Review of Mass Effect: Andromeda

Originally Posted by joxer
Except that hair, well, you won't see me arguing with anyone who says the hair sucks, I'm even prepared to claim I was the first person who ever posted it sucks.

Hey, do you work in shampoo company or something, joxer?

Originally Posted by joxer
To everyone on internet who sucks in character creator so their Ryder looks like Vagita Dict from Sims 4, here's an ingame message:

One of the best faces in Andromeda. But tell us how many attempts and minutes did you need to achieve that?

Originally Posted by joxer
6/10 to ME4 after 10/10 to DA2? I'd be ashamed and would look for another job.

You are probably right, but maybe they try to "balance the big picture" or something. They overrated EA games, sometimes acted like fools and puppets of EA, now some of them for some reason gave lower marks. Or honestly didnt like it much. Lets ask why now? Was relation between EA and media damaged recently? Did they expect something exceptional? Maybe some of them didnt really like story about exploration and colonisation of new planets, they want some predictable military drama. Or did they just see too much of Witcher 3 or Horizon so Andromeda pales in comparison?

Originally Posted by Farflame
But tell us how many attempts and minutes did you need to achieve that?

One attempt, 5 minutes.
My first character was asian with a different head type (more oval I'd say, but it was also one attempt), so for this one I just took another preset, widen eyebrows, did some antiholywood nosework, set eyecolor, played with a jaw and cheeks for a bit, set whatever hair as all are equal disaster, then some more color switching and that was it.
I believe for the third character (if there will be one) I'll do something in even less time.

Originally Posted by Farflame
You are probably right, but maybe they try to "balance the big picture" or something. They overrated EA games, sometimes acted like fools and puppets of EA, now some of them for some reason refused to overrate it. Lets ask why now? Did they expected something exceptional? Was the relation between EA and media was damaged recently? Or did they just see too much of Witcher 3 or Horizon so Andromeda pales in comparison?

ME4 is not better than TW3, that's not questionable. But 6/10 means, normally should mean, a bit better than mediocre.
Perhaps I'm totally blind and don't see why ME4 is almost mediocre and why DA2 is a masterpiece.

Balancing the big picture is possible in only one way. Fire all those reviewers who unbalanced it in the first place!
Yea, not gonna happen. Destiny2 is coming on PC and imagine, everyone is talking about that crap as if it was second coming. Even those who saw through hype and advertising and wrote how bad Destiny is. Unbloodybelievable.

Originally Posted by joxer
Wh?

Man, why did you play predefined character? Because some people here said whatever you do in creator, the result is always something ugly?

This is my second custom character (Jaal is on the left), sorry I deleted my first character with savegames because of the naming bug so can't show that one also:

… SNIP …

Actually your character looks great. But it isn't just the looks of the character (plus I was fine with Scott's default looks) but that they have a sister/brother, defined parents, defined role, etc.

Oh nothing like Tomb Raider, Witcher 3, or Assassins Creed mind you. You can change looks and gender and some RP freedom. I should have been more clear.

When I consider a game I tend to put a lot of emphasis on character freedom. From something as open as making a character in a TES game to one as restricted as the Witcher 3 with many things in between.

So while I had some freedom in MEA I am still basically "Scott" Ryder (regardless of first name), son/daughter of Alec and whomever the mom was named. I have history and family and a role.

I am not saying that's horrible or bad but it limits replay for me and limits how much I can put into creating a character. Course I can just "ignore" it and pretend I am my own pathfinder …but Scott/Sarah are pretty integrated into the story.

It means nothing to some but for me its a big deal. I mean I ended up not playing the W3 because of it.

Ah well, no ME game is supposed to be nostory sandbox…

Originally Posted by joxer
ME4 is not better than TW3, that's not questionable. But 6/10 means, normally should mean, a bit better than mediocre.
Perhaps I'm totally blind and don't see why ME4 is almost mediocre and why DA2 is a masterpiece.

