-
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 is the 3rd biggest UK launch of the year
- Thread starter Crossing Eden
- Start date
Yeah, I've only played the access trial, but it seems like a lot of fun albeit taken entirely non-seriously. I enjoy the combat, I'm a sucker for open world games, and a lot of the jank is more hilarious than game-breaking. It's a good lazy summer game, although that's definitely not what EA wanted when funding it for 5 years.
SirPinkyNose
Member
How is this good news? This is terrible news. It's Mass Effect we are talking about.
Interfectum
Member
EA miscalculated this launch. They figured a half-baked ME before fiscal year end would be better short term than a long term quality ME title. The problem is Q1 2017 was absolutely loaded with quality titles which made ME stick out more and become an internet meme. Hardcore gamers have a ton of options right now so ME had to nail it.
no they didn't
That's really the problem here. If they took a few more months and launched this summer, there'd be far fewer bugs and virtually no competition as opposed to the current killed field. It would have been perfect for the game. You've already sunk 5 years of cash into the project, dropping another 3 months would have reaped more rewards.
Yup this, so much quality games like Horizon, Zelda, Yakuza 0, Nier etc... and EA comes with MEA, not even finished... I think the game is better than everyone makes it to be but it's inferior at the OT for sure, Mass Effect series and us fans deserve more than that, EA should know this.
Yeah that's what makes everything worse for MEA
Even as someone who thinks the game's alright, it should have been much better after being in development for five years.
Then add in high quality releases like Yakuza, Horizon, and Nier and MEA's flaws stick out even more.
I legitimately disagree with the game being half-baked. ME:A reminds me of BioWare games pre-EA acquisition, which is to say it has issues. However, around here you'll see people celebrating the franchises inevitable demise, but while common criticisms are pretty much spot on the analysis of the games overall quality is heavily skewed IMO.
gundamkyoukai
Member
No game that has as much bugs as MEA should score near HZD .
Maybe they don't bother you but people expect more from a AAA game that was work on for 5 years .
Then we also have whole bunch of other high rank games to play so MEA already had a up hill battle .
Interfectum
Member
It probably is skewed but, again, it's going up against Zelda, Horizon, etc... games that don't suffer from the issues this ME suffers from. We are getting hammered with high quality AAA titles and this turkey lands in our lap. Of course people are going to rip it apart.
Maybe his face is just tired.
Exploratory
Banned
No offense but this is the most nonsensical post I've read about MEA yet. They clearly had development issues and ran out of time. Now that they have a game to work off and have delivered a product on next generation consoles the next game will be significantly smoother and they can improve on the issues. Basically ME1 -> ME2. AC1 -> AC2.
Now in terms of pure profit would an MMO lite game make more money? Yes it would but you could say that for literally every RPG developer.
And not game that has as thin and mediocre side content as HZD should score as high as it did. Not even mentioning your super safe and mediocre crafting system that had no reason to exist in HZD.
My point was that both games scored "wrong" because some things in them were weighted a lot more than others. Subjective thing and all at the end tho.
Edit: Love it how my original post is getting all this "lolsalt" response
Fantastic is a bit of stretch but it is ME. The writing is unquestionably worse in Andromeda than 1-3.
Maybe we don't put MEA under hot garbage that is ME3. No game deserves that insult.
Exploratory
Banned
And not game that has as thin and mediocre side content as HZD should score as high as it did. Not even mentioning your super safe and mediocre crafting system that had no reason to exist in HZD.
My point was that both games scored "wrong" because some things in them were weighted a lot more than others. Subjective thing and all at the end tho.
Edit: Love it how my original post is getting all this "lolsalt" response
If there's anything I've learned with my time on the internet is that public opinion spreads like wildfire. Once a popular opinion is perpetuated the reality does not matter. A game like MEA with it's easily GIFable bugs never stood a chance. If social media had evolved to this level in 2011 Skyrim would have been obliterated.
I find the game fantastic. I like most of the characters and the gameplay is miles better than then original trilogy.
Or maybe the game is just an unpolished turd that reviewers also called out for its many flaws? Maybe sales are lower because EA didn't have much faith in it with non-existant marketing, a complete lack of gameplay trailers until a couple of months before release, etc.
