If Shepard isn't the main character of a new mass effect game I at least hope they give us the option to play as other races. I always wanted a Krogan pc or even a Turian.
Or Quarian, these guys did that species dirty by claiming "Nah they just had ship problems." Regardless, just like in the trilogy, other races are on different ships. Why they couldn't give us a Quarian squadmate or side character is stupid.
I got a running theory that Liara gets pregnant by Shephard (willingly if you romance her) when she merges with your mind on earth before the final push. Thought it be cool to play as a Shephards kin in the next game of that was the case
Drack could have been one of Mass Effect's best characters. An old Krogan past his prime trying to figure out where he fits into the world now. There was so much potential with that character.
@@Rikalonius im super late to this comment, but nah man, Wrex wasn't defined by his tragic backstory (anymore than any other Krogan that lived before the Genophage is) his whole driving factor was being one of the few Krogan that recognized that the pointless fury and despair that most Krogan gave into was killing them faster than the genophage was, and a cultural overhaul was the only way they could have a future both metaphorically and literally(as krogan culture led to the other races being mostly okay with their slow genocide, as a resurgent krogan would just indiscriminately attack everyone)
@@EDMARSH100 I was taking about his father betraying him and having to kill him and abandon the Krogan, at least at the time of the conversation about it on the Normandy.
The poor launch helped pull the plug on any DLC planned for the game. There is a missing Salarian and Quarian ark which goes unlocated. It was inferred as that being the DLC.
@@daltonbalusek I personally don’t think anyone including the TH-camr himself has actually play this game cause that’s definitely one of the main missions like you said plus like the comment above me said they drop a book on it
My main issue with Andromeda was that I didn't feel like the main character, I felt like I was just carrying around the main character. The number of times people came to yo, not for your input, but to have SAM do something just showed how irrelevant Ryder was to the story. The end bit just felt more forced than anything trying to convince me that Ryder was important. The one instant at the beginning when a potential LI actually greeted SAM and then quickly greeted Ryder more as an afterthought pretty much confirms it.
see thats actually what i liked about it i liked that not every thing revolved around me i liked that we saw our crew interact with eacher alot more than in previous games and not just me
That's the point, I think? I mean, Bioware could have used the simplest way of allowing us to play N7 Alec, who was already an established and confident character like Shepard, but they went with a newbie without any significant background, whose ship crew don't see Ryder as a leader at the first part of the game (It was really shown in first crew meeting, when everyone just left without Ryder closing the meeting). As the game progresses, you can actually see the shift towards MC, everyone starts treating Ryder as real pathfinder and in the end (Kind of rushed, agree) you can see Shepard vibes.
@@samuelw4380I never got that, all throughout it just felt like SAM was the main protagonist. During the one mission before the endgame SAM literally kills then revives Ryder to get out of a trap, if they let Ryder get the opportunity to prove themselves here then maybe it would have been more organic character growth but SAM just took charge. SAM did all the real work throughout the game, the character isn't even given the chance to think through puzzles as SAM is quickly taking you by the hand to explain how to complete them. Even when SAM was infected instead of letting Ryder figure out how to save SAM they still have SAM walk Ryder through how to do it so instead of getting a moment of growth we just get shown that SAM is the lead character. Without SAM there would be no Ryder but as shown in the opening Ryder is easily replaceable.
When the crew openly disrespects Ryder there should have been at least an option to put them in their place. Ryder is supposed to be an ex alliance marine he/she really shouldn't put up with that. Often trying to pick what I thought was more of a "renegade" dialogue option usually came out as bitchy instead of badass. Just made me really dislike the character.
What bothered me most about Ryder (male version) was that his voice performance was so bland. What would have helped out a lot more if the performance was a lot more assertive and louder. He always talks so low and quiet.
If the next game has the gameplay of Andromeda and skill functions, with the role-playing and depth of characters from the trilogy, then it'd be a perfect game. A solid 10/10, like Me2 was for its time.
I personally prefer the Level design and combat of the original trilogy. The combat in ME 1-3 was more focused on strategy, similar to how games like Brothers in Arms worked. And while you still can kinda play this way in Andromeda, the game and level design clearly wants you to play it as a fast-paced action shooter. This can be fun, sure, and I'm not saying that a gaming franchise should never change its core mechanics, but it doesn't feel like Mass Effect to me. It feels more like CoD (or any other modern shooter) with a Mass Effect skin.
The Mass Effect Trilogy also feels way more realistic. The suspense that makes your heart beat when you see a 10 foot enemy 5 feet away from you after you carelessly turned around a corner was just super alarming and exciting, especially with the Geth tanks or giant Mechs. Even with other games like Halo, you could just blindly explore without a care in the world and then 5 seconds later you'll be fighting Hunters that ambushed you. It really gives the game a sense of mystery. Tbh I wouldn't mind a few game mechanics from Andromeda. Maybe Mass Effect 4 can have a nice balance of both gameplay giving a sense of freedom and mystery from a soldier's perspective
They took away our power wheel, so no pause in the game play to figure out strategy, and we got little to no control of our squad mates. What good does priming a target for detonation when my ally is off running around? At least in 1-3, they STAYED WHERE YOU PUT THEM.
The only thing that was worth playing was the benefactor mystery. Getting the memory fragments was a tedious task. However, it does put into perspective that the main reason for the initiative wasn’t space exploration like the majority of people thought. It was an evacuation.
That would have worked much better if they would have had the Crucible team craft a lifeboat and hurl themselves at Andromeda in case it didn't work. To have a human run initiative 8 years before the events of ME1, when humans were viewed almost a sub species by the other three council races, is very much straining credulity. And then to have the not-Citadel there just made it more cringe. To me, it was completely lore breaking, and took away from what could have a been a good castaway story foundation.
@@Rikalonius as far as we know, that could still happen...We don't know who the benefactor is and who's connected to and Liara is the only connection between galaxies, the next game is allegedly connecting both galaxies, but even if that's not the case, there was plans to make a Andromeda 2 (or at least, make DLCs to expand the story), so for all we know, Andromeda 2/Next ME game could very well have those connections
@BwanaLasPelotas I can't wait for the next iteratition of the Montreal Effect series, I've yet to truly feel Andromeda deep inside of me, to feel it's mass effect me in a truly Andromeda way.
Slow story, too many boring side quests, most of the characters have 0 charisma, same as the villains, the gameplay and customization system are the only good things about this game
It's important to remember the historical context of WHEN this game came out and what it represented at the time. This came out in 2017 and was following up Mass Effect 3 from 2013. People still had a bad taste in their mouths after the disastrous ending. So when Andromeda came out as a buggy, poorly written mess, it felt like an affirmation of all the bad feelings people had for the last few years at that point. Especially in light of all the censorship and ridicule from gaming media against those who were critical of ME3's ending. Andromeda was too much of a failure to suppress, and it reignited discussions of ME3's endings as well. In many ways, it became a post-mortem about the entire franchise and EA-Bioware as a whole.
6:51 I've thought about this myself, and the only possible explanation I can come up with is that Ryder had been exposed to the planet's toxic air for too long at that point. Even with a constant flow of breathable air from the moment Alec Ryder transferred his helmet, Scott/Sara Ryder barely survived. Merely sharing the helmet would have likely resulted in his/her death. The combat being a win isn't really a surprise when you consider that this is the team that worked on Mass Effect 3's excellent multiplayer mode. And the environments in Andromeda are a nice step up from the already good environments in Mass Effect 3. It's the story and characters that kill this game for me. The story is... fine I guess, but the villain is boring and one of the main story elements is too similar to something we had already seen in the Mass Effect trilogy. But for me, the characters were worse. Alec Ryder was the only one I could take seriously. I wish he had been the main protagonist, because Scott/Sara Ryder has all the gravitas of a limp noodle. I guess I could accept the initial lack of gravitas if he/she had a really strong character arc, but I just didn't see it. Something else I didn't like about Scott and Sara is that the developers treated them as the male and female version of the same character (like Commander Shepard). They're DIFFERENT PEOPLE, or at least they should be. But aside from one throwaway line early on, their personalities and dialogue are identical. Maybe it would have been too much to expect BioWare Montreal to essentially craft two separate trees of interactions and dialogue with main protagonists that are actually different from one another, but they shouldn't have done the sibling thing if they weren't willing to follow through with it. They should have just had one character with a male and female version.
I still can’t get over how the trilogy was about a team of the most badass fighters in the galaxy (Shepard was already the best of humanity even before the game started), and the Andromeda was about a bunch of high school kids…
@@juzoli eh, depends on the game. but, moot point, as that wasn't what andromeda, the game, was about anyway, really. it's the plot behind the andromeda initiative, but not the gameplay.
I really liked the humour and the consept of a very inexperienced pathfinder. It’s a fresh change compared to an experienced soldier like Shepard. Also playing as a biotic was a blast, the combat overall is very enjoyable.
Andromeda was the first ME game I ever played (after the major bugs were fixed). I didn’t understand the hate it was getting until my friend gifted me the original trilogy. Andromeda doesn’t hold a candle to the original trilogy. That’s not to say that it’s an awful game, but after learning what made older BioWare games special, I have no desire to ever play this game again. I’m not sold on the next ME game either. I haven’t seen any meaningful change from BioWare that would give me confidence.
yeah, kinda the problem - it's a good action rpg - imo better than the trilogy in that respect. It fails at what mass effect was loved for, and what bioware is kinda famed for.
Thats the problem with that Mindset, you cant compare a whole Developed Trilogy to a new single sided Entry. I like to compare MEA to ME1 thats more fair. A completely new Game build up to tell its whole Story with Sequels. Only that Andromeda won´t have the opportunity atleast as a Standalone Series. The buggy technical state the Game launched in was indeed bad. Other then that it was totally fine imo, you have to Stop a Bad Guy from doing dumb shit similar to ME1.
I came to this after playing The Outer Worlds; after Liam's loyalty quest boy did I want to throw him out of the airlock. No chance that would fly on the Normandy.😡
IKR? I just replayed that the other day and was like: This doofus never would have made it on the Normandy! Who even chose him to be crew on the Tempest? Alec Ryder? Yet another thing the dude messed up then. Almost everyone else on the Tempest has a unique selling point or skill, but Liam is just... young and dumb.
a solid one and done for me. I got super immersed and love it when I played it. But everytime I have tried to replay, I get bored and stop. I never had that with any Bioware game before it. Multiplayer was fucking baller though. edit: some of the most fun combat I've ever played. They really nailed that part for me. some great builds
Same! I'm trying to get through it for a second time, cause now I have Steam Achievements to grind for, but it is a struggle. I replayed the original trilogy 100% like four times with ease.
@@MCellationthe major part for me is the UI, it feels so sluggish and hard to scroll through. It’s also really slow there are times when it delays or sometimes the blue highlighter doesn’t go over the button you want and you have to move back and forth for it to relocate it
@@MCellationI just finished my legendary edition playthrough and it was my first time playing thru all 3 in a row (never played 1, mostly played MP on 3, played 2 many times on 360) and it took everything in me to not immediately start the whole series over after I finished. Such a banger and me3 was much better than I remembered.
One of the best parts for me that no one really talks about... Later on, once you get some good schematics and crafting materials, you can craft some _beastly_ weapons. Explosive rounds, ricocheting rounds... you could even turn _any_ gun into a beam weapon, and/or give it regenerating ammo (similar to ME1). Some combos were crazy broken.
In my opinion if the Mass Effect trilogy didn't exist and Andromeda was the first and only game people would have seen it as an average sci fi space game. They wouldn't love it but they also wouldn't hate it. Andromeda isn't disliked because it's a bad, it's just diliked because of the legacy of its predecessors.