I like MEA better than TW3. I find TW3 combat to be mediocre (serviceable) and I play games for the gameplay, not watch cutscenes.

and DA2 is a masterpiece, purple Hawke FTW!

Originally Posted by azarhal
I like MEA better than TW3. I find TW3 combat to be mediocre and I play games for the gameplay, not watch cutscenes.

Yes, because we all know that the only thing TW3 has is cutscenes.

It's especially ironic because Bioware games as a whole also have tons of those.

Originally Posted by JDR13
Yes, because we all know that the only thing TW3 has is cutscenes.

It's especially ironic because Bioware games as a whole also have tons of those.

I'm not sure where is the irony. BioWare games don't have as much cutscenes as TW3 does,nor are they as long nor have dialogue options that exist just to move the characters to another area to have another cutscenes to advance the plot. They even started to move away from facial close up for normal conversation with DAI.

Originally Posted by azarhal
I'm not sure where is the irony. BioWare games don't have as much cutscenes as TW3 does,nor are they as long, nor do they tend to be as long nor have dialogue options that exist just to move the characters to another area to have another cutscenes to advance the plot. They even started to move away from facial close up for normal conversation with DAI.

You're right, TW3 has cutscenes that actually advance the plot. Bioware games on the other hand have tons of dialogue you have to sift through just to get the best options for your companions and/or quests from them. The worst part about it is that most of it isn't even well written.

Originally Posted by azarhal
I like MEA better than TW3. I find TW3 combat to be mediocre (serviceable) and I play games for the gameplay, not watch cutscenes.

I don't know about Andromeda but none of the other ME series is known for combat either, if anything, on par with TW3.

and DA2 is a masterpiece, purple Hawke FTW!

Are we talking about the same game here? Please explain why you think DA2 is a masterpiece because I can't think of one thing that will qualify DA2 as a decent game let alone a masterpiece.

Originally Posted by JDR13
You're right, TW3 has cutscenes that actually advance the plot. Bioware games on the other hand have tons of dialogue you have to sift through just to get the best options for your companions and/or quests from them. The worst part about it is that most of it isn't even well written.

That stuff is the 2nd worst part about BioWare games (2nd only to SJW'age). Having to constantly talk to your companions just so you don't miss stuff. You're not usually informed when they're ready to "talk more", either, so it's like the regular routine in any BioWare game. Whenever you're back at your ship/base/whatever, hit up every companion to see if anything new has been triggered yet. Skip through everything that you've already read a dozen times, etc etc.

Originally Posted by JDR13
You're right, TW3 has cutscenes that actually advance the plot. Bioware games on the other hand have tons of dialogue you have to sift through just to get the best options for your companions and/or quests from them. The worst part about it is that most of it isn't even well written.

I'm not sure it's an issue of quantity, though, whether people like it or not, they both heavily rely on cinematic storytelling.
Difference is how they manage to convey their characters through them.
Recent article: http://kotaku.com/some-of-the-witche…l-b-1793655372
Interesting thing is that BW was someone others looked up to this ( at least in rpg genre) and now are catching flak for it.

Originally Posted by azarhal
I They even started to move away from facial close up for normal conversation with DAI.

Odd thing to say… Bioware games are all about characters. One thing that's been always consistent about them.
Pretty sure everyone on BSN hated non cinematic camera, like in ME III/DAI…it distances player from the dialogue, makes it far more impersonal.

Originally Posted by Stingray
That stuff is the 2nd worst part about BioWare games (2nd only to SJW'age). Having to constantly talk to your companions just so you don't miss stuff. You're not usually informed when they're ready to "talk more", either, so it's like the regular routine in any BioWare game. Whenever you're back at your ship/base/whatever, hit up every companion to see if anything new has been triggered yet. Skip through everything that you've already read a dozen times, etc etc.

I suggest you low down your greedy level and tune down your probable focus on maximize everything. It's how you manage it that makes it a problem. I can understand the problem but the void of some Witcher for companions is a lot weaker than this problem.

