Support NeoGAF

[spekkeh]

For me because while I really liked ME3 (ME2 > ME3 >> ME1), you started to notice a shift in development. It appears EA was not happy with the way Bioware burned money before and adopted a more template driven development approach. The Ubisoft model. Farm as much as you can to secondary studios across the globe so they can work on content continuously and concurrently.

The problem with this is that if you want to do it really efficiently, those secondary studios shouldn't throw up any bottlenecks for the main story, so ideally none of the things they make should actually matter to the critical path. You have one studio that develops the critical path, and N amount of studios that create what is basically busywork for the game. In ME3 these were clearly the multiplayer maps they used to pad out the campaign. Now obviously people don't like feeling that they're doing nonsense padding, so you tie it in to a bullshit metric ('galactic readiness level') and hey presto, game with 30 hour campaign ready to ship in two years. I don't like this busywork, not just because it's busywork, but also because it's predictable. The only predictable thing I want in my exploration based RPG is a narrative arc and that there are waifus. Predictable templates are the antithesis to narrative RPGs.

Then Bioware said we listened to your critique of the Galactic Readiness level, we shan't do it again! And then released Dragon Age Inquisition, which was basically one big loool fuck you. With busywork up the wazoo, real world timers, and the gall to actually level gate based on whether they deemed you did enough inane busywork.

Then they make the studio who were responsible for the busywork in ME3 in charge of the full MEA game. Now studios obviously just do what they're told, so I didn't want to hold that against them. Besides, EA said they learned from the critique that Inquisition got, and MEA would be nothing like that.

Then we finally get the bullet points marketing for MEA a few months before release and loooooool fuck you twice EVERYTHING IS BUSYWORK. There might not actually be a complete story, just groundwork for the busywork.

Mass Effect is my favorite universe since Secret of Mana, so I will buy the game regardless, but if it really is just a lot of busywork then so help me God I will sign up to the Bioware Social Forums and become exactly like those people.

 

[Henrar]

They produce popular, well reviewed, highly distinctive games. Their latest one was well received by the fans and won a number of fan voted awards.

Whether they're "not that great" is obviously subjective, but even so I don't see how that warrants the ocean of vitriol that Neogaf spews at the mention of their name.

And DA2 was hailed as RPG of the decade. So? DA:I won awards, because 2014 sucked for AAA gaming. If it was released earlier or later it would not win anything.


As for the OP - DA:I, ME3 ending fiasco and lack of clear marketing (remember how this game was announced?) makes people cautious about Andromeda.

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

Fool me once, shame on me etc.

Bioware can sing for their supper on this one. Will not be preordering, and will not be buying until I'm sure the game actually had some teeth past the initial (not that exciting) excitement of "You can Mako everywheeeere."

 

[Ridesh]

-Because of ME3

-Because of DAI mmo open world design and fetch quests.

-Because of the bad FemRyder animations of the last trailer.

-Because of irrational pessimism like this:

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.

-And because of missinformation like this:

I recall them saying something like Andromeda would be similar to DA:I and I don't really want that for Mass Effect.

 

[Dram]

I'm just hoping the new novels based on the game are good.

 

[SkylineRKR]

DA:I turned out to be a mess. I kind of liked it during the first half, but ultimately the story is very short and padded out with shitloads of useless things.

Mass Effect 3 was obviously focus tested to the max. Good gameplay but worse anything else, very set piece driven and banked on multiplayer MT's.

So yeah, if I take BioWare's latest games as an example, plus the awful DA2, then BioWare is nothing like the company it was when it created KOTOR, Jade Empire, ME1, ME2, DA:O. Its just a very average studio that thrives on past successes.

Andromeda is what, a few months shy of release? I still don't know jack shit about it. My gut feeling says its going to be run of the mill but we'll see.

 

[Ushojax]

They picked just enough to make it a Mass Effect game. But otherwise they removed or changed most key themes from the first game. Shepard Space Jesus started here. Humankind usurped the Council and is the focus, to the point the last boss is human reaper. Harbinger reduced himself to taunting foot-soldier. Collectors as Reaper mooks were introduced out of left field with no integration into the universe, unlike the Geth. Cerberus went from a comic A.I.M. to humanity's hope. Ex-teammates experienced major personality changes (suddenly Liara is Nick Fury and Wrex disinterested in Genophage). Emphasis is more on teammates and their issues, not the world or overarching conflict.

Story-wise, I'm thinking the rot started in 2. Yes the combat is better.

Mass Effect followed a very similar trajectory to Dead Space. The first games felt fresh but the sequels made things grander, more 'cinematic' and more stupid before eventually collapsing under all the bullshit. EA takes a lot of the blame but Inquisition did not really reassure me that BioWare can make another great game. Their story tropes and increasingly shoddy game structure are starting to annoy people.

