because I love their story driven games and you don't need to cram a million and one ****** side quests into a game to make it good. There are definitely exceptions, but I feel like the open world craze has overshadowed the market for much better linear games.

Usually the problem with a company like BioWare trying to add open world stuff means more effort is spent on such, which means other areas will be lacking if they don't spend enough development time.

I get games are getting bigger, but bigger does not equal better if you don't execute properly. The whole reason why open world works for Bethesda games is because the story is not the main highlight, the exploration is. With BW trying to tackle such in their games means they're really doing a half ass job on open world, and that also means half ass on the story too, which means the end product is a forgettable experience.

 

[GlassesJacketShirt]

I remember Skyrim ended up having an impact on DA:Inquisition and they haven't been the same since.

I'm thinking the mixed reviews of DA:2 made them re-think their entire approach.

Which is a shame because there's still a role for theatrical story-driven games.

Didn't Dragon Age 2 contain repetitive environments as a major sticking point? Like, you could go into two different locations with the exact same layout, texture for texture? Thought that was the primary issue with that title.

I did enjoy the story though. Lots of people seemed to prefer Dragon Age Origins' plot, but I thought DA2 had an excellent approach in telling Hawke's story. Went beyond some of your typical high fantasy fair and silently touched some very interesting topics that can be applied to the real world as well.

 

[NyQuil]

Didn't Dragon Age 2 contain repetitive environments as a major sticking point? Like, you could go into two different locations with the exact same layout, texture for texture? Thought that was the primary issue with that title.

Their excuse was the fact that the entire game took place in a single location over many years so they could explain it that way.

However, it was absurdly poorly executed (like when the map shows all of the corridors but some of them are just closed off for some reason for some missions.)

They also ruined gear in DA:2 because you couldn't gear your companions.

I did enjoy the story though. Lots of people seemed to prefer Dragon Age Origins' plot, but I thought DA2 had an excellent approach in telling Hawke's story. Went beyond some of your typical high fantasy fair and silently touched some very interesting topics that can be applied to the real world as well.

It was pretty good. I have a hard time siding with the Templars though - both playthroughs I ended up with the mages.

The companions were actually pretty good - once you got over the fact that none of them were from DA:O. (Although Anders was in Awakening) I used respec mods so that I could choose the companions I wanted to RP with irrespective of their builds.

I think DA:O just had more gravitas to it. The battles seemed more important. There was fewer "here are 5 waves of bad guys coming in and one of them is named Phil and he's the leader".

That's what really annoyed me about DA:I. The number of actually important and interesting antagonists was 2. In DA:O, every hub area had a decent storyline with its own fully scripted antagonists.

 

[Commander Clueless]

Usually the problem with a company like BioWare trying to add open world stuff means more effort is spent on such, which means other areas will be lacking if they don't spend enough development time.

Yep, and it shows.

While I really enjoyed Inquisition, it was the start of a shift in game design mentality that has resulted in worse games (subjective, but recorded reception of these games would agree with me).

 

[Cush]

Believe it's a 10 hour trial

 

[SpookyTsuki]

Believe it's a 10 hour trial

I wonder if it will be super glitchy like the other trial

 

[KingBran]

They really need to remaster KOTOR.

Not a reboot. Just remaster. But do it from the ground up. Maybe even a newer combat system. Change nothing about the story or the maps. Only combat, graphics, audio and cut-scenes get changes.

 

[Throw More Waffles]

I just came back to it and gave it another go.

I think this is the hardest I've ever tried to get into a game. I just loved 2 and 3 so much, I keep thinking I'll eventually get into it.

But I think I just have to accept it... I find it boring. I'm literally bored every second that I'm playing. I think they just made something far too big for its britches. Far too much of my game time is spent running around massive areas without much really going on.

I don't really know what's gone wrong, because Skyrim was massive but easily kept me engaged all the way through. Andromeda, I'm just constantly bored. Always. Bored.

 

[XX]

I don't really know what's gone wrong, because Skyrim was massive but easily kept me engaged all the way through. Andromeda, I'm just constantly bored. Always. Bored.

