• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Mass Effect: Andromeda | Review Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
I see some people defending a 75 but the truth is that is actually pretty awful for a AAA game of this caliber with this kind of pedigree, particularly in a loaded 2017 that has already seen many 85+ games in a similar genre. The game might be alright but alright isn't going to cut it. It's a shame, I had high hopes for this one.

I agree. No one seems to understand this. A 75 is not a bad score in general. A 75 for a AAA game is though.

This game is going to get over looked by zelda and Horizon, both of which scored great. Wouldn't be surprised to see people look at NieR and Persona 5 now instead of Mass Effect.
 

Dany

Banned
Ok so no shade meant by this but why is it important at all what shinobi thinks about reviews or the game, like why is this a topic of discussion? I feel like im missing something here
Because he has been GAF inside man at bioware through the development of mass effect. Feeding us info and hyping it up for years
 
TH2t9H8.png

Jesus christ this guy needs to discover twitlonger.
 

eot

Banned
Pretty pathetic performance for a five year development cycle.

The Dragon Age team managed an 89 Metacritic and 134 Game of the Year awards (101 critic, 33 reader) with a 3.5 year development cycle, cross-gen limitations, and having to build out all the RPG functionality for the engine. They even spent a non-trivial amount of their cycle on a canceled Dragon Age 2 expansion pack, and had a much worse base to work from.

Mass Effect: Andromeda on the other hand follows up three 90+ games with what will be in the bottom 25-30% of $60 games by Metacritic score this year, and assuredly getting zero (or at least very close to zero) Game of the Year awards, despite having 1.5 more years for development and all the groundwork the Dragon Age and original Mass Effect teams laid for them.

The Dragon Age team was experienced, this team wasn't. Of course they weren't going to make a GotY candidate, regardless of how much time they were given.
 

Lothars

Member
Yeah, it's sad that some people seemingy took offense of his positive preview, and he became a target for whatever grievances they had.
to me it feels like the same ones that want to shit on everything mass effect. It's been consistently happening from some people since ME3 came out and he took the blunt of it.
 

Holundrian

Unconfirmed Member
Why does Inquisition always get slammed on GAF...

I really enjoyed that game.. :(

I enjoyed it as well especially the crafting system. But the stuff it usually gets slammed for I don't really disagree with, weird I know. :-x It's like one can like a game and still agree or at least see where criticism comes from.
 

marrec

Banned
Why does Inquisition always get slammed on GAF...

I really enjoyed that game.. :(

Cause it's a game with huge peaks and valleys. The environmental design is breathtaking at times, the writing can be some of Bioware's best since Baldur's Gate, and the design mechanics are intriguing, while at the same time the mission design is all garbage, the main plot is poorly written, and the world gets samey.

A solid game with major flaws that I happened to really enjoy.
 

Betty

Banned
Shinboi is a diamond but he's way too forgiving and optimistic compared to the rest of us, he was also all in for The Order 1886 before it came out and that was a turd too.
 
What I get out of this thread so far is that shinobi is the only player alive that liked the game, all the reviews are dire and that there sure is a lot of people, without having played it themselves, are wallowing like gluttons in their own confirmation bias.

I'm sure the game is problematic but damn, it's always a drama scene with this shit.

It was on EA Early Access, so a lot of people played it themselves.
 
Sorry and this isn't against you, but this is to me such a defeatist and intellectually bankrupt mindset to cultural artifacts. Not saying that arguing about video games over dumb review scores fall into this lap, but the whole lowering our standards approach and shutting off your brain and enjoy the popcorn-movie is just something that irks me a lot. It is eerily comparable to Moff's Law:

It's fine and not the point I was making. The point is don't attack someone for enjoying something of lesser value to you or even media in general. There is a reason movies and games that get less the glowing review scores succeed still at times. Like Resident Evil or Transformers films. Sometimes people just learn to enjoy things, even if the quality is sub par or whatever and for some that's all entertainment is about, having a good time.
 

ironcreed

Banned
Ok so no shade meant by this but why is it important at all what shinobi thinks about reviews or the game, like why is this a topic of discussion? I feel like im missing something here

He was dog-piled for merely liking the game and was called an EA shill and such. He basically said, "fuck this" and bailed and I cant say I blame him.
 