I don't really want to play another game where I play as The Shepherd/Inquisitor/Wayfinder/Whatever and am the only person in the universe who can assemble a team of misfits to stop an ancient evil from destroying the world. It's a bad sign when people are rolling their eyes already after about 2 trailers. They are being so vague about the actual gameplay that I can only assume the worst.

 

[Lucifon]

I'm dreading they'll follow the same gameplay loop as DA: I. I played a tonne of that game and finished it but was completely done with it by the end. The mmo-lite repetitive flow to it really dragged.

 

[Wulfram]

It's not that uncommon for people to change their view on a well received game after several months or years. And it shouldn't be dismissed just because 'well other people like it!'

OK, but the views of people who like the games should be respected too. That's not the case on Neogaf, which skews any threads.

 

[Sinatar]

Are people really under the impression that this is being made by Bioware (Edmonton)? It's not.

 

[Catvoca]

I'm a big Mass Effect fan, I love all 3 games, but nothing shown from Andromeda has looked good to me. The animation is terrible, the focus on scavenging and crafting is the opposite of what I want and I didn't think the combat looked like much fun. I hope I'm wrong, I'm still looking forward to finally getting to try it out myself.

 

[Nydius]

Don't know when the worm turned on DA:I, it got a solid if not spectacular reception when it came out and I had a lot of fun with it, more than anything it showed that Bioware learned a lot from their mistakes with DA2 and ME3.

I can't wait for Andromeda personally.

Probably around the time most people realized how atrocious the writing and character building was and that the core gameplay loop was part Ubisoft open world discovery-and-fetch fluff, part Facebook timed resource game, and only a very small part actual "Dragon Age".

 

[Myriadis]

Are people really under the impression that this is being made by Bioware (Edmonton)? It's not.

Montreal, Edmonton and Austin. It is.

And I don't hate it, but I'm not interested in it at all, as I didn't like any BioWare game so far, even the old ones.

 

[Linkyn]

We're only months away from release, and I don't think we've seen a single extended demo to show some of the game's systems in action. Add to that some of the more disappointing aspects of Dragon Age: Inquisition and Mass Effect 3, and it becomes perfectly understandable that some people might prefer to be more cautious about Andromeda.

Personally, I think it's going to be fine, but that has a lot more to do with my feelings towards their franchises in general. I recognise that their recent output has been far from being consistently good (their last game without any major issues was Mass Effect 2, in my opinion), but I like the universes they've created, and love roleplaying in them.

 

[Mr_Antimatter]

I'm interested in the game, but not pre-ordering after ME 3. I didn't mind DA:I too much, rather enjoyed my playthrough, but i'll wait and see on any furture DA games as well.

 

[Hyun Sai]

It's being made by the team that made Arrival and Omega, the two garbage tier DLCs for ME2/3

You're kidding me.

I'm only in for the multiplayer, so things are looking pretty good on my end.

I can only pray they don't mess this up...

 

[DemWalls]

Who cares, give me more Kai Leng-tier stuff and I'll be happy. I want to be entertained.

 

[TEJ]

Dragon age inquisition was a hot mess, undeserving of any goty awards.

However I kinda liked me3 outside of the ending and didnt think da2 was that bad. I want andromeda to be a good vidyagame.

I like bioware outside of dai.

 

[nOoblet16]

Don't know when the worm turned on DA:I, it got a solid if not spectacular reception when it came out and I had a lot of fun with it, more than anything it showed that Bioware learned a lot from their mistakes with DA2 and ME3.

I can't wait for Andromeda personally.

The problem was that the entire reason DA:I received that positive of a reception and GOTY awards was because there was nothing else on the market. It was a very dry year and it was a big name RPG from a big name developer that looked nice....It wasn't until later that people realised the sheer mediocrity of the game

 

[Xater]

The last 3 Bioware games were not great, so I am not confident this trend will change.

 

[nOoblet16]

We're only months away from release, and I don't think we've seen a single extended demo to show some of the game's systems in action.

It's amazing because we have two several minutes long videos and one with commentary that show basically fuck all about the game's systems, classes etc.

 

[Renekton]

The problem was that the entire reason DA:I received that positive of a reception and GOTY awards was because there was nothing else on the market.

https://www.google.com/search?q=201...rome..69i57.1008j0j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

edit: not disagreeing about it being undeserved

 

[family_guy]

I never thought that highly of the Mass Effect series. I suppose the Scifi RPG element had a lot to do with its popularity given there's so little of that genre available. I think the games were just good, not great. I don't feel bad vibes for Andromeda. I'm going in with no expectations. I'm more disappointed that the series is coming back at all. I don't get it. When you start a new console generation, that gives you the opportunity to start with a fresh new franchise. We're over three years into this generation and it's mostly sequels and remasters. It's probably too late to even have a trilogy of a new franchise.

