Well for starters it's not a clusterfuck. It's a solid 7.5-8/10 game. Without any bugs it'd be inarguably there. With the bugs it's still a pretty good game.
-
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.
BioWare to announce how they're going to address ME: Andromeda on April 4th
- Thread starter Zombie James
- Start date
- Status
Well for starters it's not a clusterfuck. It's a solid 7.5-8/10 game. Without any bugs it'd be inarguably there. With the bugs it's still a pretty good game.
Inarguably there? You're serious...? Lol
Since you seemed to have skipped this part:
Without any bugs
Yes. Inarguably. Right now it's in the 70s on metacritic. With bug fixes it'd be inarguably a 7.5-8 game. With QoL improvements like fast traveling it'd be a solid 8, I think.
Personally I think right now it's an 8-8.5/10 after 60 hours in. It definitely starts out as a 7/10 because most of the jank is front loaded. And I've personally not seen anything more heinous than any other big RPG as far as bugs go. It's really just some quality of life things I'd like in the game and then it'd be 8.5+ for me, especially if the ending part is as good as others have said.
The critical consensus already puts it in that ballpark, so why not ? :s
His Majesty
Banned
The combat is great. The planets look really good. The squadmates are all interesting. The side-quests have improved. It's mainly the writing and the story that is a major letdown. It's like they had a bunch of cool ideas but they couldn't manage to integrate them properly into one game. Andromeda feels like a bunch of loose sand at times.
I enjoyed my time with it and gave it a 6. If BioWare manages to do the much needed technical and QoL improvements I could see this as a 7/10 game.
The Last Wizard
Member
Bioware seems to run on pdt time so it'll be a few hours of anything.
Without any bugs but with it's current gameplay, storylines, quest structure you think it would inarguably be 7.5-8, yeah I got that the first time that's why I'm dumbfounded. The game has a ton of issues beyond bugs, I think you may be missing the complaints if you think people's only problems are the bugs lol
D
Deleted member 752119
Unconfirmed Member
No, I was implying the opposite.
They should have let the series die, or pawned it off to another developer if Bioware wasn't interested in giving it the attention needed to make a game up to the IPs standards.
Pressuring a dev to make a game they don't have their heart behind is going to lead to a lackluster (at best) game and wasted money either way. Quality would be better if you forced the main team to do it, but they'd still end up with a lesser game than if they let them make the game they wanted to make. Here they did that, but will likely lose money from forcing a B team to make ME:A, and likely killed one of their strong IPs vs. letting it sit longer or finding one of their Dev teams that was passionate about doing it.
It makes perfect sense. A huge, 60+ hour WRPG with a crazy rabid fanbase (and legion of haters) creating a TON of pressure to deliver is a hell of a tall task for any teams first full game even if they have some veterans on the team. The veterans clearly weren't the key writers and animators, which are the key for this IP as at the end of the day the majority of the fanbase was their for the story, characters and character relationships--as the success of the first game with it's clunky-ass gameplay showed.
They said fixing the bugs would bump it from a 7-7.5 game to a 8ish game.
How is that implying that would fix all the issues people have? They suggested it would just bump the average up by 0.5-1 point.
Garrett Hawke
Member
Read the content of the reviews instead of whichever glitch compilation on YouTube. They can definitely address a lot of reviewer complaints, even just outside of the animation.
It is already sitting on a very low 70s MC, with polish it would probably be higher.
I'm not so sure about that. Big single player game aren't as profitable as they used to (though andromeda budget is a bit on the low side in that regards). And the new IP is supposedly a MP RPG-ish game which seems to be THE things that every publisher bets on these days (Destiny/ The Division) so I'm not even sure it was Bioware idea in the first place
Bioware always make huges game, what were they supposed to work on ? And it's not like they send Montreal on a suicide mission. They helped on 3 games made 2 DLC and designed ME3 MP. Plus they sent a bunch ME trilogy veteran to Montreal.
Maybe that wasn't enough or it wasn't done properly. But it's much simpler for us to judge what should or shouldn't have been done when everything is over (that doesn't excuse everything obviously but still)
moondoggerr
Banned
I completely agree. The internet echo chamber has turned some awkwardness and jank into MAJOR ISSUES. Last time I saw that happen was Mass Effect 3.
When I started playing the game, after seeing all the hysteria, I expected a complete unplayable mess. What I found was a solid, entertaining Mass Effect game.
Familienoberhauptvogel
Banned
maybe its the fact that I'm a new comer and never played the old ME games, but I'm enjoying the hell out of this game. The acting is terrible for sure but since when has acting ever been good in games, with the exception of one or two here and there. I've only had one major glitch so overall, I'm pretty happy with a game that many people here are calling a disaster. lol.
Pretty much.
I've played the game myself, even without the numerous bugs it still is a bad game, imo obviously. They would have to completely remake the game for it to be good.