Skyrim isn't that big map wise, if you compare it to other open world games (Witcher 3 is 9x larger), but it's fairly dense and there's plenty of stuff to do.

They just straight up ran out of development time with this game if you follow the behind the scenes stuff. There were plans for many more planets, even after abandoning procedural generation. The problem is a team under crunch and under funded tried to cram Mass Effect into an Inquisition style game. It just doesn't work on any level except a few moments here and there. Thank goodness the combat is decent.

 

[SpookyTsuki]

I just came back to it and gave it another go.

I think this is the hardest I've ever tried to get into a game. I just loved 2 and 3 so much, I keep thinking I'll eventually get into it.

But I think I just have to accept it... I find it boring. I'm literally bored every second that I'm playing. I think they just made something far too big for its britches. Far too much of my game time is spent running around massive areas without much really going on.

I don't really know what's gone wrong, because Skyrim was massive but easily kept me engaged all the way through. Andromeda, I'm just constantly bored. Always. Bored.

In skyrim there's pretty much a story to every cave you enter into. There's some lone hut near river wood where there's a dark story there or something If you can find the semi hidden cellar.

 

[GlassesJacketShirt]

On a somewhat related note, looks like Casey Hudson is back as Bioware's GM.

I would actually welcome this move greatly if it weren't for EA still calling the shots.

 

[Birko19]

I just came back to it and gave it another go.

I think this is the hardest I've ever tried to get into a game. I just loved 2 and 3 so much, I keep thinking I'll eventually get into it.

But I think I just have to accept it... I find it boring. I'm literally bored every second that I'm playing. I think they just made something far too big for its britches. Far too much of my game time is spent running around massive areas without much really going on.

I don't really know what's gone wrong, because Skyrim was massive but easily kept me engaged all the way through. Andromeda, I'm just constantly bored. Always. Bored.

Because the team that built Skyrim are experts at open world stuff, BioWare's strength is story telling.

Also if you notice the pattern of BioWare successful story plots, less = more. The main reason why I loved the ME trilogy and DA:O was because you felt like your back was against the wall the entire time. Despite all the side quests and inner plots, everything was wrapped up inside a basic plot, which was the land or universe is in trouble and you need to do something to save everyone. The game did a good job of identifying the major threat, and took you on a wonderful journey to prepare and pump you up for the finale. The other BioWare games that were meh, lacked that basic plot and the story was somewhat complicated.

 

[SpookyTsuki]

On a somewhat related note, looks like Casey Hudson is back as Bioware's GM.

I would actually welcome this move greatly if it weren't for EA still calling the shots.

It's still bad news. Hudson is the main reason the ending to 3 made 0 sense and had plot holes everywhere. Him and Walters both. Walters is just terrible though at least Hudson has talent. Maybe Hudson is happy about his life and isn't depressed anymore but I doubt it

 

[awesomo]

this game is 20$ already at bestbuy...quick drop. prolly as low as it goes

 

[GlassesJacketShirt]

It's still bad news. Hudson is the main reason the ending to 3 made 0 sense and had plot holes everywhere. Him and Walters both. Walters is just terrible though at least Hudson has talent. Maybe Hudson is happy about his life and isn't depressed anymore but I doubt it

Good point. Botched Mass Effect 3 ending completely eliminates his resume. KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect trilogy might as well go in the trash.

As far as I'm concerned, the problem begins with EA and trickles down everywhere, which is why I'm not entirely excited from this news. But the guy has done far, far more good than bad in his career as a games director.

 

[SpookyTsuki]

Good point. Botched Mass Effect 3 ending completely eliminates his resume. KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect trilogy might as well go in the trash.

As far as I'm concerned, the problem begins with EA and trickles down everywhere, which is why I'm not entirely excited from this news. But the guy has done far, far more good than bad in his career as a games director.

I'm not sure who ruined the ending more with plot holes. Hudson or Walters (I forgot drew came back so maybe Hudson coming back is actually good)

Apparentaly he said he wants to go back to the roots and doesn't care for the action action which is good cause bioware wasnt and probably will be never good at that