Um, no?
Social media was around in 2011. Do you not remember how insanely widely used the "arrow to the knee" meme was? The thing was, behind the jank there was a game a lot of people really liked, and admiration for what they were trying to achieve allowed people to write off the mistakes (personally I wasn't a huge fan and think its overrated myself!).
But this is 2017 not 2011. Things that people wrote off in 2011 because of the games scope and size don't fly nowadays when you have games like Horizon, Zelda and the like available. And despite what Tovarisc is saying it seems clear that the majority of people find the writing and side quests in HZD much more enjoyable and interesting than ME:A (I certainly do).
Forget those games, its going up against ME3 and 2 and fails against those interms of core ME concepts and narrative.
Not really, theres a lot of good in games like Skyrim so it can be overlooked. ME:A delivered an experience that is worse (when technically BioWare have no reason for it to be) than the older games. They failed at core elements that made ME so significant to so many fans (universe and story).
DR2K
Banned
EA spent 40 million on game development and has nothing to show for it. I imagine the marketing budget will have a huge sticker price with nothing to show for it as well.
AnthonypUK
Member
Here's your problem, its not 2011 anymore.
If Skyrim got released today it probably would be ripped, and i expect the next Elders Scrolls to also be ripped since Bethesda have shown no interest in making those types of improvements to their games.
Primethius
Banned
And not game that has as thin and mediocre side content as HZD should score as high as it did. Not even mentioning your super safe and mediocre crafting system that had no reason to exist in HZD.
My point was that both games scored "wrong" because some things in them were weighted a lot more than others. Subjective thing and all at the end tho.
Edit: Love it how my original post is getting all this "lolsalt" response
That's cause it is super salty.
"Boo hoo reviewers don't agree with my opinion on a game."
Looks like consumers and sales don't agree either. And soon to be long term legs either.
And not game that has as thin and mediocre side content as HZD should score as high as it did. Not even mentioning your super safe and mediocre crafting system that had no reason to exist in HZD.
My point was that both games scored "wrong" because some things in them were weighted a lot more than others. Subjective thing and all at the end tho.
Edit: Love it how my original post is getting all this "lolsalt" response
An overall great game with average side content isn't half as bad as buggy/glitchy and overall mess of a game to core
Andromeda became a laughing stock when this gif happened and continued to be so
APZonerunner
Member
This is almost certainly what their new IP is, but that's also why it's sort of imperative that in spite of the critical reception ME:A does at least okay - the fate of the traditional style Bioware game lays in the hands of this and the next Dragon Age.
Gudji
Member
And not game that has as thin and mediocre side content as HZD should score as high as it did. Not even mentioning your super safe and mediocre crafting system that had no reason to exist in HZD.
My point was that both games scored "wrong" because some things in them were weighted a lot more than others. Subjective thing and all at the end tho.
Edit: Love it how my original post is getting all this "lolsalt" response
You're so salty that you have the need to be negative about HZD in every single thread it's mentioned.
Spyder_Monkey
Banned
It couldn't beat fucking Ghost Recon..
Disagreeing with opinion and having different one is being salty?
Something I never quite understood about Internet. "You are just salty / don't get it / don't understand..." etc. gets thrown around so easily.
How that disarm scene looks now in release? I didn't get it during my playthrough and that gif is from pre-release trailer. Just curious.
But MEA isn't mess of an game at its core? Flawed and has bugs? Oh yeah, but nothing so game breaking and constant that it would push it low 70s in my eyes.
Nah, I praised it in HZD OT because it deserves it.
Primethius
Banned
Yea... no.
This is the definition of salt:
"Helps that reviewers ate Sony exclusive up and praised it more than game deserved, while ripped into MEA a lot more than it deserved."
Exploratory
Banned
Have you played Andromeda? It's so far from a military cover shooter I'm not sure we're talking about the same game.
Ghost Recon is almost a perfect game in terms of what the market eats up these days though. Open world, multiplayer, big license, great graphics, lots of content, etc.
wesleyshark
Banned
I think that's referencing Bioware's upcoming new IP/Destiny competitor.