Let me parse this out for you.
The game is already basically a 7.5 by critical consensus. Yes I think that fixing all the bugs would make it inarguably .1 or .2 points higher than it already is. Why is this so hard to understand?
I'm not missing other complaints. That's why I'm still saying it's a 7.5-8/10. That doesn't make it a perfect game. Hell, we have threads around here all the time saying 10/10 games aren't perfect.
I honestly really love the game. Not as much as ME2 or 3, but more than 1. My post in the game thread the other day sums up my own opinion so i don't have to get into it here.
Letting me save would be a good start. Never seen a game with such a crazy aversion to letting me save my fucking progress. Love getting one shotted at the end of a dungeon area on insanity by a new enemy because I was out of cover for literally seconds and now I have to redo the entire fucking place again. Seriously bioware? This isn't fucking dark souls and at least in dark souls I have the option to run past the enemies on my return trip.
SirMossyBloke
Member
Mine is a literal unplayable mess. What now?
"It didn't happen to ME, so it can't be a broken mess!"
Look, I never experienced any bugs or glitches or crashes in Assassin's Creed Unity, but I acknowledge other people did, and on a scale that was concerning and tarnished the series's reputation.
I still have an original Xbox 360. It never gave ME a red ring of death, but I don't act like it wasn't a huge problem for others that should have been addressed earlier instead of denying the problems.
I know one Mass Effect player who has had a crash nearly ever hour. His experience is just as valid as yours. And by that experience, yeah, the game is beyond broken and unplayable at times. And it doesn't take much effort to find other players encountering similar issues.
Mass Effect Andromeda is not just a mediocre game. It's a buggy, glitchy, unfinished, rushed, unpolished mediocre game. That makes a difference.
Garrett Hawke
Member
But I think, having played it, you could see how with the bugs fixed it would probably score higher?
that was a big part of all the reviews.Not talking like going from good -> great, just almost good -> just good.
The Last Wizard
Member
Head to sleep, it ain't coming at 9. I'd say around 12-1.
It's sad how some people just don't seem to care about story, narrative or characters in a mass effect game. Like you'll let all that slide for combat:/
So you are talking about the overall score, not your personal score. That's fine that makes more sense then sorry.
Well yeah, less bugs is inherently better. But it wouldn't fix the underlying issues so I don't think the review impact would be enough to push it from a middling 7 game (even that's too high imo) to a 8But I think, having played it, you could see how with the bugs fixed it would probably score higher?
Not talking like going from good -> great, just almost good -> just good.
bonesmccoy
Banned
I think we've reached peak Gaming Side.
But I think, having played it, you could see how with the bugs fixed it would probably score higher?
Not talking like going from good -> great, just almost good -> just good.
If they do a complete overhaul, just relaunch it with a new title --- Andromeda Reborn.
The game will gets new reviews for sure.
Andromeda: Paragon edition
If that's not hyperbole, please explain the specifics that make it unplayable.
I like it.
Goodnight.
I mean, I don't know if the game ends on a cliffhanger or what, but they did go out of their way to say it wasn't the start of a new trilogy. DLC is coming for sure (tho it might have changed in scope/priorities) but they can definitely cut and run from these characters, and if we see another ME I bet that's what they do.
I don't know how many resources it would've taken to delay the game again, and it's likely they didn't have any confidence in the team to make that decision, but it should be significantly more than whatever this new plan is going to cost them. So yes, it should be all hands on deck, but it's unlikely it will be. They probably still want to make a profit.
Sounds like good fixes.
Samurai G0SU
Member
That's it, why did they announce this in advance...? Lol.
Hope it's better for the fans at least.
Pretty comprehensive for a patch. But is this it in terms of what they planned for today? Thought they would at least discuss possible dlc, future roadmap.
CrichtonKicks
Member
They did give it to another developer. Bioware Montreal. In the process they also staffed Montreal with several key series veterans to hopefully ensure a smooth transition. Obviously things didn't work out as planned. It will hopefully make a fantastic article someday. But at this point we don't have anywhere near enough details to start saying that the game's issues were due to a rookie or inexperienced dev team.
ShiftaDeband
Member
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
That all sounds great, is the patch out ?
Zombie James
Banned
Talk about weak. I guess we'll have to see before/after comparisons on the animation issues, but I was expecting some kind of plan on how they were going to fix the game long-term.
edit: nvm, I read their 2 month plan. That sound better.
edit: nvm, I read their 2 month plan. That sound better.
ShiftaDeband
Member
Fatalmephisto
Member
Got beat to it
fadedbones
Member
So basically, don't buy the game until all these patches they're planning have rolled out? lmao
Basically, these guys paid $60 to beta test this game even from a writing standpoint. This kind of confirms it should have been delayed..
- Status