My main problem was that if felt like there were always too many "do X thing Y times" 'quests' that it made the game feel padded and underthought. It just felt like an MMORPG mechanism that was shoehorned in to give the game more 'content.'
Interesting take on the class restriction. That took all replayability away, as in I did not see a reason to restart another playthrough- I already played all different classes in one go. And with word of no dlc or continuation of the game or story, I felt no reason to replay. MELE was able to squeeze 4 full playthroughs, due to wanting play as different classes- Vanguard and Infiltrator for the first time for me.
True. Character classes is a core feature in RPGs. We can identify with our character much better it they serve a single specific role in combat, and ME1-3 even had very memorable moments where only a specific class could access certain dialogue choices. Plus, the squadmates were origianlly intended to complement each other and the PC in their abilities (combat, tech and biotics). This is not possible with a jack-of-all-trades one-person-army.
That said, I am glad ME:A let you switch classes within a single game, as I am not willing to play it more than once, anyways. XD And the combat is so much fun that being able to access all skills only serves to increase the fun.
I have never liked or agreed with the "why couldn't Ryder share the helmet?" argument. Has no one noticed that the younger Ryder's helmet is compromised in a HOSTILE environment. This isn't scuba where you can share a respirator. The environmental suit(s) have to be first unsealed, then re-sealed. That takes time. Likely both would be dead if they tried to buddy share the one helmet between them. This was hinted at early in the first alien planet mission when the younger Ryder's helmet face plate cracks and you see them desperately looking for the emergency sealant. That aside, I generally agree. Once Bioware slowed down and fixed Andromeda, it is/was serviceable. As I am sure I have said here, and I know I have said elsewhere, Bioware killed/ injured two franchises with Anthem. It killed Anthem and severely injured Mass Effect as if I remember correctly, Bioware pulled development staff from Andromeda as it was being finished to work on Anthem.
I have played and beaten Andromeda at least three times now, and there are still a few bugs. The animation in cutscenes is kind of weird (especially the faces/eyes), and sometimes in combat, an enemy will get stuck in the wall and you either have to move around them or try to kill them while they are in said wall. My biggest gripe would probably be how large the open worlds are. They're not nearly as bad as DAI, and your squad speak a lot more often then in DAI. The landscape in most of the worlds is pretty enough to distract me from the monotonous traveling from one place to the next. That being said, I do enjoy the game for what it is. I think the story is interesting and the squad is fun. Also the lore behind the Angara and Kett is pretty cool, even if a bit weird or lack luster. I love the more-laid back vibe of the group that makes sense for the setting. I would love to see a second game that plays off of your choices from this game and works on following some more plot threads. I also have found the main story line from each of the planets to be fun to playthrough while discovering interesting events across the map as I go along. Again though, this is just my opinion. Andromeda is not a game I play constantly or back to back for a long period of time, but it is a fun one for me to play and complete once every few years or so.
For me, one of the big contrasts between Ryder and Shepard is that Shepard starts with a reputation already set in, has become an N7 and was considered an elite from the moment we start. Ryder, either Scott or Sara, had undergone basic training and were on their first assignment when they were blacklisted and discharged. No one expects much of them because no one knows them. They end Andromeda where Shepard started, a hero with a reputation. It’s the equivalent of playing as Shepard during the Blitz, on Torfan or during Akuze at the end of Shepard’s first game. We can see this with the briefings at the start and end of Andromeda. At the start everyone barely acknowledged Ryder and leaves the briefing without being dismissed and Ryder feeling awkward. At the end they all refuse to leave until Ryder dismisses them and act much more professionally.
Great opening level, great shooting and controls….. but half assed rushed story is truly where it went wrong for me. It needed a couple more years of development time.
Just finished the game yesterday and i kinda loved it. Took me some time (October-Feburary) with some breaks ... it isnt the original trilogy but it s still has it s good sides. Wish we gotten some more content after the main story.
I played it 5 years after. Keeping my expectations for the story and characters a bit more humble I really enjoyed it. Biggest issues I had was the repetitive nature of the side missions(especially when most were randomly generated), the pacing of the story was inconsistent as well. However I really like the characters and how they played off each other and the gameplay was great.
I had a similar experience with it. Got it for cheap a year or two after release when all the big bugs had been squashed and went in with low expectations, ended up liking it enough to play through it twice. The main story is weak and the antagonists are forgettable and honestly unnecessary, but the companions are likable enough and the combat and exploration gameplay is fun. I especially enjoyed "terraforming" the planets and actually seeing them visibly change... It doesn't really do much mechanics-wise, but it helps sell the fantasy of being a space settler carving out a niche for your people. Speaking of which, I did also like that the main theme was more about exploration rather than the mystery and war against basically gods of the original trilogy, gave it more of an identity of its own.
I understand a lot of the criticism around Andromeda, but I still do think it is very over hated, especially by people who have never played it. I hope whatever connections it has to Mass Effect 5, only makes the aspects of the game better, but I do not want to return to Andromeda
This is my third comment sorry. Yeah most of the consequences in game are just verbal recognition but ME1 does basically the same thing. Rachni queen doesn't do anything until ME3. Save the council doesn't til ME2&3. Kirahes survival, ME3. Loyalty missions never matter. Feros only gets you galactic readiness and barely any at that. Whos in charge of Noveria is similar. I would say there are only two choices that heavily inpact the mass effect trilogy, including ME1. Does Wrex die and whos the virmire survivor because they directly impact you and your squad. You can't tell me ME1 is that much better than Andromeda about choice and consequence. Fans complaining about this kindof stuff is the reason we never got a sequel to Andromeda, or even DLC that might've touched on stuff like the Salarian Pathfinder much more. Its unfair to compare Andromeda to the entire trilogy. It should be compared to ME1.
Tbh even if we compare just ME1 to Andromeda these games are polar opposites. Me1: dated graphics (especially original game), dated combat (again, OG is even worse), good story, ok to good companions. Andromeda: good combat, good graphics, bad everything else.
Good point you make about comparing it to ME1. Totally agree choice and consequence boiled down to three coloured endings in Mass effect 3, from what I've seen of the state of the galaxy in Andromeda's references and what we see so far in the promotion of the next game it's likely that choice doesn't matter anyway and possibly only one is likely to be cannon. It was the continuation of the story that gave us a sense of choice and consequence in the trilogy but it still boiled down to an illusion at the end, especially before they extended the ending, my depression was real and I could barely play it to the ending again after completing the pre-dlc ending, I find it hard to look at the ending with nostalgia it's the in-between that I enjoyed and choices mattered to a point as the depth of your actions occured over 3 games, for example making peace between geth and quarians was difficult to do without a lot of pieces falling into place. Essentially it had time to gain depth. I just played Andromeda this year after being so annoyed and disappointed by the cringy animations at launch and the bugs (some of which remain) that I just couldn't pick it up again till now. I'm glad I did as I had fun playing it, loved the jetpack making combat feel very different for example, exploration flybys were a nice touch, Angara, Remnant were interesting after they were explored a little more, Kett archon was too much like Mustache twirling boring bad guy, so it kind of diminished the kett a bit, as were exiles making most of the enemies, so we travel to another galaxy to largely fight ourselves, boring). it can't stand against the epic depth of a trilogy but it was unfair of us to expect it to and now it likely never will because Bioware largely gave up on it and they never really did it justice in the first place, remember at the time a lot of their effort was going into Anthem, we just got the barebones of the vision and as another commentor here posted it's important to remember the historical context of the hurt we felt prior to game release from the disappointing ending of the previous game and the fact many were demonised for voicing their disappointment (of how rushed, empty and unfulfilling it was) after investing so much of their energy in the years between the 3 games, I recall some people did take it too far by making death threats (which is just criminal and entitled nonsense) which led to the media's response to fans but it didn't make the criticism invalid. I hope some of the better elements of this concept of Andromeda go into the next game though. I love the universe this game is set in, the races, the setting, the space opera. I'd love to see it reach it's potential and not be rushed next time it's a testament to the strength of the universe of Mass effect that it could survive two big mistakes that came about as a result of rushing content. They need to get it right next time.
Ugh, I hate the combat mechanics in Andromeda. They literally got rid of all the combat features I liked about the trilogy (control of squadmates’ powers, the power wheel and the pause that goes with it). The only thing I actually like about the combat is the verticality.
I disagree with your take on Ryder. Mostly I feel like you're only weighing in how Ryder acts in the beginning of the game because by the end of the game I do think Ryder has a lot of confidence and is super respected by his team. This was supposed to be the first game in a trilogy and Ryder likely would've been more like Shepard in those later games. I like that there's a story arc and maybe you don't cause you can't roleplay a stoic badass power fantasy. But I couldn't roleplay being insecure in the og trilogy. I wasn't even able to roleplay being sad about Kaiden breaking up with me in ME2. What if I think Shepard is too stoic and it takes me away from their character? This take is extremely subjective and I guess that's the point but I do want to say the other perspective on this because I think saying Ryder is bad and walking away is missing the more complex picture of what that character is. Shepard is more complex then their stoicism and Ryder is more complex then their insecurities. Anyway I like Ryder a lot, maybe as much as Shepard. Maybe more than Shepard depending on what aspect of the characters we're talking about. I definitely relate to Ryder on a much more personal level. This has just turned into rambling but yeah. Don't dis my guy like that
They dislike them because they aren't shepherd and not because they are a bad character. Personally i think ryder is a great protagonist and if im being honest even though I do prefer shepherd, I do think ryder has more actually character to them (for the first game later it's more even) Just a shame there wasn't more games
Agree! I made Shepherd in ME2 display evidence of a drinking problem (by drinking everywhere possible) just so I could imagine that she had emotions. The pressure was getting to her and she just needed a drink, you know? There is definitely more depth in the role play aspect in Andromeda. I don’t think it’s a better game than Mass Effect 2, but I think it actually fixed a few things that bugged me about the original trilogy. Like having to be a bad@ss and everyone constantly telling Shepherd how important, cool and amazing they are. In my opinion, the constant ego stroking did not enhance my enjoyment of the game. It felt a little like pandering. Funny, when I started ME1, I thought it would be great if I could have played the character before everyone thought they were awesome. Because then at least some of the praise would have felt earned and I would have gotten more of a character arc. So I do think that was a thing that Andromeda did better. You don’t start awesome, but you can become awesome and then it feels more earned.
Yeah I played it last year and a quest bugged completely, it just wasn't activating the flag that I'd killed all the enemies. Wasted an hour running around trying to figure out what I was missing. Really soured me on the whole experience
My opinion was that it wasn't a bad game it was just a bad Mass effect game. My biggest gripe will always be the lack of new species that are introduced in Andromeda. It was mainly a rehash of milky way friends with 2 new aliens to say hi. Mass effect 1 in 2007 introduced most of the aliens we see and know except for the Drell and Vorcha who were introduced in mass effect 2.
It's an okay game, for the under 10 bucks I paid, but my biggest gripe with it is reducing you to only being able to slot 3 powers/skills. It's basically forcing you to take a power combo, rather than have contingencies for many situations. The number of times I was like "well that would be cool if I just had another slot" knocks off some enjoyment for me. But it did give me a strong "Voyager" vibe - alone in alien space, finding new enemies and allies, etc. Also I wish the NPCs hadn't gotten hit with the woke stick - screw realism in this Great Value space opera!
No. Romances were great. Combat was great. The final mission was great. Some of its criticism was super deserved. Most of its criticism was for being different from the trilogy and I think that's fine. For instance, Andromeda is more comedic and less serious. That is a trade off not inherently worse. I actually like Andromedas tone a lot, if you don't whatever you have three games of what you like don't criticize me for liking this. Stuff like that.
To me the combat is the only really good thing in this game, a solid improvement compared to ME3 except of not having jetpack cooldown. Thats why I and many others enjoyed the MP. You get aliens, lots of classes and skills and this new combat.
