-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Why the bad vibes on Mass Effect Andromeda?
- Thread starter Caipirinha
- Start date
Me too.
letmetrythisname
Member
Because Bioware hasn't made a good game since Mass Effect 2.
Sanctuary
Member
Not really. It just went from The Wrath of Khan to The Empire Strikes Back.
About the only thing the first game did better combat wise was biotics. The whole having to strip layers of "health" away just to get to the real health bar before you could actually start tossing things around again was pretty fucking annoying. Everything else however was massively improved.
And a quantum dive in the overall quality of the writing, and only got worse from then onward.
TC McQueen
Member
No, the proper Trek comparison is probably The Motion Picture, sadly.
Giolon
Member
I actually enjoyed them as I felt like I was actively exploring alien planets. It's not much different than No Man's Sky (complete with empty pointlessness after a while). Seeing all the different skies and alien terrain were a lot of fun for me, as well as being able to go wherever I wanted, not just down a few linear corridors. It was something that should've been refined and iterated upon, not jettisoned altogether in favor of dragging a cursor across a planet from space. Even that was diminished to "just click it once" by ME3.
They could've become Skyrim in space, and yet they went the complete opposite direction.
Hammerhead in ME2 was just a shooting arena. Meh.
BFIB
Member
Missed Effects
I can't even remember the story in ME1, but I can still recall every character and loyalty mission from ME2.
so I'm gonna have to disagree there.
This clearly separates you into a Star Wars (drama and immediate action) camp while the rest of us started out as Trekkies (details, continuity and worldbuilding) in ME1.
Science Fantasy vs Science Fiction
The reason you don't remember the story is because ME2 retconned most of it.
Only several months away from release and we still know very little about the game and what has been shown doesn't look terribly promising. Thus far they have released five trailers that are each roughly a minute and a half long, that doesn't strike me with confidence.
Not to mention Dragon Age: Inquisition was a terrible game for the most part and what what little has been said through vague dialogue it would seem Andromeda is going along a similar path.
Not to mention Dragon Age: Inquisition was a terrible game for the most part and what what little has been said through vague dialogue it would seem Andromeda is going along a similar path.
SmackAttack
Member
Mass Effect 3 was such a big disappointment for me and it wasn't just because of the ending, which I do believe deserved every bit of shit it got. The continued loss of RPG elements, the fact that few choices you made even mattered at all, the loss of atmosphere in locations, etc. I loved the characters in the series but to see where it went after the potential the first game showed where it could have gone is really disappointing.
I'm remaining optimistic on Andromeda so we'll see. I just want to know off the bat if the things I choose will matter or if they have an ending in mind and this is more about the journey in terms of what I do. Don't lie to me again.
I'm remaining optimistic on Andromeda so we'll see. I just want to know off the bat if the things I choose will matter or if they have an ending in mind and this is more about the journey in terms of what I do. Don't lie to me again.
RecRoulette
Member
I think Mordin's story is the only thing in the second two games that stands up to Sovereign's reveal at the end of one.
matrix-cat
Member
ME3's ending is still one of the absolute worst ways I've ever seen a fictional creation go. I don't know if I can think of a ball that has been dropped harder. I used to absolutely adore that series, even had all the dumb novels and comics, but ME3 shook any faith I had in Bioware. I think Andromeda looks pretty good, and I'll still be there day one, but I really can't see myself ever getting invested in the series again as much as I was before.
Back-In-Black
Banned
I'm not sure what you are getting at? A vocal minority disliked Inquisition, that is their opinion, it doesn't change the fact that a majority of people including the press enjoyed it greatly. Those same people now feel that Andromeda, without any real evidence, will be more of the same of what they didn't like Inquisition for. You can dislike Inquisition all you want, that doesn't mean it suddenly is a bad game.
Sanctuary
Member
The story is really easy to remember since there wasn't all that much to it, but it did feel more urgent and I guess "epic" than those that came after. Too bad it only had two interesting villains, and you barely ever interacted with them. The second game was just "You must gather your party before venturing forth", but that doesn't matter since the squad member interactions and missions were so much better.
While it really was much closer to Star Trek than Star Wars, it was actually the first game that made me feel like I was finally playing as a force user. It was a much more gratifying experience than anything from either KOTOR game.