 

[Jobbs]

It looks good to me. I'll play it.

 

[Clarkus Darkus]

I went from loving ME and it being my fave series, To losing complete interest in it now.

Mixture of age, Diff games appealing too me, The shift in gameplay from exploration to cover shooter, The abysmal DAI which i gave up about 50 hours in.

Let's be honest, All they will care for is the MP aspect anyway.

Cyberpunk2077 will hopefully give me that sense of wonder like the original ME did all them years ago.

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

To be very specific about my gripes, I never liked that they transitioned from exploration and discovery to gun shooting in the two sequels. In Mass Effect 1 I felt like having guns was more about personal security and then the evolution of Shepard's story. There were conflicts that didn't require you to shoot anything and when you did it was more for self preservation than anything else. It felt more like an RPG in this way. Aside from the main story, there was very little weight attached to you using your gun. The gun shooting missions were mainly taking out teams of bandits or thieves that wouldn't change the story largely if you did or didn't take them out.

Starting with 2, there is no conflict in the game that you don't resolve with shooting at it.This immediately makes the RPG aspects useless as the talking only serves to set up the shooting, instead of being a possible resolution to whatever conflict you find yourself in. It was Gears of War with talking bits. Also with 2 Shepard became more than just a Spectre doing their job - s/he became "savior of the universe" which meant anything s/he did had huge weight to it. Now the objective was to go in guns blazing, instead of to explore and unravel. In Mass Effect 2 the only characters you really talk with are your teammates. Everyone else is just target practice.

Now, as far as combat Mass Effect 1 had huge issues (the controls were a mess, there were I think 4 or 5 different base styles the entire game, the inventory management sucked, especially when it filled up, there really wasn't any major difference between your team members and abilities) but there were things it did that neither of the other 2 games accomplished. Specific example - I once went to a snow world (can't remember the name) with a Geth installation and as an Infiltrator I was able to set up on a mountain about a kilometer away and snipe to my hearts content. There was versatility, distance, and control. In 2 and 3, all the fights are set pieces in which you MUST address the fight in THIS specific way. It always felt silly being an infiltrator and "sniping" a character 30 feet away.

People talk about the improvements with the Mako and the vehicles in ME2, but I disagree. The Mako had one major advantage in that you had to use it to beat the game. Not only are the vehicles in ME2 not mandatory to complete the game but they're behind a paywall as well. Another example about how all of the versatility of ME1 was stripped away.

Someone earlier in the thread mentioned how the Witcher has taken Bioware's RPG crown. I agree, because CD Project realizes that a great game lies in versatility and change to approach, not every one of Geralt's missions in the Witcher requires him to kill a monster. Meanwhile Bioware started ME in this way then distilled the series into 'talk to teammate, go on mission, token words, gunshoot' and away from the exploration and discovery. I hope that ME:A takes this into account.

 

[eot]

You're kidding me.

No, it's being made BioWare Montreal

On their own site they take credit for Omega. I've seen a lot of people say they made Arrival too, but it was probably more of a joint development (the creits are on mobygames but I can't be bothered to go through them atm).

I mean, people come and go from these teams all the time anyway so who knows. The lead gameplay designer for ME2/3 left for Riot, the Drs left, Hudson left, Karpyshyn left etc. It's not like Edmonton is the same as the one that made ME1/2.

 

[SinCityAssassin]

I was into it until that gun scene.

 

[Mozendo]

Mass Effect is my favorite universe since Secret of Mana, so I will buy the game regardless, but if it really is just a lot of busywork then so help me God I will sign up to the Bioware Social Forums and become exactly like those people.

That got shut down.

 

[eot]

I've been on media black out and I hate everything about this. Not just the animation, but that ugly round face doesn't belong in the ME universe. It looks like something out of an animated Star Wars cartoon.

 

[2San]

I have high hopes for Mass Effect Andromeda. ME3 when factoring in all the DLC was pretty good. More importantly the combat looks like an improvement over ME3 (which already was great). It's an unique franchise and there's nothing out there that scratches the same itch.

It's being made by the team that made Arrival and Omega, the two garbage tier DLCs for ME2/3

What is Bioware Edmonton working on?

 

[Vhalyar]

I can only pray they don't mess this up...

They did the MP portion of ME3, should be fine right? Right? Let's not jinx it.