No, it's even worse than that. 2020s AAA can still have some people with talent forced to work on pure slop. No one with talent touched a keyboard in the development of Andromeda.
6:05 cant even imagine what would have happened if anybody walks out of the room while my renegade commander shepard was talking. Things would gone dark real quick.
Playing devils advocate, briefly, I think a fairer comparison is to do this against Mass Effect 1 only. That is a game that, if you just play the story, is ultimately 3 main quests to kill, save or retrieve something, and three romance options. Under that, you have the story of the Reapers, but you don’t fully get that in the first game, and Liara just tells you where to go regardless of when you pick her up. Outside of that, your biggest choice is whether or not to kill Wrex, but just in that one game, it has no lasting impact aside from some dialogue. If you play every side mission, too, they are a lot of fetch and carrying, for little pay-off. And a lot of tedious Mako driving. If 2 and 3 hadn't come out with their ability to import your character and saved options, it would have gone down as a good game, but maybe not great.
So, I played ME1 after ME2. While the combat was not as good, and I did not like billions of RPG gear decisions (many of which didn't make much difference) the story was top notch. There is NOTHING like the conversations with Sovereign, Vigil, or Saren in Andromeda. The first time I played the Sovereign interchange, I got goose bumps. But, ME1 was a non-Star Wars KOTOR that just improved on the formula, it was a game for its time, and better than its peers. Andromeda was the opposite. It took a huge step backwards to its peers, and the dialog was cringe. Yes, the combat was better, but it had nothing else. Also, ME1 was made as a closed story. Nobody ever thought it was going to get a sequel. Andromeda started life expecting to have more games and DLC, and it had the benefit of the trilogy to overpower the hype train. ME1 was its own entity that started slow and became wildly successful on word of mouth.
I got this game opening weekend and loved it. Sure the story and characters were weaker but most of the Mass Effect 1 cast wasn't near their best in the first game. And it easily has my favorite gameplay in the series. There were a lot of gameplay changes between Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2 I disliked and while Mass Effect 3 fixed some of these it actually made one worse, and didn't fully fix the one of others with some DLCs adding a partial fix while Andromeda fixed them all and made the class system much less restrictive. Sure I mainly focused on the Tech tree until it was maxed but it was nice being able to mix some Combat tree skills in during the early phases then pouring more points into the combat tree once I had finished the Tech tree. Most of the gameplay bugs I encountered were things I ran into with the original Mass Effect trilogy and even the Legendary edition. And I don't care at all about cutscene animation glitches or characters faces looking odd. I remember people complaining about a character looking tired but never understood why people cared so much about this. And honestly under the circumstances her being exhausted and looking it makes sense I doubt I will ever forgive whatever jerks canceled the story DLCs.
Was borderline unplayable on release, as were many now beloved AAA games, including Cyberpunk and Witcher 3 which was buggy af when it came out. They patched everything up, the game was still flawed, still the weakest in the series, but a good game anyway, beat it twice and had fun both times. I'd be willing to bet the vast majority of people trashing Andromeda have never even played it.
The biggest problem with Andromeda was that it forgot why so many people loved the Mass Effect trilogy to begin with. When most fans talk about the series, they don’t really talk about how much they love the combat or the world exploration or even the RPG aspects of it; they almost exclusively talk about how much they love the characters and the connections they have with each other. Would the trilogy have been as well loved as it was if Garrus or Tali didn’t exist? If Shepard wasn’t the smartass they were? If Joker was a silent NPC or EDI only existed to give details about the ship? If Javik wasn’t delightfully blood thirsty? Everything that made Mass Effect so well loved always comes back to the characters and their relationship to Shepard, and that’s where Andromeda flounders. The devs either didn’t have the time or didn’t care to really flesh out these characters. You don’t know them, their reasons for joining Ryder amount to ‘Eh why not?’, and none of them are nearly compelling. They were described to me as being hot topic versions of the trilogy characters, and that held up when I recently tried to play it. None of them are that interesting, and none of them warranted me picking up the controller to play past the first act. I bought the game on sale for $8, and, in hindsight, it wasn’t worth it.
I’ve tried playing through it on 3 or 4 separate occasions but I got so bored I just gave up. Boring grind and boring story. I couldn’t even be bothered to read ahead and find out how it ends. The whole game was a cop out for not explaining the many unanswered questions that the botched endings of the trilogy raised. “Let’s go to a new galaxy and conveniently leave before the events of reaper war so we won’t know what happened but still have the remember berries of a boring Liara recording and a holo image of your shepherd”
We will get a continuation of MEA story, they're working on ME5 currently and the post that says (or did say) there are answers to our many questions regarding the whole Mass Effect story, said that ME5 is to be the sequel to BOTH MEA and ME3's ending. So unfortunately for us fans that dislike MEA, MEA is canon to the ME Universe official story. I do agree that some of MEA's writing could be better, for example best for me is with Avitus Rix, at end with him on discovering what happened to Macen Barro, neither of the dialog responses Ryder has to Avitus feels appropriate.
Liam's redemption: his mission. It's Guardians of the Galaxy-level hilarious with its screw-ups. Easily the best squadmate personal mission in Andromeda; maybe its best quest. And then there's the whole shifting the layout of the map. Andromeda however misses the ball on not being an evil pathfinder. Why be a diplomat in fetch quests when you could just be a conquistador and exploit for the power-hungry folks back at the home base? The salarian or krogan bosses would probably appreciate that approach.
I love Andromeda now and I loved it on release. Yes it was a little bit of a let down but thats simply cos my expectations coming out of the OT were way too high. It was a great game with a lot of bugs and issues however almost all the bugs were fixed very quickly. The so called 'fans' of Mass Effect were pathetic and went as far as to send death threats to the devs kids, it was an embarrassment that led to my favourite game series effectively being shelved for a decade, completely pathetic, those that attacked the devs and their children deserve prison. Absolutely love how much attention Andromeda has been receiving as late, seems people are finally realising its a very solid and enjoyable game.
While I still think Andromeda has some fundamental issues, it's a solid game, with particularly enjoyable gameplay. Companions might not reach the highs of the Normandy crew, but like, those only got so good after 3 games. If ME had been cancelled after the first game, Garrus, Tali, Liara, etc would have been nothing more than decent buddies in your space exploration game. That's my opinion at least. The story never quite drew me in like the OG did... it was a fantastic premise that felt very weirdly executed. I mourn what it could have been, but can appreciate what it is.
Not all the bugs have been fixed. I've had the Nomad eject Ryder & co while it zooms away by itself, and I still occasionally get two Coras or two Dracks on the Tempest.
I think the main reason I quit so early in my play through of this game was because of my expectations that this game would be similar to mass effect but maybe if I change my expectations during my next play through I can enjoy it more
I cannot downplay how poor it was at launch. Then again, I have to constantly remind people how poor Witcher 3 and Cyberpunk were at launch, too. The difference there was CDPR brought those games back to a point that they're all time classics. MEA just got to a point where it was "okay," because the writing is all over the place in terms of quality. The gameplay after everything was fixed did get really fun, though; the extra movement options really made the combat dynamic...most of the time. Some enemies are easily cheesed by just getting on top of a nearby rock, but most enemies have some sort of projectile to counter that.
Witcher 3 at launch was not buggy at least on my playthrough don't know about others and CDPR were not even consider a big company before that game BioWare on the other hand was supposed to be a big AAA developer with a massive audience and budget waiting for their next release yet that game was a dumpster fire and I have not many positive things to say about it I played it last year for the first time and it still had a lot of bugs and terrible facial animations among the repetitive boring content it had to offer.
@Zombits-zt9fs Witcher 3 was a huge HUGE mess on PC when it launched. Search for Witcher 3 launch glitches and you'll see plenty. The worst offenders would crash your game and corrupy your save.
Witcher 3 wasn't as disastrously bugged as Cyberpunk 2077 at launch. It was a great game from the start, and the future DLCs along with patches only made the experience more refined and satisfying. Whereas with Cyberpunk they really had to dig dip, because they promised a lot of things, that were simly not working.
I don't think anything was as bad at launch compared to the hype (that included the developers phony game play videos) as Total War: Rome II. Just one of the worst released I ever experienced as a gamer.
The thing I'm most mad about with Andromeda more so than all the bad design choices and the launch is that they set up an entire new galaxy with a storyline that will never be fully explored and the story will never conclude with how badly the game was received.
I never felt connected to the story like I was in the original trilogy. I never felt motivated to talk to anyone and the story didn’t grip me. I loved the combat, I just wish it was attached to a more engaging story.
It was up there with cyberpunk as terrible at launch, but they did redeem themselves, and made a decent game. Sure, it's not as good as the original trilogy, but it does get a few things right, and it's ending isn't as infuriating at ME3.
Finished the Legendary edition a few days ago and have been playing Andromeda now. I am not that far in the story yet, but I'm having so much fun gameplay wise! I love the exploration and helping out the colonies and outposts. I don't expect to be wowed by the story like the trilogy did, but I am surprised by how much I like it.
My only question about M.E. Andromeda is this: HOW DID THE LEADER OF THE KETT GET A TOILET SEAT STUCK ON HIS HEAD? My guess is that since the Kett appear to have heads made of overly chewed bubble gum, perhaps someone tried to shove his head into a kamode and he got stuck? seriously though, the Kett are about the silliest looking villians ever to come out of the M.E. universe. I really don't want to see them show up in the next M.E. game. They were dumb and as over the top as Snidely Whiplash in Andromeda, and as with most of the cr@p that came our of Andromeda I'd STRONGLY prefer to forget that that game ever happened.
@monstersandmachines Maybe whoever came up with the character in the concept art has earned that same nickname, and whoever approved the design should have the nickname Poo-Poo King.
Its a ok game but it had a lot of potential, the main story could have used a bit of a overhaul, i like the main villains the kett how there like a biological reaper and there all other species transformed into kett, its like how the Roman empire would force conquered land to speak there language and follow there gods, but the guy at the head wasn't very interesting and he had very little screen time, like compare him to Illusive man or saren and he cant hold a candle to them. I wish they had more represented characters more than just the two figure heads that showed up or at least make the figureheads that did show more rememberable 😂 the ketts faces were to similar if they made them had a bit more distinction and gave the leader a better face it could have helped alot but he also did just need better scenes lol
Also i dont think you can compare the Charakter development from ME1 and MEA. ME1 takes like 10-15 hours to complete and it was the first game of the franchise
The 1st outpost choice DOES have an effect on the game, if you chose Military then you get extra soldiers during the final set of big battles against the Archon.
If I’ve said it once I’ve said it 1 billion times people didn’t hate this game because of what it is people hated it for what it wasn’t and what it wasn’t was the first three mass effect games it was just OK and in a franchise known for being phenomenal that’s just not gonna cut it
It was pretty underwhelming outside of the combat. The characters were all pretty one-note and the choices lack impact as stated. The OG series is universally beloved so it got an even more critical comparison. I played it once in 2017 and just haven't felt the need to do so again. It felt like Bollywood Mass Effect.
I didn't like the fact that you can't control your teammates. I like RPG mechanics, the strategy, the builds, the moment to moment tactics in combat. Having teammates that are just AI characters doing moves on their own without being able to coordinate or plan anything felt like a step down in that department for me. But there were plenty of things to like about the game, especially the exploration and some of the world building. I didn't hate it, it was just disappointing
You're not wrong. Given the hoops the original team had to go through to appease a certain demographic with a certain shoe-horned in shuttle pilot, I'm guessing they had a new crop of vocal fans.
Andromeda was good. It had it’s bad things but overall good. What makes me angry about the game is the lack of meaningful choices. Like you find out Addison hires outlaws, arms them, and trains them in inititive procedures guarding Prodromos and they turn on her and kill a bunch of people. You can expose her and nothing happens! Like wtf why can’t I get her exiled for that?
The game was fun enough but for me it really improved the story after reading the novels. I don't love that they split the whole story between multiple media styles but it wasn't the worst thing ever. At least it wasn't destiny.
Not that Bioware is capable of making a good game anymore, but even if they were, a new Mass Effect is entirely contingent on Andromeda not being canon. It's dead on arrival otherwise. But again, this is all in the realm of the hypothetical. The same people who had a character pointing a gun backwards are now more concerned with putting post surgery (you know the kind) scars in their fantasy RPG.
In my opinion it's not that bad.. it was going against our expectation of the original Mass effect trilogy... It is really a massive game with a lot of side missions but for those who never play it just look at the entire game as a huge DLC from the Mass effect trilogy and curve your expectations and you will enjoy the game much better
A fair review. Only criticism to Dan: Peebee only maybe a good companion? Loved her from the moment she first jumps onto you. And Suvi, damn I love a scottish accent. Overall not bad but not brilliant either and when you heritage is one of the greatest RPG series it's a though call. I still think an add on or second installment could have fixed some issues and swayed people over but a terrible launch and mediocre reviews probably sealed the deal. Hoping the best for ME4.
My biggest gripe was the 'replay value' there was absolutely no incentive to play again for a possible different outcome. That's what I think kept ppl playing 1-3, you could almost end up playing a whole new game jus with different choices or when you did certain missions
It's the only game I never sold after I finished it and no longer wanted it even after owning it for only a week, so it still had full resale value. Instead, I took it out back for target practice. True story.
I thought it was just fine. It wasn't a great game, it wasn't the festering shitstorm the internet tried to make it out to be. It was a perfectly serviceable game that tried to set itself apart from the story events of the main one. And I enjoyed it just fine.
I don't agree with a lot of this analysis regarding the storyline. "Ryder is a bad protagonist because he's insecure and cringe." Feels like its a bit lazy. I think just having us play another bad ass like commander Shepard would've been weak sauce because it would be like trying to emulate a zeitgeist. I liked that Ryder was a little understated and naïve. I think it was the game commenting that it wont ever live up to the original trilogy so it is going to do its own thing. I think the biggest mistake a lot of critiques makes with regards to Andromeda is trying to compare it. I remember playing the first game. It was fine, but it was not great shakes in terms of its characters. Many of the characters we love from the original trilogy didn't really become 3 dimensional till the 2nd game when we saw how they had changed. The writing in the first game was awful! It was sooo basic that at time I legit fell asleep in the middle of long conversations. I am so glad they got rid of the Paragon Renegade stuff for a more comprehensive dialogue wheel, it feels like they wanted to make the players feel like it was THEIR Ryder, and not just one of possible 2 Shepards. I liked Andromeda, I thought the story was complex, there were a lot of irons burning, but I thought that with more games, these choices and storylines would pay off. Some of the characters were a bit flat, but again, every Bioware game has some of those. The Kett were actual antagonists with some complexity to them, not just automatons. Don't get me wrong, Reapers work great as an antagonist, but as a writer, with characters like the reapers, you run into problems like you did with the ending of Mass Effect's original trilogy. You paint yourself into a corner. I liked that the Kett were not a force, and rather a colonizing species, and I especially liked that the game didn't just fall back into this tiresome scifi trope of "AI = Bad." I am very tired of that cliché plot point, it is incredibly over done. My only criticism of the game in terms of its characters was the Angara. I think they could've given them a little more lore. After I finished the game, it felt like I didn't really know any more about the Angara than I had half way through the game. This made the big reveal that they were a species "created" by the Jardaan not hit very hard. Which brings me to the ending. The ending should've been done better. I get that they likely wanted to resolve a lot of the choices in a possible sequel, but there should've been some consequences to your actions shown to occur. It feels like I made so many choices that could have massive implications only to get no payoff for them. And against I understand why they did it, presuming that they had intentions of making a sequel, but still, not seeing what happens to ANY of them other than a vague "planets are now more habitable and here is your standard colony" was a bit rubbish and where the game's rushed development seemed to impact the story the most.
I can deal with playing a protagonist like Luke from 1977 Star Wars, if it makes sense. In the case of ME:A it doesn't. As he said, it was pure nepotism because they were too married to the idea. There are chains of commands for a reason. I was in the Navy for 20 years. If the captain died, there is a whole host of officers in the chain to replace him, the new ensign with very little experience is FAR down that chain. Maybe it would have been about him reaching that level by end, and proving himself, it would have been a better execution of the story idea.
@Rikalonius but that's the big difference here, right? It's not a military force, pathfinders aren't specters. They show the conflict between Ryder and Cora as one of the conflicts of the game as she was passed over as the 2nd. That's what makes this more shades of grey than the original trilogy. Alex Ryder got kicked out of the military for his research to save his wife. These are not model archetypes. they're flawed people, regugees technically, looking for a home.
@@FLASK904 Exactly! Also pathfinder is not a predefined role as commander, not before Ryder anyways. And the Initiative is a group of renegades. They're all about defiance and not about following law and order, which doesn't even exist in Andromeda yet, because we are the firsts, the ones who sets it up.
I think it's a shame what they did with female Krogan in this game. In the original trilogy there was lore about the female Krogan living separate to the male Krogan. Having their own camps. And Eve was a total badass and had an air of wisdom and strength about her. Like the females were the wise sages and an excellent counterbalance to the over the top male dominated aggression in Krogan society. Like when Eve walks into the assembly of the male Krogan. All bickering and fighting about the path forward stops merely with her presence. When she walks in they all shut up and paid attention. She gives inspiring words and they all follow her lead. In Andromeda they just turned female Krogan into male Krogan who happened to be female. No sagely wardrobe. No wise council and guidance for their people. They are supposed to be the brains to the male Krogans brawn. Not just female versions of the same.
I never understood why so many people chose soldier in the original trilogy. I always gravitated towards infiltrator or vanguard because who wants to be a boring soldier when you can be a soldier with tech or biotic abilities in a sci fi universe? It's like the people who choose humans in RPGs with countless other race options. Boring, vanilla, basic.
valid question. I think I played soldier class also the first time I played the game. I played other fps shooting games so I just thought that soldier class is solid and easy all-around class to go with so that's why I chose it. Also maybe I was thinking that the other classes might have some flaws to the combat. BUT when I played the trilogy again I tried the other classes and thought what a stupid class the soldier is :D.. my favorites in the ME1 is adept, ME2 vanguard/Infiltrator , in ME3 vanguard/sentinel/infiltrator. In ME2 I thought the adept class got a bit boring and don't remember if I have tried it in ME3. Engineer I haven't really played but maybe I will give it a try some day
I'm playing it right now and enjoying it very much. It could have more alien Species but is an enjoyable game on it's own. I feel sorry that because of the spoiled brats we don't have the Quarian Ark DLC and more info on the general plot of Andromeda.
@Big Dan Gaming you really need to cover "Exodus" from archetype entertainment. it's pretty much the old guard from Bioware and other big rpg franchises. and from the cinematic trailer seems like a good spiritual successor to mass effect. if they could sneak a role for Mark Meer that would be the icing on the cake XD
I've tried this game a few times, and just couldn't get into it. I want to, and will probably try again eventually. But too many other games at the moment this is low on my list.
I never played any mass effect until this one last week, i enjoyed this game. I spent hours in this world. I might try to play the 1st 3 next. I liked the gameplay more than i thought i would.
Okay, something that bugged me in Andromeda aside from the gameplay issues and "choice and consequences" issues: The aliens. In the Milky Way, evolution of the current races was shaped by the Protheans, so it makes sense that there'd by shared physical and cultural traits. But that's not the case in the Andromeda galaxy. But the alien races we run into....all happen to have the same basic body design and share recognizable cultural traits. Hugging and kissing have the same significance as they do with humans. They're even morphologically ( if not genetically ) compatible to have sex with a human apparently. Like, Bioware had a chance to explore some TRULY alien creatures and just....made humans in funny rubber suits. ( Not literally, they're CGI I know, but that's the vibe ) ( Also I got it bundled with Dragon Age Inquisition with all DAI's expansions for like $20 on Steam a couple years ago. So not complaining. Just wish they'd allow it to be played on GeForce now, as my potato computer doesn't do well with it. )
Quarians and Turians and Drell are def NOT compatible with humans, Mordin warns you about turian and drell biology if you romance garrus or thane buuuut ofc it doesnt matter
![เปิดบ้าน นาราเครปกระเทย 1 ไร่ ขายขาดทุนหลัก10ล้าน เอามาใช้หนี้!!! l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0jz84VFWVP4/mqdefault.jpg)
If Shepard isn't the main character of a new mass effect game I at least hope they give us the option to play as other races. I always wanted a Krogan pc or even a Turian.
Or Quarian, these guys did that species dirty by claiming "Nah they just had ship problems." Regardless, just like in the trilogy, other races are on different ships. Why they couldn't give us a Quarian squadmate or side character is stupid.
I wouldn't mind a First Contact war game so you can have multiple protagonist.
Yeah, I'm also ok with not having Shepard in ME4. As long I can play as Liara T'Soni :D
I got a running theory that Liara gets pregnant by Shephard (willingly if you romance her) when she merges with your mind on earth before the final push. Thought it be cool to play as a Shephards kin in the next game of that was the case
@@GuyInBlackClothesthey had plans for it, but since the game was a failure they scrapped it
Drack could have been one of Mass Effect's best characters. An old Krogan past his prime trying to figure out where he fits into the world now. There was so much potential with that character.
Yeah, he just ended up being Not-Wrex/Grunt.
Except that's essentially what Wrex was. Drack was just a olderer version with none of the tragic backstory.
@@Rikalonius im super late to this comment, but nah man, Wrex wasn't defined by his tragic backstory (anymore than any other Krogan that lived before the Genophage is) his whole driving factor was being one of the few Krogan that recognized that the pointless fury and despair that most Krogan gave into was killing them faster than the genophage was, and a cultural overhaul was the only way they could have a future both metaphorically and literally(as krogan culture led to the other races being mostly okay with their slow genocide, as a resurgent krogan would just indiscriminately attack everyone)
@@EDMARSH100 I was taking about his father betraying him and having to kill him and abandon the Krogan, at least at the time of the conversation about it on the Normandy.
@@Rikalonius oh, then that makes a lot more sense im that context, but you kinda shouldve clarified that to start with
The poor launch helped pull the plug on any DLC planned for the game. There is a missing Salarian and Quarian ark which goes unlocated. It was inferred as that being the DLC.
The Salarian Ark was found, it was one of the missions of the main story.
The Quarian ark was the one that suffered. Bioware supposedly published a novel telling that story.
@@aronjohnson2388 They did, it is Mass Effect: Annihilation I believe
@@daltonbalusek I personally don’t think anyone including the TH-camr himself has actually play this game cause that’s definitely one of the main missions like you said plus like the comment above me said they drop a book on it
Not to mention the fact that the studio that made it was also lost.
My main issue with Andromeda was that I didn't feel like the main character, I felt like I was just carrying around the main character. The number of times people came to yo, not for your input, but to have SAM do something just showed how irrelevant Ryder was to the story. The end bit just felt more forced than anything trying to convince me that Ryder was important.
The one instant at the beginning when a potential LI actually greeted SAM and then quickly greeted Ryder more as an afterthought pretty much confirms it.
see thats actually what i liked about it i liked that not every thing revolved around me i liked that we saw our crew interact with eacher alot more than in previous games and not just me
That's the point, I think? I mean, Bioware could have used the simplest way of allowing us to play N7 Alec, who was already an established and confident character like Shepard, but they went with a newbie without any significant background, whose ship crew don't see Ryder as a leader at the first part of the game (It was really shown in first crew meeting, when everyone just left without Ryder closing the meeting). As the game progresses, you can actually see the shift towards MC, everyone starts treating Ryder as real pathfinder and in the end (Kind of rushed, agree) you can see Shepard vibes.
@@samuelw4380I never got that, all throughout it just felt like SAM was the main protagonist. During the one mission before the endgame SAM literally kills then revives Ryder to get out of a trap, if they let Ryder get the opportunity to prove themselves here then maybe it would have been more organic character growth but SAM just took charge.
SAM did all the real work throughout the game, the character isn't even given the chance to think through puzzles as SAM is quickly taking you by the hand to explain how to complete them. Even when SAM was infected instead of letting Ryder figure out how to save SAM they still have SAM walk Ryder through how to do it so instead of getting a moment of growth we just get shown that SAM is the lead character.
Without SAM there would be no Ryder but as shown in the opening Ryder is easily replaceable.
When the crew openly disrespects Ryder there should have been at least an option to put them in their place. Ryder is supposed to be an ex alliance marine he/she really shouldn't put up with that.
Often trying to pick what I thought was more of a "renegade" dialogue option usually came out as bitchy instead of badass. Just made me really dislike the character.
What bothered me most about Ryder (male version) was that his voice performance was so bland. What would have helped out a lot more if the performance was a lot more assertive and louder. He always talks so low and quiet.
In my opinion, no. It's an ok game, but when the series is known for it's critical acclaim, "ok" looks bad by comparison.
Well said.
💯
They set the bar so high, the only way to go, was down
If the next game has the gameplay of Andromeda and skill functions, with the role-playing and depth of characters from the trilogy, then it'd be a perfect game. A solid 10/10, like Me2 was for its time.
Yeah, that's really what it is, an okay game. It's unremarkably alright.
I personally prefer the Level design and combat of the original trilogy. The combat in ME 1-3 was more focused on strategy, similar to how games like Brothers in Arms worked. And while you still can kinda play this way in Andromeda, the game and level design clearly wants you to play it as a fast-paced action shooter. This can be fun, sure, and I'm not saying that a gaming franchise should never change its core mechanics, but it doesn't feel like Mass Effect to me. It feels more like CoD (or any other modern shooter) with a Mass Effect skin.
From afar, it looks more like Crackdown than CoD
But yeah, from the little I played of it, I preferred the combat of the originals. May even prefer Mass Effect 1's combat to it, idk
The Mass Effect Trilogy also feels way more realistic. The suspense that makes your heart beat when you see a 10 foot enemy 5 feet away from you after you carelessly turned around a corner was just super alarming and exciting, especially with the Geth tanks or giant Mechs. Even with other games like Halo, you could just blindly explore without a care in the world and then 5 seconds later you'll be fighting Hunters that ambushed you. It really gives the game a sense of mystery. Tbh I wouldn't mind a few game mechanics from Andromeda. Maybe Mass Effect 4 can have a nice balance of both gameplay giving a sense of freedom and mystery from a soldier's perspective
I agree. I always play as an infiltrator, just started mea and the combat seems off to me.
They took away our power wheel, so no pause in the game play to figure out strategy, and we got little to no control of our squad mates. What good does priming a target for detonation when my ally is off running around? At least in 1-3, they STAYED WHERE YOU PUT THEM.
The only thing that was worth playing was the benefactor mystery. Getting the memory fragments was a tedious task. However, it does put into perspective that the main reason for the initiative wasn’t space exploration like the majority of people thought. It was an evacuation.
That would have worked much better if they would have had the Crucible team craft a lifeboat and hurl themselves at Andromeda in case it didn't work. To have a human run initiative 8 years before the events of ME1, when humans were viewed almost a sub species by the other three council races, is very much straining credulity. And then to have the not-Citadel there just made it more cringe. To me, it was completely lore breaking, and took away from what could have a been a good castaway story foundation.
@@Rikalonius as far as we know, that could still happen...We don't know who the benefactor is and who's connected to and Liara is the only connection between galaxies, the next game is allegedly connecting both galaxies, but even if that's not the case, there was plans to make a Andromeda 2 (or at least, make DLCs to expand the story), so for all we know, Andromeda 2/Next ME game could very well have those connections
@BwanaLasPelotas I can't wait for the next iteratition of the Montreal Effect series, I've yet to truly feel Andromeda deep inside of me, to feel it's mass effect me in a truly Andromeda way.
It's like a straight to DVD spin off of your favourite film franchise. To me it's a solid 7/10
this is it. this is the perfect way to describe it.
are you in my head?
Slow story, too many boring side quests, most of the characters have 0 charisma, same as the villains, the gameplay and customization system are the only good things about this game
me too
this was the transmorphers as compared to power rangers.
It's important to remember the historical context of WHEN this game came out and what it represented at the time. This came out in 2017 and was following up Mass Effect 3 from 2013. People still had a bad taste in their mouths after the disastrous ending. So when Andromeda came out as a buggy, poorly written mess, it felt like an affirmation of all the bad feelings people had for the last few years at that point. Especially in light of all the censorship and ridicule from gaming media against those who were critical of ME3's ending. Andromeda was too much of a failure to suppress, and it reignited discussions of ME3's endings as well. In many ways, it became a post-mortem about the entire franchise and EA-Bioware as a whole.
6:51 I've thought about this myself, and the only possible explanation I can come up with is that Ryder had been exposed to the planet's toxic air for too long at that point. Even with a constant flow of breathable air from the moment Alec Ryder transferred his helmet, Scott/Sara Ryder barely survived. Merely sharing the helmet would have likely resulted in his/her death.
The combat being a win isn't really a surprise when you consider that this is the team that worked on Mass Effect 3's excellent multiplayer mode. And the environments in Andromeda are a nice step up from the already good environments in Mass Effect 3. It's the story and characters that kill this game for me.
The story is... fine I guess, but the villain is boring and one of the main story elements is too similar to something we had already seen in the Mass Effect trilogy.
But for me, the characters were worse. Alec Ryder was the only one I could take seriously. I wish he had been the main protagonist, because Scott/Sara Ryder has all the gravitas of a limp noodle. I guess I could accept the initial lack of gravitas if he/she had a really strong character arc, but I just didn't see it.
Something else I didn't like about Scott and Sara is that the developers treated them as the male and female version of the same character (like Commander Shepard). They're DIFFERENT PEOPLE, or at least they should be. But aside from one throwaway line early on, their personalities and dialogue are identical. Maybe it would have been too much to expect BioWare Montreal to essentially craft two separate trees of interactions and dialogue with main protagonists that are actually different from one another, but they shouldn't have done the sibling thing if they weren't willing to follow through with it. They should have just had one character with a male and female version.
I still can’t get over how the trilogy was about a team of the most badass fighters in the galaxy (Shepard was already the best of humanity even before the game started), and the Andromeda was about a bunch of high school kids…
Tbf, andromeda initiative wasn't the spearpoint of a war, either.
Ya kinda want younger people to start a new society.
@@KeithElliott-zd8cx Yeah, and starting a new society is not a good basis for an action game…
@@juzoli eh, depends on the game. but, moot point, as that wasn't what andromeda, the game, was about anyway, really. it's the plot behind the andromeda initiative, but not the gameplay.
And?
Indeed, the Normandy Crew were the Expendables, and the Tempest crew were the Breakfast club.
I really liked the humour and the consept of a very inexperienced pathfinder. It’s a fresh change compared to an experienced soldier like Shepard. Also playing as a biotic was a blast, the combat overall is very enjoyable.
Biotics all the way 😎
The only mass effect game that made biotics feel powerful in gameplay and not just cutscenes
Andromeda was the first ME game I ever played (after the major bugs were fixed). I didn’t understand the hate it was getting until my friend gifted me the original trilogy.
Andromeda doesn’t hold a candle to the original trilogy. That’s not to say that it’s an awful game, but after learning what made older BioWare games special, I have no desire to ever play this game again. I’m not sold on the next ME game either. I haven’t seen any meaningful change from BioWare that would give me confidence.
yeah, kinda the problem - it's a good action rpg - imo better than the trilogy in that respect.
It fails at what mass effect was loved for, and what bioware is kinda famed for.
Bioware hasn't released a good game for more than 10 years at this point. How the mighty have fallen
Thats the problem with that Mindset, you cant compare a whole Developed Trilogy to a new single sided Entry. I like to compare MEA to ME1 thats more fair. A completely new Game build up to tell its whole Story with Sequels. Only that Andromeda won´t have the opportunity atleast as a Standalone Series. The buggy technical state the Game launched in was indeed bad. Other then that it was totally fine imo, you have to Stop a Bad Guy from doing dumb shit similar to ME1.
I came to this after playing The Outer Worlds; after Liam's loyalty quest boy did I want to throw him out of the airlock. No chance that would fly on the Normandy.😡
IKR? I just replayed that the other day and was like: This doofus never would have made it on the Normandy! Who even chose him to be crew on the Tempest? Alec Ryder? Yet another thing the dude messed up then. Almost everyone else on the Tempest has a unique selling point or skill, but Liam is just... young and dumb.
I wanted to space peebee after trying to kill me in the escape pod.
Combat wise he also sucked. Only using SMG. Especially mid to long range gun battles he was useless.
But the Fanservice when he and Jaal went all Gym-bros xD
PeeBees loyalty mission was more spacing worthy. What Liam revealed is information that had already been revealed to legions of people.
a solid one and done for me. I got super immersed and love it when I played it. But everytime I have tried to replay, I get bored and stop. I never had that with any Bioware game before it. Multiplayer was fucking baller though.
edit: some of the most fun combat I've ever played. They really nailed that part for me. some great builds
Same! I'm trying to get through it for a second time, cause now I have Steam Achievements to grind for, but it is a struggle. I replayed the original trilogy 100% like four times with ease.
@@MCellationthe major part for me is the UI, it feels so sluggish and hard to scroll through. It’s also really slow there are times when it delays or sometimes the blue highlighter doesn’t go over the button you want and you have to move back and forth for it to relocate it
@@MCellationI just finished my legendary edition playthrough and it was my first time playing thru all 3 in a row (never played 1, mostly played MP on 3, played 2 many times on 360) and it took everything in me to not immediately start the whole series over after I finished. Such a banger and me3 was much better than I remembered.
One of the best parts for me that no one really talks about...
Later on, once you get some good schematics and crafting materials, you can craft some _beastly_ weapons.
Explosive rounds, ricocheting rounds... you could even turn _any_ gun into a beam weapon, and/or give it regenerating ammo (similar to ME1). Some combos were crazy broken.
Same. Was a blast with very fun combat, but when I went to play again after a year or so I just got bored and moved on
In my opinion if the Mass Effect trilogy didn't exist and Andromeda was the first and only game people would have seen it as an average sci fi space game. They wouldn't love it but they also wouldn't hate it. Andromeda isn't disliked because it's a bad, it's just diliked because of the legacy of its predecessors.
No, it's disliked because it's bad lol
My main problem was that if felt like there were always too many "do X thing Y times" 'quests' that it made the game feel padded and underthought. It just felt like an MMORPG mechanism that was shoehorned in to give the game more 'content.'
Interesting take on the class restriction. That took all replayability away, as in I did not see a reason to restart another playthrough- I already played all different classes in one go. And with word of no dlc or continuation of the game or story, I felt no reason to replay. MELE was able to squeeze 4 full playthroughs, due to wanting play as different classes- Vanguard and Infiltrator for the first time for me.
True. Character classes is a core feature in RPGs. We can identify with our character much better it they serve a single specific role in combat, and ME1-3 even had very memorable moments where only a specific class could access certain dialogue choices.