The Illiterati
Member
All of the Mass Effect games are enjoyable and disappointing in their own unique ways. To me, ME:A looks like more of the same, and I don't see what there is to be excited about. I really dislike the aspect that seemingly you're in a whole new galaxy but I doubt the focus will be removed from the same old races. Maybe I'll be proved wrong.
I'll still never understand a lot of GAF's opinion on Mass Effect. ME1 was a janky horrible mess of a slog to get through. I'm glad I did it because it let me play the masterpiece that was ME2. Absolutely fucking loved ME3, too.
I have almost no inclination to ever play ME1 again. It was freakishly terrible to play.
I'm excited as hell for Andromeda.
I have almost no inclination to ever play ME1 again. It was freakishly terrible to play.
I'm excited as hell for Andromeda.
ME1 is basically the original star wars trilogy + a dating sim
ME2 is basically the new star wars trilogy + a dating sim
ME3 is basically a micheal bay movie + a dating sim all with the same bad end.
All I learned from The Mass Effect trilogy is that the entire universe depends on commanders shepards space jesus cock.
TC McQueen
Member
What RPG elements? Because ME3 was the game that had two branches for every skill after you passed a certain point, had weapon customization that affected stats and visuals, and let you customize the armor. If you mean dozens of pointless levels in each skills that controlled incremental upgrades, then that was well worth losing.
The writing and story have very little chance of being anything but sophomoric, imagine ME 3 but take out all the story arcs from the first 2 games, take out all the characters from 1 & 2 and replace them with Kai Leng and the cast of Inquisition, holy fuck thats bad. Unless they utterly nail the action part(not likely) it will be a turd.
Especially since the Montreal studio had the lead on this and probably still does. Once EA bought them, you would hear things like 'I was a huge fan of the first Mass Effect or Mass Effect 2 and wanted to help make Mass Effect 3 great.' A lot of the original talent is gone, replaced by people brought on by EA after the success of ME.
I have it preordered but I am not expecting much. Just a shittier and more generic Mass Effect 1 or 2 clone.
staticneuron
Member
Hit the nail on the head!
I couldn't be bothered to finish DA:I. If ME:A is the same I will def pass.
I think they actually said quite the opposite, but many people--including myself--do not really believe them.
nooo
ThatStupidLion
Member
Never played a mass effect. Want to play one. Andromeda feels like the series is straying further and further from what intrigued me in the first place
Unknown Soldier
Member
But you can play a female Shepard...
Star Wars (science fantasy) ventured into Star Trek (science fiction) territory was when they explained Force as midichlorians, and SW fans did not like it. You can tell ME1 is details-first science fiction because they try to overexplain most things except plot critical stuff like Reapers.
People prefer ME2 because they prefer Star Wars over Star Trek.
ME1 started out as Star Trek. Shepard did not become "Mankind's Hope" until Illusive Man said so at the start of ME2.
whatever, the entire universe revolves around commander Shepards genitals and whatever Harem you've attained from your adventures.
TC McQueen
Member
As a Star Trek fan who prefers ME2 to ME1, I find this hilariously out of touch.
Then again, I'm one of the folks who prefers DS9 over most of the Prime Universe Trek shows, so what do I know?
All the way from bandicoots and apples to young ladies playing guitars over the still warm corpses they created.
This is progress. As painful as it can be.
RoboticWater
Banned
What? The cast of Inquisition is great. Unique, fun, nuanced, and each with enough story to feel relevant.
But that's besides the point. Mass Effect has always had a completely different writing team from Dragon Age and Andromeda specifically had a new head writer. If anything, I'd expect the writing quality to be the biggest unknown variable.
matrix-cat
Member
Decent sidequests, any kind of exploration or missions where you do things other than killing stuff, dialogue choices that don't just loop back around to the same point regardless of what you pick, an ending that takes into account the decisions you've made...
grosvenor_92
Member
It's my most anticipated game of the year but I understand why some people aren't so excited about it.
Yeah, the writing I actually expect to be standard Bioware: great engaging characters, dull as dirt story.
No, what should be concerning to most people is the overall game design.