And not game that has as thin and mediocre side content as HZD should score as high as it did. Not even mentioning your super safe and mediocre crafting system that had no reason to exist in HZD.
My point was that both games scored "wrong" because some things in them were weighted a lot more than others. Subjective thing and all at the end tho.
Edit: Love it how my original post is getting all this "lolsalt" response
"Your opinion is wrong because mine is fact"
People are responding to your comments because they were petty and juvenile. Opinions aren't facts. Nor are other people's opinions wrong because they disagree with your own. Stating your own opinions about an entirely unrelated product solely for the purpose of tearing it down as if that somehow elevates the one we are actually discussing is disgusting.
But hey at least you aren't alone confusing your opinions for facts and sanctimoniously dismissing everyone else's as if they are somehow objective things that can be disproven.
Exploratory
Banned
My point is that a game can be unpolished and buggy and still be good. Which MEA is.
Admittedly I have only played about 10 hours so far but I have yet to meet anyone who is as enjoyable to explore the universe with as Wrex and Garrus. I got the full team achievement so I assume I have a full party.
Exploratory
Banned
The first 10 hours are the worst 10 hours. Keep playing. Also keep in mind Garrus wasn't really Garrus until ME2 when he become Garrus the God. Give it time.
10 hrs into Andromeda from a narrative standpoint isn't the same as a much smaller game in scope like ME1.
DarkLordMalik
Member
Good thing Dragon Age did better and seems to be alive and well. Shame about Mass Effect though.
But Drack alone is better than Wrex and makes Garrus sweat hard. And I loved me some Wrex and Garrus, Grunt too.
Which is kinda odd considering MEA is better game than DAI, at least from quest and world design standpoint.
I have to say, a Destiny like game with ME:A's gameplay makes me very excited. I could lose a year to a game like that.
The Salt Life
Banned
Not only is it fantastic but the world's are beautiful, the only thing that look bad in game are the humans, everyone else looks dope.
Good that you like it, but the general consensus from reviewers is that it's not a good game. Couple this critical reception with the many technical flaws and missing content from the game should be indicative enough of the quality of the game. It's good that you're having fun, but in terms of contemporary standards of what a video game is, ME:A unfortunately fails on many fronts - writing, quest design, narrative, dialogue, customization, looting, bugs, character creation, animation, music, etc. Comparing it to other games, even its own previous trilogy, shows that it is a product not up to par. - I don't even see how that is debatable. Sales will most likely also reflect this and it'll be the ugly stepchild that no one wants to remember some years down the line (unless they fix it, which I very much doubt they will)
Severe development and production problems are evident and I'm surprised they bothered to release it in the state it is in.
I doubt it'll have any legs at all. I'm not sure why the average consumer would bother with an underwhelming, visually poor and buggy game.
I'm actually pretty excited to hear more about this. If main studio Bioware can put together a quality sci-fi/fantasy world and pair it with some Andromeda gameplay, I'm definitely interested. Destiny has good gameplay but trash-tier everything else.
This is something I find interesting, Fallout 4 came out in late 2015 and was generally very well received. This is despite it being a very poor RPG, especially in comparison to 3 and New Vegas, with poor writing, poor story and not bad gameplay but could be better. Overall I found it to be a very mediocre experience.
So I'm wondering, why wasn't Fallout 4 ripped apart or dogged on the way Mass Effect Andromeda is ? ME:A is a far better game than Fallout 4 on combat alone and even some of its writing is better. Does Fallout 4 simply get away with it because it's Fallout ? It was also buggy on release too, we're talking about a game not even a year and a half old yet too. Now I do think that ME:A was released in a worse state in terms of bugs and animations and obviously just pushed out the door, a few of which are very annoying, but in terms of content I think Fallout 4's pretty vapid.
If they go for that Destiny / Division service based model of game design they have to gut it out quite severely so they have some content and story to push as "service" later on. That is based on me not expecting them going out of their way creating huge narrative experience to base game and adding even more to it with DLC.
If MEA has several clear story threads cut for DLC their new IP could take that to another level.