If that bores you, don't bother get any single piece of dialog from every single companion in MEA, you can as well just focus on a subset and keep other for some potential replay. I think MEA tried target this specific point, and when you enter in the ship you get a quote that this companion or that companion want talk with you when it's important.

Your request looks like you want some exclamation mark, no Oblivion never been a right blueprint. Don't speak to them constantly, just do a few sessions a few time. To manage a flux the game trunk those dialog, and ok that's a questionable design, but it's not that a big deal if you just do the check more rarely.

Well a large part of the problem IMO is also that it's all just so formulaic and predictable. You play any BioWare game and you know exactly how things like that are going to work. Every game they've made since KoTOR, 14 years ago, has pretty much the exact same framework, and some pieces of the formula go back even further than that.

And, no, I'm not looking for exclamation marks…that would be horrible.

Originally Posted by Stingray
Well a large part of the problem IMO is also that it's all just so formulaic and predictable. You play any BioWare game and you know exactly how things like that are going to work. Every game they've made since KoTOR, 14 years ago, has pretty much the exact same framework.

Since BG2 not Kotor… And you bash them to death to have tried DAI and MEA, no coherency.

Originally Posted by Dasale
Since BG2 not Kotor… And you bash them to death to have tried DAI and MEA, no coherency.

Well, not really, the very next game after BG2 (NWN) broke from a lot of the formulas. Pretty sure NWN didn't have any romances, no party (just 1 "henchman" that you didn't interact a whole lot with?) Not to mention, BG2 was 2D isometric. I feel like the current-day BioWare formula was really established in KoTOR. Granted, there have been a few "innovations" in recent years, like gay romances and MMO-style collect/fetch/task quests.

Originally Posted by JDR13
You're right, TW3 has cutscenes that actually advance the plot. Bioware games on the other hand have tons of dialogue you have to sift through just to get the best options for your companions and/or quests from them. The worst part about it is that most of it isn't even well written.

The writing quality isn't at same level, so it makes difficult to compare, because Witcher writing quality is overall quite above the melee, but also TW1 is still quite above 2&3.

No companions in TW series is a weakness on my tablets. If that bores you why do those tons of dialog for some pointless greed?

Greed and completionist play will kill surely DAI, and in part MEA. How about make only whats fun when it's fun?

Originally Posted by Stingray
Well, not really, the very next game after BG2 (NWN) broke from a lot of the formulas. Pretty sure NWN didn't have any romances, no party (just 1 "henchman" that you didn't interact a whole lot with?) Not to mention, BG2 was 2D isometric. I feel like the current-day BioWare formula was really established in KoTOR. Granted, there have been a few "innovations" in recent years, like gay romances and MMO-style collect/fetch/task quests.

Hmm.. sorry to say but there was a romance in NWN too… lol. Well, the OC and HotU did. Not sure about SoU - I played it but it was so boring I don't remember anything about it except for Deekin.

I played all 3, but barely remember anything about the OC and SoU, they were both so awful. I remember, at the time, I was pretty much in disbelief that this was the next big game from the same company who made BG/BG2.

Originally Posted by Stingray
Well, not really, the very next game after BG2 (NWN) broke from a lot of the formulas. Pretty sure NWN didn't have any romances, no party (just 1 "henchman" that you didn't interact a whole lot with?) Not to mention, BG2 was 2D isometric. I feel like the current-day BioWare formula was really established in KoTOR. Granted, there have been a few "innovations" in recent years, like gay romances and MMO-style collect/fetch/task quests.

It changes nothing BG2 is iso, BG2 is series of small areas, an introduction, then choices among a set of small areas, then a series of small areas. That's the only thing really predictable with companions obviously.

For DAI that's a superficial point of view, that you ignore how different are the blueprints is big. MEA and DAI could be among the most flawed Bioware games, but on exploration it's first time they do something quite good, and neither TW nor ES series are on par on this aspect, it's a lot closer to Gothic 1&2 quality on that aspect.

EDIT: For NWN it's possible the general blueprint is a bit broken, but BG2 matches well. For sure not BG1.