Sanctuary
Member
That's a pretty myopic opinion, even if it might be true. It could just be that "people" prefer the second game, because it was just all around better in the gameplay department and it also had a much more realized identity, instead of just looking like an amalgamation of Star Trek, 2010 and Space 1999.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
The entire ending space battle of ME1 is lore inconsistent. We see a dozen or so of the 3d models that were supposed to be human dreadnoughts, which led to them retconing this model to be "heavy cruisers", meaning that we now see that the "entire Arcturus fleet" has not one single dreadnought with them. The opening salvos of the battle take place with missiles being fired from long range. In fact, every ship is constantly firing slow moving missiles and we never see anything resembling point defense being used, the ships all just kind of take it. There are multiple shots where the large missiles that everybody is firing are deployed from the railgun, and we never see fighters using them, only capital ships. The codex says they're deployed in massive firing patterns like the MLRS of the 20th century, but we don't see this.
The battle takes place at ultra close range, not the hundreds or thousands of km that the codex dictates is "normal". Indeed, when the Alliance attacks Sovereign, they don't just get clear shots, they park right in front of it for no particular reason, like spitting distance. The Turian Admiral/Captain onboard one of their warships waits until he can practically see the lights in Sovereign's eyes before he gives the attack order... for some reason. The Normandy swoops and swerves like an aircraft, one particularly notable shot being the one where it dramatically swoops up, kills all of its forward momentum with a sharp turn as if it's in an atmosphere, and then descends like a dive bomber for the killing blow on sovereign. The whole battle has full sound effects even though the codex mentions that there's no sound in space. All of the "ultra-fast railgun shots" actually move very slow and are visible onscreen and look like plasma bolts from star wars.
The people making the game only ever cared about the lore details to a certain extent. It's just that in ME1 they hadn't had time to deviate too far from it yet. Despite that it still has problems scattered throughout. The ridiculous time-frame given by the dates in the game is notorious, because in like 30 years Humanity went from discovering ME technology to being a galactic contender, nearly on par technologically, territoriality and militarily with civilizations that have been expanding and colonising for over a thousand years. Or the fact that half of the game treats Biotics like it's some biological trait you can just inherit as with the Asari, while other parts of the game treat it as if it's something you need large scale exposure to Eezo to create.
Mass Effect was never hard scifi, it just took slightly more of a Star Trek approach where it attempted to provide explanations for things - even though they're often total junk science and what we see on screen is frequently contradicted by what the "lore" or "Technical Manuals" explain.
TC McQueen
Member
This is actually a coherent answer that explains what you want out of an RPG, so thank you. Most of the time ME1 defenders don't actually convey what they want out of an RPG.
Back-In-Black
Banned
You must've played a different game than me because ME3 had all of that stuff except free form exploration, since you know there was a galactic WAR on. And, I should note I HATED the ending of ME3, but most everything leading up to it was pure greatness. Mass Effect 3's side quests are so good and so well integrated into the main story that you forget that they are side quests. That mission where you go inside the Geth Collective and learn about the history of the Geth-Quarian conflict, that was a side mission.
Evil Monkey DTT
Banned
They haven't showed nearly enough to fill me with confidence, it feels like a game they are ashamed to show me and that's really weird and concerning.
Agreed entirely except when Jessica Chobot showed up. I can never forgive.... never.
Agreed entirely except when Jessica Chobot showed up. I can never forgive.... never.
Or if you would prefer, ME1 to ME2 is like from Star Trek to Abrams Star Trek.
ME1 is science fiction and world building, lots of details with some grounding on known science. Why does this race behave this way? What historical event caused this? What do those guys eat? What is the politics?
ME2 eschews a lot of that, retconning most of the plot points in ME1 for immediate character drama and action.
That is perfectly reasonable. ME1 wasn't focused in its identity yet and the gameplay wasn't nearly as tight.
RoboticWater
Banned
No, in fact they specifically said it wouldn't be similar Inquisition, or to be more true to their phrasing, that Inquisition wasn't a template for Andromeda. Whether or not that's true, however, has yet to be determined. Resource collection and forward operating bases don't exactly paint a hopeful picture though.
Of course, the more relevant metric is how much content isn't resource collection and open world drudgery. If it's like the Witcher 3 and disperses its narrative side-quests at a good enough pace throughout the world, the tedium will be negligible.
Similar threads
- Poll