Wulfram

Member
Is the Andromeda developer team completely different from that of the original trilogy?

Not completely different. Its Bioware Montreal rather than Edmonton, but some people switched over to there, Montreal worked on ME3 (mostly the multiplayer) and Edmonton still did some work on MEA.
 
Phew! Those scores.
And, of course, I'm so much of a degenerate Mass Effect fan that this was the first game I broke my No Digital Pre-Orders rule on in years!

Haha. I remember buying into this new generation of consoles and thinking "How awesome is a new Mass Effect going to be!?"
If the reviews are anything to go on... apparently it's just kinda alright-ish?

Well, hopefully my expectations have been put in line. Perhaps I'll be one of the lucky ones who enjoys the game?
 

Sizzel

Member
I read this opinion this morning and it makes sense- modern AAA is really based on a 5 star rating 6-10.

If you think back over it- it rings true and seems to be a more accurate descriptor if you think about last few years ratings vs gameplay experience where mod 80's seem average

So. Mid 70's is no bueno- 2.5 stars ,
 
What did he say? I'm curious.
GlamFM posted it a few posts up but here it is again.
TH2t9H8.jpg


To be fair, I was saying close to the same thing when the first NieR came out and people were mocking the graphics. That was before my time on GAF so I don't know what the opinions were of that game when it came out.
 

Niks

Member
Well call me a sucker but the Mass Effect series has been one of my favorite RPG's for a long time. This is one of those moments when no matter how these reviews pick this game apart I'm buying and playing the shit out of this.

That was probably what EA/Bioware thought when they shipped the game.

Meh, its probably good enough for the fans.
 
That top 20 in that GAF GOTY topic is just painful to read. 2014 was even worse than I remembered. Most of the games there are what I considered average.

Yeah, Inquisition absolutely benefited both critically and commercially from being released in what wound up being the weakest year in big releases in the past decade (particularly if you didn't own a Wii U.) Andromeda, on the other hand, is releasing in the exact opposite situation.
 

RDreamer

Member
Well call me a sucker but the Mass Effect series has been one of my favorite RPG's for a long time. This is one of those moments when no matter how these reviews pick this game apart I'm buying and playing the shit out of this.

I don't think that makes you a sucker at all. Sure there are a lot of good games out there, arguably some better than this that you could be playing, but it's not like there are 10 other space opera RPGs like this. It scratches an itch for you and it's probably the type of game you'll like. Nothing wrong with that.

I think every single person on this forum has liked a game with a 70-80 meta score in their life. I'd say you need to expand your tastes if you really haven't.
 
Nothing wrong with those tweets by Shinobi602. But a 70-78 for ME IS on the low side. But he's clearly enjoying it and I can understand why he says what he says. I would like to ask him some things about the game because I am this close to just spending those 44 bucks and see it for myself.
 
Sorry and this isn't against you, but this is to me such a defeatist and intellectually bankrupt mindset to cultural artifacts. Not saying that arguing about video games over dumb review scores fall under this umbrella, but the whole lowering our standards approach and shutting off your brain and enjoy the popcorn-narrative is just something that irks me a lot. It is almost following Moff's Law:



(this is not to engage the whole poster thing that's going on right now, just to comment on a tendency that I usually see when people discuss the reception of film, games, literature, etc.)

EDIT: And don't get me started on the whole "it's entertainment, not politics". That's the absolute worst excuse I hear in other topics.

Thank you, thank you, thank you. I was about to post a much longer piece on this, but yours was much more succinct.
 

oneils

Member
Ok so no shade meant by this but why is it important at all what shinobi thinks about reviews or the game, like why is this a topic of discussion? I feel like im missing something here

He is a super fan that got an advance copy of the trial, I think, and shared his impressions in a thread. He loved it. Then the animated jank-gate started and other impressions started being passed around. He got some flack for his praise as some felt he might not be unibiased due to his friendliness with the devs.

At worst, he wants to like the game so he likes it. But I don't think he was being disingenuous when sharing his impressions. Some disagree.
 