 

[Jibbed]

I'm still sour on ME3 because there's no way for me to buy all the DLC I've not touched without using fucking BioWare points.

 

[Frimaire]

Wow, it's weird seeing people talking about what an amazing RPG ME1 is.
I liked it when I played it, but from what I remember the level up and equipment/inventory systems were a bit shit...

 

[spekkeh]

That got shut down.

Damn, well, continue to whine on GAF it is.

 

[Putyouinmyoven]

I'm still excited, but the open world design is really lowering my expectations - MGS5, FFXV and now Mass Effect.

 

[StereoVsn]

ME3 had botched ending. DA:I was alright but not particularly special. Trailers for ME:A seem to have iffy writing, iffy VA, and bad char animation.

 

[Paz]

crafting, continued focus on more typical tps combat mechanics with less emphasis on the RPG elements (Yes ME2/3 feel better than ME1 in general but the soul is gone without my crazy jedi-esque character), fucking detective vision, and I can already feel the open world grind & generic 'quests' coming just like DA:I.

That's my list, I don't even care about the 'jank' that dominated the early pages, ME1 was the jankiest and yet the best of the trilogy last gen.

 

[longdi]

ME1-3 story aint that great either.

It is rather generic and reeks of Halo, except Halo has a better lore. A fps > rpg, lol. Then again ME is going the shooter router already.

 

[ISee]

Because DA:I had a terrible, annoying and bloated open world part and for now I'm sure ME:A will be the same. We'll be exploring pointless points, gather a ton of resources and the combat doesn't even look interesting. In the end it all comes down to story but me3 and da:I were also a disappointment story wise.

 

[DevilFox]

Oh.. wow. That's one ugly animation. I didn't expect her to humiliate Steven Seagal at his best but come on.
However, the little footage I've seen of the game seems cool. I'll see how it turns out, there's no rush to play it.

 

[HellofaMouse]

I dont think its fair to judge bioware based on da:i. That game was obviously designed to be an mmo, then turned into a single player rpg later on.

 

[2San]

crafting, continued focus on more typical tps combat mechanics with less emphasis on the RPG elements (Yes ME2/3 feel better than ME1 in general but the soul is gone without my crazy jedi-esque character), fucking detective vision, and I can already feel the open world grind & generic 'quests' coming just like DA:I.

That's my list, I don't even care about the 'jank' that dominated the early pages, ME1 was the jankiest and yet the best of the trilogy last gen.

ME3 was far from typical TPS combat wise. Compared to basic stuff like Uncharted or Gears, despite being a bit more janky has more options due the biotic and tech abilities at your disposal. Furthermore there where some distinct weapons at your disposal (Gears is also good at this though). Honestly I don't understand how you can say this. ME3 allowed for truly different builds where you could even spec abilities in distinct ways. ME1 is pretty limited in the ways you can customize your character weapons and armor where samey as well (there where a lot of weapons and armor but they didnt feel distinct gameplay wise), having the ability to put more points in one weapon handling over an another isn't really interesting customization. The Biotic explosions you could create with your team in ME3 is pretty great.

 

[deleted]

Bioware showed over the last few years that they don't really know what to do with Mass Effect.
I would argue, that showed as early as Mass Effect 2, which felt like a massive change in story direction compared to the first.
The 3rd one established that while they refined the gameplay pretty well (even if I don't like the direction it took) they had no idea how they could find a compelling conclusion for the story.

Then there was the abandoned Mass Effect Battlefield like game.
That brings us to a franchise that didn't have an entry in 5 years. Because they had to distance themselves from the terrible ending of the last trilogy and because they didn't know where to take the franchise next.

And to sum it up it comes from a studio that's very slowly declining in quality and is consumed by the EA effect.

And after all of this, the first showing was more than lackluster for many.
So while all these points don't have to end up in a bad or mediocre game, they don't exactly inspire confidence.

 

[Harlequin]

I hated ME3's ending as much as (or even more than) the next person but I'm quite excited for MEA. No bad vibes from me.

 

[Atanascovich]

Must fire the person who let this abomination go public.

 

[HeisenbergWW62]

Because a different team in bioware made a bad game in Inquisition and people forget how good ME3 was and only focus on the Last 15 minutes

That one dialogue as well as the facial animation in the game awards trailer were pretty shit tho

 

[Fret]

.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

If I was to boil everything down to a singular feeling about ME:A, leaving any doubts about ME3 or DA:I aside, it'd be a feeling of sameness. Which is to say this is a game that's supposed to be set in a new galaxy, and there has been little to nothing that has inspired a sense of wonder in me in what they've put out for the game.

 

[brau]

Must fire the person who let this abomination go public.

She look a lot more smug in motion than in a screen grab. But i tried.