Plus, the squadmates were origianlly intended to complement each other and the PC in their abilities (combat, tech and biotics). This is not possible with a jack-of-all-trades one-person-army.
That said, I am glad ME:A let you switch classes within a single game, as I am not willing to play it more than once, anyways. XD
And the combat is so much fun that being able to access all skills only serves to increase the fun.
I have never liked or agreed with the "why couldn't Ryder share the helmet?" argument. Has no one noticed that the younger Ryder's helmet is compromised in a HOSTILE environment. This isn't scuba where you can share a respirator. The environmental suit(s) have to be first unsealed, then re-sealed. That takes time. Likely both would be dead if they tried to buddy share the one helmet between them. This was hinted at early in the first alien planet mission when the younger Ryder's helmet face plate cracks and you see them desperately looking for the emergency sealant.
That aside, I generally agree. Once Bioware slowed down and fixed Andromeda, it is/was serviceable. As I am sure I have said here, and I know I have said elsewhere, Bioware killed/ injured two franchises with Anthem. It killed Anthem and severely injured Mass Effect as if I remember correctly, Bioware pulled development staff from Andromeda as it was being finished to work on Anthem.
I have played and beaten Andromeda at least three times now, and there are still a few bugs. The animation in cutscenes is kind of weird (especially the faces/eyes), and sometimes in combat, an enemy will get stuck in the wall and you either have to move around them or try to kill them while they are in said wall. My biggest gripe would probably be how large the open worlds are. They're not nearly as bad as DAI, and your squad speak a lot more often then in DAI. The landscape in most of the worlds is pretty enough to distract me from the monotonous traveling from one place to the next.
That being said, I do enjoy the game for what it is. I think the story is interesting and the squad is fun. Also the lore behind the Angara and Kett is pretty cool, even if a bit weird or lack luster. I love the more-laid back vibe of the group that makes sense for the setting. I would love to see a second game that plays off of your choices from this game and works on following some more plot threads. I also have found the main story line from each of the planets to be fun to playthrough while discovering interesting events across the map as I go along.
Again though, this is just my opinion. Andromeda is not a game I play constantly or back to back for a long period of time, but it is a fun one for me to play and complete once every few years or so.
100%
Why is your Ryder looking like the adoring fan from Starfield 💀
For me, one of the big contrasts between Ryder and Shepard is that Shepard starts with a reputation already set in, has become an N7 and was considered an elite from the moment we start.
Ryder, either Scott or Sara, had undergone basic training and were on their first assignment when they were blacklisted and discharged. No one expects much of them because no one knows them.
They end Andromeda where Shepard started, a hero with a reputation. It’s the equivalent of playing as Shepard during the Blitz, on Torfan or during Akuze at the end of Shepard’s first game.
We can see this with the briefings at the start and end of Andromeda. At the start everyone barely acknowledged Ryder and leaves the briefing without being dismissed and Ryder feeling awkward. At the end they all refuse to leave until Ryder dismisses them and act much more professionally.
Great opening level, great shooting and controls….. but half assed rushed story is truly where it went wrong for me. It needed a couple more years of development time.
Just finished the game yesterday and i kinda loved it. Took me some time (October-Feburary) with some breaks ... it isnt the original trilogy but it s still has it s good sides. Wish we gotten some more content after the main story.
I played it 5 years after. Keeping my expectations for the story and characters a bit more humble I really enjoyed it. Biggest issues I had was the repetitive nature of the side missions(especially when most were randomly generated), the pacing of the story was inconsistent as well. However I really like the characters and how they played off each other and the gameplay was great.
I had a similar experience with it. Got it for cheap a year or two after release when all the big bugs had been squashed and went in with low expectations, ended up liking it enough to play through it twice. The main story is weak and the antagonists are forgettable and honestly unnecessary, but the companions are likable enough and the combat and exploration gameplay is fun. I especially enjoyed "terraforming" the planets and actually seeing them visibly change... It doesn't really do much mechanics-wise, but it helps sell the fantasy of being a space settler carving out a niche for your people. Speaking of which, I did also like that the main theme was more about exploration rather than the mystery and war against basically gods of the original trilogy, gave it more of an identity of its own.
Andromeda felt like a poorly written retelling of mass effect 1.
I understand a lot of the criticism around Andromeda, but I still do think it is very over hated, especially by people who have never played it. I hope whatever connections it has to Mass Effect 5, only makes the aspects of the game better, but I do not want to return to Andromeda
Oh shit I love your videos ❤
This is my third comment sorry. Yeah most of the consequences in game are just verbal recognition but ME1 does basically the same thing. Rachni queen doesn't do anything until ME3. Save the council doesn't til ME2&3. Kirahes survival, ME3. Loyalty missions never matter. Feros only gets you galactic readiness and barely any at that. Whos in charge of Noveria is similar. I would say there are only two choices that heavily inpact the mass effect trilogy, including ME1. Does Wrex die and whos the virmire survivor because they directly impact you and your squad. You can't tell me ME1 is that much better than Andromeda about choice and consequence. Fans complaining about this kindof stuff is the reason we never got a sequel to Andromeda, or even DLC that might've touched on stuff like the Salarian Pathfinder much more. Its unfair to compare Andromeda to the entire trilogy. It should be compared to ME1.
Exactly.
Tbh even if we compare just ME1 to Andromeda these games are polar opposites. Me1: dated graphics (especially original game), dated combat (again, OG is even worse), good story, ok to good companions. Andromeda: good combat, good graphics, bad everything else.
Yeah but still mass effect andromeda story is so shit that my child can write a better story
Good point you make about comparing it to ME1. Totally agree choice and consequence boiled down to three coloured endings in Mass effect 3, from what I've seen of the state of the galaxy in Andromeda's references and what we see so far in the promotion of the next game it's likely that choice doesn't matter anyway and possibly only one is likely to be cannon. It was the continuation of the story that gave us a sense of choice and consequence in the trilogy but it still boiled down to an illusion at the end, especially before they extended the ending, my depression was real and I could barely play it to the ending again after completing the pre-dlc ending, I find it hard to look at the ending with nostalgia it's the in-between that I enjoyed and choices mattered to a point as the depth of your actions occured over 3 games, for example making peace between geth and quarians was difficult to do without a lot of pieces falling into place. Essentially it had time to gain depth. I just played Andromeda this year after being so annoyed and disappointed by the cringy animations at launch and the bugs (some of which remain) that I just couldn't pick it up again till now. I'm glad I did as I had fun playing it, loved the jetpack making combat feel very different for example, exploration flybys were a nice touch, Angara, Remnant were interesting after they were explored a little more, Kett archon was too much like Mustache twirling boring bad guy, so it kind of diminished the kett a bit, as were exiles making most of the enemies, so we travel to another galaxy to largely fight ourselves, boring). it can't stand against the epic depth of a trilogy but it was unfair of us to expect it to and now it likely never will because Bioware largely gave up on it and they never really did it justice in the first place, remember at the time a lot of their effort was going into Anthem, we just got the barebones of the vision and as another commentor here posted it's important to remember the historical context of the hurt we felt prior to game release from the disappointing ending of the previous game and the fact many were demonised for voicing their disappointment (of how rushed, empty and unfulfilling it was) after investing so much of their energy in the years between the 3 games, I recall some people did take it too far by making death threats (which is just criminal and entitled nonsense) which led to the media's response to fans but it didn't make the criticism invalid. I hope some of the better elements of this concept of Andromeda go into the next game though. I love the universe this game is set in, the races, the setting, the space opera. I'd love to see it reach it's potential and not be rushed next time it's a testament to the strength of the universe of Mass effect that it could survive two big mistakes that came about as a result of rushing content. They need to get it right next time.
Ugh, I hate the combat mechanics in Andromeda. They literally got rid of all the combat features I liked about the trilogy (control of squadmates’ powers, the power wheel and the pause that goes with it).
The only thing I actually like about the combat is the verticality.
Same.
I disagree with your take on Ryder. Mostly I feel like you're only weighing in how Ryder acts in the beginning of the game because by the end of the game I do think Ryder has a lot of confidence and is super respected by his team. This was supposed to be the first game in a trilogy and Ryder likely would've been more like Shepard in those later games. I like that there's a story arc and maybe you don't cause you can't roleplay a stoic badass power fantasy. But I couldn't roleplay being insecure in the og trilogy. I wasn't even able to roleplay being sad about Kaiden breaking up with me in ME2. What if I think Shepard is too stoic and it takes me away from their character? This take is extremely subjective and I guess that's the point but I do want to say the other perspective on this because I think saying Ryder is bad and walking away is missing the more complex picture of what that character is. Shepard is more complex then their stoicism and Ryder is more complex then their insecurities.
Anyway I like Ryder a lot, maybe as much as Shepard. Maybe more than Shepard depending on what aspect of the characters we're talking about. I definitely relate to Ryder on a much more personal level. This has just turned into rambling but yeah. Don't dis my guy like that
This!
They dislike them because they aren't shepherd and not because they are a bad character. Personally i think ryder is a great protagonist and if im being honest even though I do prefer shepherd, I do think ryder has more actually character to them (for the first game later it's more even) Just a shame there wasn't more games
Agree! I made Shepherd in ME2 display evidence of a drinking problem (by drinking everywhere possible) just so I could imagine that she had emotions. The pressure was getting to her and she just needed a drink, you know? There is definitely more depth in the role play aspect in Andromeda. I don’t think it’s a better game than Mass Effect 2, but I think it actually fixed a few things that bugged me about the original trilogy. Like having to be a bad@ss and everyone constantly telling Shepherd how important, cool and amazing they are. In my opinion, the constant ego stroking did not enhance my enjoyment of the game. It felt a little like pandering.
Funny, when I started ME1, I thought it would be great if I could have played the character before everyone thought they were awesome. Because then at least some of the praise would have felt earned and I would have gotten more of a character arc. So I do think that was a thing that Andromeda did better. You don’t start awesome, but you can become awesome and then it feels more earned.
"But now that all the bugs have been fixed..."
My man, that is a very generous supposition.
Yeah I played it last year and a quest bugged completely, it just wasn't activating the flag that I'd killed all the enemies. Wasted an hour running around trying to figure out what I was missing. Really soured me on the whole experience
My opinion was that it wasn't a bad game it was just a bad Mass effect game. My biggest gripe will always be the lack of new species that are introduced in Andromeda. It was mainly a rehash of milky way friends with 2 new aliens to say hi. Mass effect 1 in 2007 introduced most of the aliens we see and know except for the Drell and Vorcha who were introduced in mass effect 2.
The vorcha are mentioned in ME1, but never shown.
@@Rikaloniusthe vorcha are shown and mentioned many times in me2
@@lfcforlifefr I can see where the confusion was in my statement, but I wasn't referring to 2 or 3.
When in isolation, it's ok. But when aside its Mass Effect legacy, Andromeda is YA discount Halo with decent gameplay.
It's an okay game, for the under 10 bucks I paid, but my biggest gripe with it is reducing you to only being able to slot 3 powers/skills.
It's basically forcing you to take a power combo, rather than have contingencies for many situations. The number of times I was like "well that would be cool if I just had another slot" knocks off some enjoyment for me. But it did give me a strong "Voyager" vibe - alone in alien space, finding new enemies and allies, etc.
Also I wish the NPCs hadn't gotten hit with the woke stick - screw realism in this Great Value space opera!
I too found that beyond irritating. See all these cool looking skills? You can only use three at any one time 😊. Nah f*ck off with that.
it's locked to 3 powers/skills because it's designed for consoles not PC
Yes, I would have preferred 6-8 slots instead of this profile switching.
This was a fair review. Thanks for not jumping immediately on the hate train
7 years. I can’t believe it’s been 7 years….. the disappointment feels like it happened literally last year
No. Romances were great. Combat was great. The final mission was great. Some of its criticism was super deserved. Most of its criticism was for being different from the trilogy and I think that's fine. For instance, Andromeda is more comedic and less serious. That is a trade off not inherently worse. I actually like Andromedas tone a lot, if you don't whatever you have three games of what you like don't criticize me for liking this. Stuff like that.
To me the combat is the only really good thing in this game, a solid improvement compared to ME3 except of not having jetpack cooldown. Thats why I and many others enjoyed the MP. You get aliens, lots of classes and skills and this new combat.
Ive only played ME1. Ill play this one after I finish the trilogy. So probably in 2185.
It's bad but it's not 2020's AAA gaming bad.
No, it's even worse than that. 2020s AAA can still have some people with talent forced to work on pure slop. No one with talent touched a keyboard in the development of Andromeda.
6:05 cant even imagine what would have happened if anybody walks out of the room while my renegade commander shepard was talking. Things would gone dark real quick.
Playing devils advocate, briefly, I think a fairer comparison is to do this against Mass Effect 1 only. That is a game that, if you just play the story, is ultimately 3 main quests to kill, save or retrieve something, and three romance options. Under that, you have the story of the Reapers, but you don’t fully get that in the first game, and Liara just tells you where to go regardless of when you pick her up. Outside of that, your biggest choice is whether or not to kill Wrex, but just in that one game, it has no lasting impact aside from some dialogue. If you play every side mission, too, they are a lot of fetch and carrying, for little pay-off. And a lot of tedious Mako driving. If 2 and 3 hadn't come out with their ability to import your character and saved options, it would have gone down as a good game, but maybe not great.
Exactly! It's unfair to compare 1 game to 3...
So, I played ME1 after ME2. While the combat was not as good, and I did not like billions of RPG gear decisions (many of which didn't make much difference) the story was top notch. There is NOTHING like the conversations with Sovereign, Vigil, or Saren in Andromeda. The first time I played the Sovereign interchange, I got goose bumps. But, ME1 was a non-Star Wars KOTOR that just improved on the formula, it was a game for its time, and better than its peers. Andromeda was the opposite. It took a huge step backwards to its peers, and the dialog was cringe. Yes, the combat was better, but it had nothing else. Also, ME1 was made as a closed story. Nobody ever thought it was going to get a sequel. Andromeda started life expecting to have more games and DLC, and it had the benefit of the trilogy to overpower the hype train. ME1 was its own entity that started slow and became wildly successful on word of mouth.
@@Rikalonius It says a lot when carbon copy of KOTOR with reused plot is better than decade younger game.
I got this game opening weekend and loved it. Sure the story and characters were weaker but most of the Mass Effect 1 cast wasn't near their best in the first game. And it easily has my favorite gameplay in the series. There were a lot of gameplay changes between Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2 I disliked and while Mass Effect 3 fixed some of these it actually made one worse, and didn't fully fix the one of others with some DLCs adding a partial fix while Andromeda fixed them all and made the class system much less restrictive. Sure I mainly focused on the Tech tree until it was maxed but it was nice being able to mix some Combat tree skills in during the early phases then pouring more points into the combat tree once I had finished the Tech tree.
Most of the gameplay bugs I encountered were things I ran into with the original Mass Effect trilogy and even the Legendary edition. And I don't care at all about cutscene animation glitches or characters faces looking odd. I remember people complaining about a character looking tired but never understood why people cared so much about this. And honestly under the circumstances her being exhausted and looking it makes sense
I doubt I will ever forgive whatever jerks canceled the story DLCs.
It seems we are on the same page.
Was borderline unplayable on release, as were many now beloved AAA games, including Cyberpunk and Witcher 3 which was buggy af when it came out. They patched everything up, the game was still flawed, still the weakest in the series, but a good game anyway, beat it twice and had fun both times. I'd be willing to bet the vast majority of people trashing Andromeda have never even played it.
The biggest problem with Andromeda was that it forgot why so many people loved the Mass Effect trilogy to begin with. When most fans talk about the series, they don’t really talk about how much they love the combat or the world exploration or even the RPG aspects of it; they almost exclusively talk about how much they love the characters and the connections they have with each other. Would the trilogy have been as well loved as it was if Garrus or Tali didn’t exist? If Shepard wasn’t the smartass they were? If Joker was a silent NPC or EDI only existed to give details about the ship? If Javik wasn’t delightfully blood thirsty? Everything that made Mass Effect so well loved always comes back to the characters and their relationship to Shepard, and that’s where Andromeda flounders.
The devs either didn’t have the time or didn’t care to really flesh out these characters. You don’t know them, their reasons for joining Ryder amount to ‘Eh why not?’, and none of them are nearly compelling. They were described to me as being hot topic versions of the trilogy characters, and that held up when I recently tried to play it. None of them are that interesting, and none of them warranted me picking up the controller to play past the first act. I bought the game on sale for $8, and, in hindsight, it wasn’t worth it.
I’ve tried playing through it on 3 or 4 separate occasions but I got so bored I just gave up. Boring grind and boring story. I couldn’t even be bothered to read ahead and find out how it ends.
The whole game was a cop out for not explaining the many unanswered questions that the botched endings of the trilogy raised. “Let’s go to a new galaxy and conveniently leave before the events of reaper war so we won’t know what happened but still have the remember berries of a boring Liara recording and a holo image of your shepherd”
When the game came out in such awful state:
BioWare: I'M ONLY HUMAN AFTER ALL... DON'T PUT THE BLAME ON ME
We will get a continuation of MEA story, they're working on ME5 currently and the post that says (or did say) there are answers to our many questions regarding the whole Mass Effect story, said that ME5 is to be the sequel to BOTH MEA and ME3's ending. So unfortunately for us fans that dislike MEA, MEA is canon to the ME Universe official story.
I do agree that some of MEA's writing could be better, for example best for me is with Avitus Rix, at end with him on discovering what happened to Macen Barro, neither of the dialog responses Ryder has to Avitus feels appropriate.
Liam's redemption: his mission. It's Guardians of the Galaxy-level hilarious with its screw-ups. Easily the best squadmate personal mission in Andromeda; maybe its best quest. And then there's the whole shifting the layout of the map.
Andromeda however misses the ball on not being an evil pathfinder. Why be a diplomat in fetch quests when you could just be a conquistador and exploit for the power-hungry folks back at the home base? The salarian or krogan bosses would probably appreciate that approach.
I love Andromeda now and I loved it on release. Yes it was a little bit of a let down but thats simply cos my expectations coming out of the OT were way too high. It was a great game with a lot of bugs and issues however almost all the bugs were fixed very quickly.
The so called 'fans' of Mass Effect were pathetic and went as far as to send death threats to the devs kids, it was an embarrassment that led to my favourite game series effectively being shelved for a decade, completely pathetic, those that attacked the devs and their children deserve prison.
Absolutely love how much attention Andromeda has been receiving as late, seems people are finally realising its a very solid and enjoyable game.
As a game it was fine, as a Mass Effect game not so much. I still enjoyed my time on it.
While I still think Andromeda has some fundamental issues, it's a solid game, with particularly enjoyable gameplay. Companions might not reach the highs of the Normandy crew, but like, those only got so good after 3 games. If ME had been cancelled after the first game, Garrus, Tali, Liara, etc would have been nothing more than decent buddies in your space exploration game. That's my opinion at least.
The story never quite drew me in like the OG did... it was a fantastic premise that felt very weirdly executed. I mourn what it could have been, but can appreciate what it is.
Not all the bugs have been fixed. I've had the Nomad eject Ryder & co while it zooms away by itself, and I still occasionally get two Coras or two Dracks on the Tempest.
I was turned off when they gloated about putting soft core porn in the game. I want nothing to do with that.
I think the main reason I quit so early in my play through of this game was because of my expectations that this game would be similar to mass effect but maybe if I change my expectations during my next play through I can enjoy it more
I cannot downplay how poor it was at launch. Then again, I have to constantly remind people how poor Witcher 3 and Cyberpunk were at launch, too. The difference there was CDPR brought those games back to a point that they're all time classics. MEA just got to a point where it was "okay," because the writing is all over the place in terms of quality. The gameplay after everything was fixed did get really fun, though; the extra movement options really made the combat dynamic...most of the time. Some enemies are easily cheesed by just getting on top of a nearby rock, but most enemies have some sort of projectile to counter that.
Witcher 3 at launch was not buggy at least on my playthrough don't know about others and CDPR were not even consider a big company before that game BioWare on the other hand was supposed to be a big AAA developer with a massive audience and budget waiting for their next release yet that game was a dumpster fire and I have not many positive things to say about it I played it last year for the first time and it still had a lot of bugs and terrible facial animations among the repetitive boring content it had to offer.
Witcher 3 and Cyberpunk were both better designed games. And I say that as someone who believes Cyberpunk deserved all the flak it got on launch.
@Zombits-zt9fs Witcher 3 was a huge HUGE mess on PC when it launched. Search for Witcher 3 launch glitches and you'll see plenty. The worst offenders would crash your game and corrupy your save.
Witcher 3 wasn't as disastrously bugged as Cyberpunk 2077 at launch. It was a great game from the start, and the future DLCs along with patches only made the experience more refined and satisfying. Whereas with Cyberpunk they really had to dig dip, because they promised a lot of things, that were simly not working.
I don't think anything was as bad at launch compared to the hype (that included the developers phony game play videos) as Total War: Rome II. Just one of the worst released I ever experienced as a gamer.
I loved this game from day one. It is not as good as the trilogy but for me I give it a solid 7.5
It's a 6.5/10 imho. I liked the combat and upgrades but the story and enemies are boring.
The thing I'm most mad about with Andromeda more so than all the bad design choices and the launch is that they set up an entire new galaxy with a storyline that will never be fully explored and the story will never conclude with how badly the game was received.
Um... not that I'm complaining, but didn't you make a video about it already?
I never felt connected to the story like I was in the original trilogy. I never felt motivated to talk to anyone and the story didn’t grip me. I loved the combat, I just wish it was attached to a more engaging story.
It was up there with cyberpunk as terrible at launch, but they did redeem themselves, and made a decent game. Sure, it's not as good as the original trilogy, but it does get a few things right, and it's ending isn't as infuriating at ME3.
Finished the Legendary edition a few days ago and have been playing Andromeda now. I am not that far in the story yet, but I'm having so much fun gameplay wise! I love the exploration and helping out the colonies and outposts. I don't expect to be wowed by the story like the trilogy did, but I am surprised by how much I like it.
I feel like you do this "review" every 6 months 😅😅
My only question about M.E. Andromeda is this:
HOW DID THE LEADER OF THE KETT GET A TOILET SEAT STUCK ON HIS HEAD?
My guess is that since the Kett appear to have heads made of overly chewed bubble gum, perhaps someone tried to shove his head into a kamode and he got stuck?
seriously though, the Kett are about the silliest looking villians ever to come out of the M.E. universe. I really don't want to see them show up in the next M.E. game. They were dumb and as over the top as Snidely Whiplash in Andromeda, and as with most of the cr@p that came our of Andromeda I'd STRONGLY prefer to forget that that game ever happened.
@monstersandmachines Maybe whoever came up with the character in the concept art has earned that same nickname, and whoever approved the design should have the nickname Poo-Poo King.
Its a ok game but it had a lot of potential, the main story could have used a bit of a overhaul, i like the main villains the kett how there like a biological reaper and there all other species transformed into kett, its like how the Roman empire would force conquered land to speak there language and follow there gods, but the guy at the head wasn't very interesting and he had very little screen time, like compare him to Illusive man or saren and he cant hold a candle to them. I wish they had more represented characters more than just the two figure heads that showed up or at least make the figureheads that did show more rememberable 😂 the ketts faces were to similar if they made them had a bit more distinction and gave the leader a better face it could have helped alot but he also did just need better scenes lol
In Mass Effect 1 Wrex is the only decision that matters within the game. Andromeda is comparable to ME1 in terms of decisions
Also i dont think you can compare the Charakter development from ME1 and MEA. ME1 takes like 10-15 hours to complete and it was the first game of the franchise
Writing is trash, characters unlikeable and/or annoying. A disgrace to the Mass Effect name.
The 1st outpost choice DOES have an effect on the game, if you chose Military then you get extra soldiers during the final set of big battles against the Archon.
Was kind of hoping this would be a full review like the original trilogy videos.
If I’ve said it once I’ve said it 1 billion times people didn’t hate this game because of what it is people hated it for what it wasn’t and what it wasn’t was the first three mass effect games it was just OK and in a franchise known for being phenomenal that’s just not gonna cut it
It was pretty underwhelming outside of the combat. The characters were all pretty one-note and the choices lack impact as stated. The OG series is universally beloved so it got an even more critical comparison. I played it once in 2017 and just haven't felt the need to do so again. It felt like Bollywood Mass Effect.
I didn't like the fact that you can't control your teammates. I like RPG mechanics, the strategy, the builds, the moment to moment tactics in combat. Having teammates that are just AI characters doing moves on their own without being able to coordinate or plan anything felt like a step down in that department for me.
But there were plenty of things to like about the game, especially the exploration and some of the world building. I didn't hate it, it was just disappointing
The bugs have not all been fixed
Nope, not even close.
I hate Liam. Least favorite squadmate of any game, maybe tied with Sebastian from DA2.
“ Nobody asked for the Mass Effect Humiliation fetish edition….”
Well actually…. Nvm.
You're not wrong. Given the hoops the original team had to go through to appease a certain demographic with a certain shoe-horned in shuttle pilot, I'm guessing they had a new crop of vocal fans.
Andromeda was good. It had it’s bad things but overall good.
What makes me angry about the game is the lack of meaningful choices.
Like you find out Addison hires outlaws, arms them, and trains them in inititive procedures guarding Prodromos and they turn on her and kill a bunch of people.
You can expose her and nothing happens! Like wtf why can’t I get her exiled for that?
I do hope we get to see how they will handle both galaxies together
The game was fun enough but for me it really improved the story after reading the novels. I don't love that they split the whole story between multiple media styles but it wasn't the worst thing ever. At least it wasn't destiny.
Yes. The less we talk about it the better.
Not that Bioware is capable of making a good game anymore, but even if they were, a new Mass Effect is entirely contingent on Andromeda not being canon. It's dead on arrival otherwise. But again, this is all in the realm of the hypothetical. The same people who had a character pointing a gun backwards are now more concerned with putting post surgery (you know the kind) scars in their fantasy RPG.
In my opinion it's not that bad.. it was going against our expectation of the original Mass effect trilogy... It is really a massive game with a lot of side missions but for those who never play it just look at the entire game as a huge DLC from the Mass effect trilogy and curve your expectations and you will enjoy the game much better
Mass Effect Andromeda > Starfield
tbh it wasn't a horrible game, could've used more time to cook/develop though.
They cooked it for so long it went bad. Bioware management is to blame for this poor effort.
A fair review. Only criticism to Dan: Peebee only maybe a good companion? Loved her from the moment she first jumps onto you. And Suvi, damn I love a scottish accent. Overall not bad but not brilliant either and when you heritage is one of the greatest RPG series it's a though call. I still think an add on or second installment could have fixed some issues and swayed people over but a terrible launch and mediocre reviews probably sealed the deal. Hoping the best for ME4.
My biggest gripe was the 'replay value' there was absolutely no incentive to play again for a possible different outcome. That's what I think kept ppl playing 1-3, you could almost end up playing a whole new game jus with different choices or when you did certain missions
It's the only game I never sold after I finished it and no longer wanted it even after owning it for only a week, so it still had full resale value. Instead, I took it out back for target practice. True story.
My rule
Story > combat
Some examples
Origin > inquisition
Kotor > anthem
Me123> BUGandromeda
So no. Not worthy
I thought it was just fine. It wasn't a great game, it wasn't the festering shitstorm the internet tried to make it out to be. It was a perfectly serviceable game that tried to set itself apart from the story events of the main one. And I enjoyed it just fine.
I enjoy Andromeda. I hope that Bioware one day finishes the story with another game.
I don't agree with a lot of this analysis regarding the storyline. "Ryder is a bad protagonist because he's insecure and cringe." Feels like its a bit lazy. I think just having us play another bad ass like commander Shepard would've been weak sauce because it would be like trying to emulate a zeitgeist. I liked that Ryder was a little understated and naïve. I think it was the game commenting that it wont ever live up to the original trilogy so it is going to do its own thing. I think the biggest mistake a lot of critiques makes with regards to Andromeda is trying to compare it. I remember playing the first game. It was fine, but it was not great shakes in terms of its characters. Many of the characters we love from the original trilogy didn't really become 3 dimensional till the 2nd game when we saw how they had changed. The writing in the first game was awful! It was sooo basic that at time I legit fell asleep in the middle of long conversations. I am so glad they got rid of the Paragon Renegade stuff for a more comprehensive dialogue wheel, it feels like they wanted to make the players feel like it was THEIR Ryder, and not just one of possible 2 Shepards.
I liked Andromeda, I thought the story was complex, there were a lot of irons burning, but I thought that with more games, these choices and storylines would pay off. Some of the characters were a bit flat, but again, every Bioware game has some of those. The Kett were actual antagonists with some complexity to them, not just automatons. Don't get me wrong, Reapers work great as an antagonist, but as a writer, with characters like the reapers, you run into problems like you did with the ending of Mass Effect's original trilogy. You paint yourself into a corner. I liked that the Kett were not a force, and rather a colonizing species, and I especially liked that the game didn't just fall back into this tiresome scifi trope of "AI = Bad." I am very tired of that cliché plot point, it is incredibly over done. My only criticism of the game in terms of its characters was the Angara. I think they could've given them a little more lore. After I finished the game, it felt like I didn't really know any more about the Angara than I had half way through the game. This made the big reveal that they were a species "created" by the Jardaan not hit very hard. Which brings me to the ending. The ending should've been done better. I get that they likely wanted to resolve a lot of the choices in a possible sequel, but there should've been some consequences to your actions shown to occur. It feels like I made so many choices that could have massive implications only to get no payoff for them. And against I understand why they did it, presuming that they had intentions of making a sequel, but still, not seeing what happens to ANY of them other than a vague "planets are now more habitable and here is your standard colony" was a bit rubbish and where the game's rushed development seemed to impact the story the most.
I couldn't agree more.
I can deal with playing a protagonist like Luke from 1977 Star Wars, if it makes sense. In the case of ME:A it doesn't. As he said, it was pure nepotism because they were too married to the idea. There are chains of commands for a reason. I was in the Navy for 20 years. If the captain died, there is a whole host of officers in the chain to replace him, the new ensign with very little experience is FAR down that chain. Maybe it would have been about him reaching that level by end, and proving himself, it would have been a better execution of the story idea.
@Rikalonius but that's the big difference here, right? It's not a military force, pathfinders aren't specters. They show the conflict between Ryder and Cora as one of the conflicts of the game as she was passed over as the 2nd. That's what makes this more shades of grey than the original trilogy. Alex Ryder got kicked out of the military for his research to save his wife. These are not model archetypes. they're flawed people, regugees technically, looking for a home.
@@FLASK904 Exactly! Also pathfinder is not a predefined role as commander, not before Ryder anyways. And the Initiative is a group of renegades. They're all about defiance and not about following law and order, which doesn't even exist in Andromeda yet, because we are the firsts, the ones who sets it up.
I think it's a shame what they did with female Krogan in this game. In the original trilogy there was lore about the female Krogan living separate to the male Krogan. Having their own camps. And Eve was a total badass and had an air of wisdom and strength about her. Like the females were the wise sages and an excellent counterbalance to the over the top male dominated aggression in Krogan society. Like when Eve walks into the assembly of the male Krogan. All bickering and fighting about the path forward stops merely with her presence. When she walks in they all shut up and paid attention. She gives inspiring words and they all follow her lead. In Andromeda they just turned female Krogan into male Krogan who happened to be female. No sagely wardrobe. No wise council and guidance for their people. They are supposed to be the brains to the male Krogans brawn. Not just female versions of the same.
Yes. Yes it was THAT BAD. It made my face tired.
I never understood why so many people chose soldier in the original trilogy. I always gravitated towards infiltrator or vanguard because who wants to be a boring soldier when you can be a soldier with tech or biotic abilities in a sci fi universe? It's like the people who choose humans in RPGs with countless other race options. Boring, vanilla, basic.
valid question. I think I played soldier class also the first time I played the game. I played other fps shooting games so I just thought that soldier class is solid and easy all-around class to go with so that's why I chose it. Also maybe I was thinking that the other classes might have some flaws to the combat. BUT when I played the trilogy again I tried the other classes and thought what a stupid class the soldier is :D.. my favorites in the ME1 is adept, ME2 vanguard/Infiltrator , in ME3 vanguard/sentinel/infiltrator. In ME2 I thought the adept class got a bit boring and don't remember if I have tried it in ME3. Engineer I haven't really played but maybe I will give it a try some day
its not. just a few spoiled brats did some negative reviews! the game is awesome
I'm playing it right now and enjoying it very much. It could have more alien Species but is an enjoyable game on it's own. I feel sorry that because of the spoiled brats we don't have the Quarian Ark DLC and more info on the general plot of Andromeda.
Better than Starfield.
@Big Dan Gaming you really need to cover "Exodus" from archetype entertainment.
it's pretty much the old guard from Bioware and other big rpg franchises.
and from the cinematic trailer seems like a good spiritual successor to mass effect.
if they could sneak a role for Mark Meer that would be the icing on the cake XD
I've tried this game a few times, and just couldn't get into it. I want to, and will probably try again eventually. But too many other games at the moment this is low on my list.
I got it for like $5 a year ago. Haven't installed it yet.
Planning on playing it this summer though. I expect it'll be an interesting experience.
I'm playing it right now and I play the original games. While the original games are better I'm still having fun with this game
Although in my opinion it doesn’t live up to the trilogy, I still feel like andromeda is not TOO bad for what it is. Idk at least for me I enjoyed it
I never played any mass effect until this one last week, i enjoyed this game. I spent hours in this world. I might try to play the 1st 3 next. I liked the gameplay more than i thought i would.
Okay, something that bugged me in Andromeda aside from the gameplay issues and "choice and consequences" issues: The aliens. In the Milky Way, evolution of the current races was shaped by the Protheans, so it makes sense that there'd by shared physical and cultural traits. But that's not the case in the Andromeda galaxy. But the alien races we run into....all happen to have the same basic body design and share recognizable cultural traits. Hugging and kissing have the same significance as they do with humans. They're even morphologically ( if not genetically ) compatible to have sex with a human apparently. Like, Bioware had a chance to explore some TRULY alien creatures and just....made humans in funny rubber suits. ( Not literally, they're CGI I know, but that's the vibe )
( Also I got it bundled with Dragon Age Inquisition with all DAI's expansions for like $20 on Steam a couple years ago. So not complaining. Just wish they'd allow it to be played on GeForce now, as my potato computer doesn't do well with it. )
Quarians and Turians and Drell are def NOT compatible with humans, Mordin warns you about turian and drell biology if you romance garrus or thane buuuut ofc it doesnt matter