Other components of games can be criticised objectively too, like UI design for instance, which I've heard criticised in a few Andromeda reviews. The point is that it's not just technical issues that can undergo objective scrutiny. Even gameplay loops and player progression can be objectively unrewarding.

But I do agree, some people can look past these issues too and they'll affect their experiences with the game, much less. However that doesn't change the games quality if it's packed with issues that have potency to cause uses to disengage and lose interest.



But those day-one critical aggregates don't reflect Destiny's quality, or its overall reception. With patches and various expansions Destiny became a much better game than the aggregate your citing reflects. Those that stuck with it saw the base content expanded upon with various events, loot, QoL enhancements and gameplay opportunities, and those that stuck with the expansions were able to enjoy content that was very well received.

In general I think that the traditional review model is a poor fit for persistently adapting online environments. So many of these games are released unfinished, broken or packed with various issues that just make them unenjoyable to play, and they get progressively better with time. Final Fantasy A Realm Reborn is another example of an MMO styled game that made a huge turn around in quality.

Ultimately I don't even know what you're arguing about because I didn't follow the previous conversation, but the example you chose to use here is really poor. because the metacritic doesn't reflect the quality of the experience that people can have now, or had with Destiny as it progressed. This wouldn't be an issue if ME:A were a similar game, with a similar set of concerns, but it's not. There's nothing to suggest that this game would see a persistent evolution akin to the likes of Destiny or other MMOs, and many of the issues that critics cite can't be rectified in this manner, either.

I didn't intend to reference metacritic or any specific review but just the scores in general. I was just saying that I see a lot of games that receive less than stellar scores are often too quickly judged as being a shit game. They are instantly criticized and perceived as being a bad or a dud or bust where instead they are just maybe they are just not as good as their predecessors but still a really good game. Everyone will have their own opinions and again, I think it just comes down to how much are you willing to look past when you play it for yourself and form your own opinion. As I said, factors like your investment and love you have for the IP will play a large role in your own personal judgment.
 

GlamFM

Banned
He can leave his flaming hot takes at home.

He´s entitled to his opinion. You´re horrible.

This is EXACTLY why people think this place has become to hostile to deal with.

He couldn't take the mild criticism from his hilarious thread, might be time for him to hang it up.

I think we should stop with the GAFer gossip tho, inevitably it'll end up in tears.

"mild criticism", yeah right..
 

MCD

Junior Member

Meltdown.

MGSV got shit in the end and the story was lol but you can't top that gameplay. Venom Snake smooth controls alone is worth that 90 on MC.

Andromeda should at least gives me Mass Effect 1 level of presentation. That's 10 years ago and they can't even do that.
 

Composer

Member
People should have listened to me when I said that the first game was the high point of the series.

ME1 is the game the world always deserved. Still have hopes that ME: A will be closer to ME 1 than the rest of the lot.

Don't really pay attention to regular reviews or the gaming communities opinions anymore. I really seem to like things the community dislikes and dislike things the community adores. So, might as well just enjoy what I enjoy.
 

Lime

Member
It's fine and not the point I was making. The point is don't attack someone for enjoying something of lesser value to you or even media in general. There is a reason movies and games that get less the glowing review scores succeed still at times. Like Resident Evil or Transformers films. Sometimes people just learn to enjoy things, even if the quality is sub par or whatever and for some that's all entertainment is about, having a good time.

Totally agreed with you there.

Perhaps the people who have a problem with prominent personalities voicing their taste and opinion on things should simply not listen to such tastes to begin with? No reason to criticize someone who is fundamentally different in standards and tastes than yourself and perhaps next time take hype people's impressions with a grain of salt. And maybe not everyone is simply about 'having a good time', but ask for more and different types of stimuli from their entertainment than purely 'simple enjoyment'.

But then again I irrationally and childishly trashed Arthur Gies' review of Mass Effect 3 five years ago, so I'm the hypocrite when it comes to this. I guess it's about worldviews and living in different realities and feeling frustrated.

EDIT: Anyway, I don't want to participate in this particular topic, I just wanted to amend something. Sorry about it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom