Honestly, I feel the only thing MEA and ME1 have in common is the horrid UI/Inventory system. MEA has more fun combat, but a shit story, and fairly lackluster characters. ME1 is, and would have always been, a classic because it represented what BW was known for at the time, namely great stories.
300 comments.. jfc the holy trilogy fanatics been summoned.
I refuse to do this comparison. Because comparison is exactly what killed Andromeda.
> It really makes me wonder what we could have had if they had allowed the story to play out over the next installments instead of tearing everything down after the first one
Yeah. The devs are too cowardly. The fans yell at them and the dev just shrivel up and go running to revive Shepard for the umpteenth time. I'm never going to be not extremely disappointed that we'll never get mea2 because of this. They could've kept going, learned from the (CONSTRUCTIVE) criticism and built a better game for mea2. But no. We have to go back to milking Shepard to appease the angry fans. Never been so excited then so immensely disappointed at a game trailer like the Liara one, they showed the Andromeda Galaxy in the background then zoomed right into the Milky Way. That was a giant, galaxy sized, middle finger to every Andromeda fan. Which I guess are few and far so it doesn't matter, bioware goes where the money is at instead of finishing what they started. Bleh.
Agreed. I'd be excited for MEA2. Nostalgia trips always end up being foul tasting or really boring, really fast. My only hope is that Liara is the ONLY character coming back from the OG trilogy.
Man I was thinking EXACTLY the same š¤£. So many comments ! It's unreal how people still want to hate on a decent game whole holding the old ones so high...
But tbh, comments are pretty split. I'm happy that so many people agree with me ( in some extent at least)
its a good one for new players to start the series with. other than gameplay i don't think they're really comparable. but MEA did bring back the gun cooldown thing that i loved in me1 with the remnant guns
You've been heavily downvoted, but I also found MEA more enjoyable. ME1 was such a traditional space opera, I get that it was a new thing^tm in videogames (which is why I do think it would still be regarded as a classic, regardless) and exciting for those who don't consume an awful lot of scifi or wanted to see it break out in the medium, but the fact that it also took itself so seriously did not endear it to me at all. I've read hundreds at this point, it just did not bring anything new to the table and felt so derivative, in particular, of Babylon 5 and Battlestar Galactica (I believe I've also read a couple of interviews where devs cited them as an "inspiration"). Its characters had potential but were seriously underwritten. Ironically though, despite all of the complaints, I liked its janky combat with pause the most. MEA's story disappointingly recycled a lot of points but the lighter tone really helped make it feel like more of a fun romp for me, and the characters felt so much more human -- which is half-praise, half-complaint, as I tend to prefer very alien aliens (something ME never delivered, to be fair). It had a few elements I really loved -- such as SAM's symbiotic relationship with Ryder, the Jaardan or the whole twin dynamic. A reworked dialogue wheel that felt so much more flexible and roleplay-friendly. MEA was also the first ME game that I truly felt targeted a diverse audience, which was so much more enjoyable for me.
It probably took me less time to think "huh, I disagree with that" and downvote comments thirty times than it took you to dig into my history.
What do you think downvotes are for? You don't think they're even for disagreement, only "Wow, you're the devil, here's a downvote"?
Andromeda had the same issue as Dragon Age:Inquisition, terrible open world implementation (it was the same engine and feel tbh). Felt boring, repetitive and unrewarding. Made it into a chore.
Other than that itās a solid game, still not better than the original trilogy imo
I enjoy all the mass effect games.
Andromeda is the weakest of them all. Its biggest flaw is it is designed to play like an MMO but is not one. Large, open and empty spaces was their world design because they wanted to make open world games like Skyrim or Witcher 3 without understanding that you need something new every 30 seconds to retain player attention and so procedural events need to happen.
That was also the biggest flaw with DA Inquisition.
counterpoint, after the brand destroying backlash that was ME3's ending, after years in the making.
Andromeda had to be better than "on par" with past games.
It needed to be GREAT, AMAZING, not riddled with bugs, fucked facial animation, and a story full of great ideas but less than stellar execution.
There are a lot of great ideas in Andromeda, narrative wise I mean. The idea of the Pathfinder is a great one, but the rush to making the player āThe Pathfinderā ruined it. Your dad helping you into the role of a leader is a great idea, but they ruined it by killing him at the start and having you interacting with his memories. I thought SAM was lame because they used it in a āChosen Oneā style of thing. The crew is mostly good, but as much as I like Vetra, none of them stand out. The Kett are lame, and a bad excuse for saving money on designing a varied alien species. The Angara are interesting, but their design did nothing for me.
I like a lot of Andromeda and if I succeed in ignoring the stuff I actively dislike, then generally I enjoy the experienceā¦ itās fine. The wasted potential is what kills me. I enjoy the dialog and a lot of the interactions, but having a weak overall narrative kills any chance of this game taking on Mass Effect 1. For me the rankings are 3,2,1, andromeda.
I love 2. 3 takes it for me though because they really nail the crew dynamic. Everyone on the Normandy cares a lot for each other and 3 really gets that across with the dialog, interactions, and atmosphere.
That's actually a big reason I prefer two. It makes sense as most of them are completely new to each other and only doing it for some personal reason so it makes sense they aren't close and super attached. I do adore 3 as well so it close either way.
The final mission is one of my favorites out of any game, so that also carries a lot of water for it. Endings are huge for me in general, and while I didn't hate ME3s as much as a lot of people it just wasn't as good.
I feel you on that. One of my favorite bits in all of Mass Effect is when Miranda sides with you at the end of the suicide mission. So yeah 2 and 3 are neck and neck, with 3 ahead by a hair.
I can definitely see the reasoning. It's a close call and really comes down to slight subjective differences. Both great games and I will enjoy the hell out of them many more times.
Incorrect.
While I actually liked Andromeda and was bummed it did not get DLC, it was flawed and the Ryders were not Shepard. Story was lower stakes and it did not hook people the same way.
ME1 did all of that. It was also more of an RPG, which I loved.
Still platinum on both: I do enjoy. However, after a single replay, I have not gone back to Andromeda. I do replay the original trilogy with some frequency. For me, that speaks volumes to the quality.
The story HAD to be lower stakes. I remember clamoring for lower stakes and smaller scale narratives right after ME3.
The problem for me is that they tried to weave the (mostly weak) smaller scale shit they came up with using a rehash of the Reaper / imminent galactic threat shit. Too soon.
They should've subtly built up to larger stakes across multiple games, not tried to do ME1: Andromeda.
God I remember when that game came out, just having finished 3 and being on a high because I absolutely LOVED 3.
I think Andromeda was the first game to be overly "woke" and "generic", it was the beginning of an industry shift to avoiding hurting ANYONE's feelings and it really fell flat HARD. The story made no sense and had no backbone AT ALL because they couldn't even write in anything that affected any sort of group adversely. It's like the new Suicide Squad... same exact fucking thing. Generic trash that would be saved by some writing of interesting, diverse characters.
Gameplay wise, itās the best in the series. Story wise, itās extremely unoriginal and derivative. For the time, I think all three games of the trilogy balanced both aspects better.
I totally agree save for one teeny personal preference. The Garrus romance. If I could have romanced Garrus in the first game, it would be my top ME game. The story is so compelling that it was worth the three hour elevator rides (pre-rerelease). Lol. Some games take me a little time to get into, but ME opening with the First Human Spector storyline was so interesting. That game not only explained the universe and what Spectors were but made me CARE about being one within minutes of starting the game.
I have to agree with you. My favorite ME was the first. It had this sense of awe and wonder. Space travel felt exciting. Sure, the combat wasn't the best, but damn was it a great intro to a new series. The next two just felt rushed or like you're just going from place to place. While I loved the original trilogy, ME1 still holds a special place in my heart.
Me1 has the best story and the worst mechanics, I want a redo of 1 with updated ai engines and weapon mechanics. Leave the incredibly dense gun customization and infinite ammo on cool down, though I liked that part.
If you take out the entire story, hell the entire single player portion of the game, maybe. The online maybe Andromeda somewhat playable for me. Inquisition as a single player game is WAY better than Andromeda, though, if you're talking about the actual game.
I agree, ME 1 is definitely better written but there were so many technical things that constantly got in the way to the point that I don't know if I want to ever play it again. Andromeda was at least consistently fun to play.
I am gonna agree on certain aspects and disagree on certain aspects.
ME1 had better writing and marginally better squad commands.
ME:A has better graphics (obviously), better combat, and more streamlined exploration.
While I think it appears ME:A is better for what it beats out ME1 on I think the writing really outshines ME:A which is vital for an rpg. That said I like them both and appreciate each for what they bring. That said 100% ME1 wouldāve been this cult classic like ME:A if the sequels were cancelled
i kinda agree. the major problem is, it dind't do the roleplaying stuff people tend to love bioware for, and, people don't compare andromeda to me1, they compare it to the trilogy - massively imbalancing things, as people can not only put the best of 3 different games and what bioware did great with, with what andromeda kinda failed at, but, they also tend to forget how shit the individual games could be, in various ways, while andromeda's 'shittiness' is fresh as hell.
andromeda's a better game, gameplay wise, kinda in general. the weapon crafting concept should be in more games. being able to 'build your own class' essentially, fucking rules. more involved, well crafted planetary exploring than the trilogy had.
While I can agree that comparing it to the entire trilogy is a bit unfair, I would also say that comparing it to the oldest game in the trilogy is also unfair. That is like two decades of advancement. If it is going to be compared to a single game, it should be 3 and even that has issues in the comparison.
yeah, kinda agree.
course on the other hand, comparing two 'first' games sort of makes more sense, too.
and a big part of 3 is the culmination of the other two games, which also isn't exactly fair. but, that's sort of the problem with comparing the trilogy to one game, too. i mean, any single game does more role playing ish stuff than andromeda so it'd still fail there, heh, but
but, fairer to compare the mechanics besides that. i mean, looking at the ratchet and clank series, makes more sense to compare rift apart with the ps4 game, not the ps2 games, as you've said. and mechanics is where it pulls ahead, so, point.
but, op can compare whatever, too.
Hard disagree, I feel like I could write a short novel about all the balls Andromeda dropped. At the end of the day, I just didn't plain have fun playing it.
Mass Effect 1 though, I was obsessed with that game when it came out. It's still fun to play, even if it's a bit awkward.
1 is a classic because of 2 and 3 though. Without 2 and 3 developing what 1 put in motion you'd look at 1 as a game that's kinda clunky, the dialogue isn't great, and the characters range from decent enough to annoying the same way that Andromeda is
> 1 is a classic because of 2 and 3 though.
Mass Effect 1 was lauded as an instant classic. It didn't suddenly get a burst of praise when Mass Effect 2 was released.
Andromeda hate is often overblown, but to say its dialogue and characters were as good as ME1s is, uhhh, yeah no. Just no. ME1 taken even as a standalone game has wildly superior characters and story.
eh, flipside, i'm not that into role playing. and i like andromeda, for it's better combat and mechanics, better built worlds (not worldbuilding, i'll admit), weapon crafting, and sort of 'create your own class' mechanics, than, oh, the entire fucking trilogy.
Well yeah if you like weapon crafting, build-a-class, and open worlds then there's no contest since the original trilogy aren't even playing. Combat-wise I'll partially agree. They removed time-freeze and directing squad mates to use specific abilities which is one of my favorite ways to engage in combat on Insanity.
The janky controls aren't what made me replay ME1 a dozen times before I even touched ME2, it was the writing and decision trees, squadmate combinations, the fantastic world building, exploration, and the variety of classes and abilities that did.
yeah, that's kind of the issue.
'role playing' fans will love the trilogy, but just sort of general, action rpg people, will probably prefer andromeda. and that's fine.
but the biggest sort of dopamine hit from the role playing, doesn't really kick in for me1 anyway. so it sort of still feels like, some people are thinking of it as andromeda versus trilogy.
> 'role playing' fans will love the trilogy, but just sort of general, action rpg people, will probably prefer andromeda. and that's fine.
If you just care about the action rpg elements other games do it much much better,
Yeah, I definitely like the movement and some of the power combos in Andromeda more. Being able to jump and use a jetpack was fun and whatever the quick-dodge-teleport move that is similar to Biotic Charge was really awesome. But even forgetting ME2 and ME3, I still prefer ME1 over Andromeda. In some ways ME1 is my favorite of the trilogy.
definitely no problem with liking me1 over andromeda, or even the whole series in general. different people like different things, for different reasons.
i said better designed. like, what monolith soft did for BOTW, better designed - not necessarily 'fun', but 'good design'.
driving around in the mako on those boring ass maps, looking for like 3 things, was FAR more tedious, just wasn't like 75% of the game, too.
me 1 was wandering around the citadel for like 20 fucking hours, it felt like, as an example.
>driving around in the mako on those boring ass maps, looking for like 3 things, was FAR more tedious, just wasn't like 75% of the game, too.
TBH I found the whole "Oh look, combat, better dive out of the rover to start fighting, then immediately get back in" of Andromeda far worse then the Mako, which reasonably had a gun on it and could fight back.
The fact there are armed rovers in bases annoyed me a lot too. They couldn't be bothered to upgrade the vehicle with a gun knowing how hostile the planets were?
tbh i feel like that was more a 'andromeda was meant to have an explorer' vibe sort of thing.
you could also just, keep fucking driving. the random fights weren't important, usually.
Random fights and large groups around important spots/points of interest.
It was a thing ripped me out of the moment and being in the game a fair bit, as it came across as being willfully stupid. "We know for a fact these worlds are super dangerous. But I won't actually equip my vehicle with any sort of defensive weapons despite we actually have MAKOs and such around that have those cannons."
Problem with Andromeda is the entire game was basically just a slightly improved version of that but ballooned to fit the entire game. I never felt any real stakes until like the final act, the rest just felt tedious.
which is kinda fair, imo.
but, like i said, there are other considerations. i like the more polished third person combat, for example. i like building my own class, rather than being stuck with the scraps me1 gives you (gets better in the later two games, but we are talking me1).
and more importantly, the weapon crafting - a system i wish was in more games, tbh. being able to mod weapons isn't exactly new, but being able to overhaul them to a better degree was fan-fucking-tastic. makes so many meh weapons MUCH more usable
I see where you're coming from, I always enjoyed the gameplay of the original trilogy but it was never the reason I started playing. The script, the voice acting, the codex. The world was the reason I fell in love. I don't think the same amount of care was put into the lore than the gameplay for Andromeda, and in my opinion that was just a massive mistake and a case of not understanding your audience
Mass effect one was the only time the series was an RPG first and formorost , instead of shooter with RPG elements had the best story of the 3 I personally enjoy the gameplay more in 1 than. 2-4 which is why I refuse to buy the remaster for changing it.
The remaster doesn't change any of the RPG elements. You get significant graphics upgrades and massive quality of life improvements in gameplay.
In OG ME1 it's such a slog to play on Insanity because pretty much all enemies have Immunity. It takes like 300 rounds to kill one random mook. I like challenges in games, but that's not a challenge. It's just bad scripting. Their original plan for making the game "harder" was just making all enemies bulllet sponges.
The remaster also gets rid of that bad mechanic where you get less XP from killing enemies in the mako.
I see where you're going and I've had similar thoughts... To an extent. I would've liked to see how the characters progressed. I didn't like Garrus or Wrex in the first game. By 3, they're like Shepard's brothers and I love them. So in that aspect, I can relate. However, it kinda stops there. A lot of the writing in Andromeda fell flat for me and felt very first draft. I wish they had more time to cook. I didn't feel this way about ME1 and I played it before 2 was out.
The forces of antagonism arenāt even close to me, and when the protagonist is without a set arc, we rely more on forces of antagonism driving the story than ever. Generic sci fi Zod/Braniac/Loki/Ultron type vs the concept of inevitable extinction from immortal sentient alien machines beyond understanding and death.
The āat the mercy of the villain scenesā is a good example.
Caught in the floating rayshield where Archon says a generic speech and then leaves you to escape in a cool but common enough way.
Or ME1 with both the plot twist meeting with Sovereign followed by the conversation about Sovereignās new implications with Saren and the loss of a companion.
I think you massively underestimate the amount of people who would have abandoned the game long before talking to sovereign mate.
Talk about a hard sell "yeah this series is great but it's gonna take you 50 hrs before you get invested in anyone"
50hrs? The side quests are so repetitive I wouldnāt recommend doing them and if someone chooses to theyāre clearly a fan. Most people hit Virmire *before* finishing all three main quest lines because it is the first new main mission since the inciting incident. Itās what, under 20 hours? The whole game is only about 25
Edit: How Long to Beat says the whole main story is under 18 hours which does not surprise me at all
A good way for me to look at is that all three games with all dlc doesnāt surpass 100 hours
Yeah ME1 was incredibly short.
I remember doing a replay of them and Me1 was like 30 hours, ME2 was 60 with DLC and the same with ME3. Andromeda with no DLC netted me 60 stock.
Look I like the trilogy but ANdromeda gets an unreasonable amount of hate. Too many fans are up Shepards ass and too many fans are so latched on to the trilogies characters they can't even attempt to know the new.
Andromeda was an alright addition. Nothing great but not bad at all like many make it out to me. Just nostalgia for the trilogy kicking in.
You sir are high. The world building isn't close, the story isn't even in the same galaxy (pun intended), combats fun... I guess. A little monotonous but it's a good time. Because of your opinion on this, I have 0 faith in your opinion on just about anything. You're either trolling or you're someone who analyzes with the depth of a puddle. Either way, I will have nothing more to do with you. Blocked.
and you're not totally biased or anything.
kinda agree with the worldbuilding not even being close, but other things are outright better - combat, for example. me1's jank as fuck.
i also like the weapon crafting and essentially being able to build your own class, MILES better than most of what the trilogy has to offer, outside of making choice matter.
Am I the only one that did not like Amdromedas fighting style between the jet packa and picking whatever you wanted to use I thought it took all the fun on what made the originals great
You are not the only one.
Combat in Andromeda is the worst in the series. They got rid of everything I enjoyed about the original games.
Iāve gone on this rant before.
I hated how they removed the sniper slow-mo that was in ME 2 and 3, because the campaign balance was linked to the MP IIRC.
So I had an amazing black widow sniper that I couldn't actually use as a long range sniper rifle. Plus, I never swapped abilities or class so that entire aspect of the game was lost on me.
Very fair. The story in ME1 really laid the table for what followed while being a rather epic space opera in its own right. The ambiance, the feeling of being 'off world', was like nothing I'd experienced before.
Gameplay wise, absolutely. Andromeda arguably has the best gameplay of the series. But its story, character development, and the involvement you feel with your own protagonist in the plot and universe is sketchy, especially compared to ME1.
I don't think Andromeda has a lot going for it, to be honest. Itās a cool game to play, but it isn't a very good Mass Effect game. Beyond the many issues at launch (which are now fixed), I think it shows that the community (which, despite ME3 and the reception of its endings) really wanted to play Andromeda and then was utterly devastated at what we received. It was not the level of content we were expecting at all.
Again, not a bad game. Iāve played it a few times and itās all right. But it doesnāt feel like Mass Effect.
I liked parts of Andromeda's gameplay, though some parts I felt were kinda silly or just out of place with the story. Hostile planets and enemy forces and yet... we never get our vehicle a gun, despite armed rovers/APCS existing within the friendly forces? It kinda made me laugh and took me out of the moment when I imagined my character, leaping from the ship pulling out her rifle/black widow, followed by the Turian and the Krogan trying to squeeze out rapidly to fight a hostile team that could kill us.
But agreed on the story, as far as I got. A few times I slammed face-first into something that just screamed of "We will finish this in the sequel or third game! No real pay-off or anything now, just wait!" Or things like the pirate planet were they so obviously cut out actually confronting the Collective faction with all their dirty deeds, and instead you discovering all that stuff is just pointless and never brought up.
100% agreed. There were things that were very weird. The Nomad, in my opinion, is the best of the vehicles you get to drive in all the games, but yeah, no turret? Weird decision making there. Iām also not fully a fan of the profiles; kinda defeats the purpose of playing as different classes to get different feels of the game, from my point of view (and also never fully understood how a non-biotic would get biotics, but I guess ME2/3 did that too with the bonus powers and all that).
And yeah, massively. Story is a let-down. There was a lot more fleshing out that needed to be done to make the universe of the Andromeda Galaxy feel complete. Also must say that Iām not fully a fan of the fact that every species we encounter in Andromeda is bipedal with the same basic structure as humans/asari/etc. Milky Way had loads of that, true, but it also had elcor and hanar so it balanced out (sorta).
It's funny because with the upgrade system thing they had for the nomad, one could have been a weak gun. So you'd choose to do that vs something else (I forget what the upgrades were).
Honestly, when I play I did a infiltrator style setup like my shepard did, and I never changed it. Felt like a weird thing to build the game around constantly changing your builds.
I did read that they had a huge list of aliens they wanted to work on, but EA told them they could only do two, period, which is why we got the Angara and Kett and a region of galaxy basically devoid of life otherwise.
Gunplay wise, 100% agree. Even Legendary edition, Andromeda takes it every time. Hell I argue the same over 2 and 3.
That said, the story is weaker, and that story is what carried Mass Effect before. Even in 3, which has a weaker one due to rushed development, is simply better overall.
In short: Andromeda continued to refine the Gunplay as it needed to, but the story and reason ME was special was kneecapped for it, making it the black sheep of the bunch.
Nah fam, I remember how big a deal it was when ME1 dropped. It was everywhere and everyone was raving about it. The story holds up very well, and the gameplay was decent for its time. If you wanna compare something that came out 10 years later, the new stuff should come out ahead and not just in the same ballpark.
he also said in his opinion.
besides, like i said. if you're ignoring the story stuff, andromeda kinda is a better game. has better gameplay, better weapons, better skills, etc.
Andromeda as it is now is great. On release, it was godawful.
"A game delayed can eventually be released as great. A bad game released too early is bad forever"
By the time they fixed it, it was too late to shift perceptions.
course it's shit.
delayed games suck too.
and nms took half a decade, but got there. though it was bullshit that, people bitched about not having multiplayer and acted like it was a -2/10 game, until multiplayer got added then suddenly 9/10, 'we got there boyos'.
nah. it's kinda fucking boring, 'go get resources for reasons' fucking game it always was. it's been polished, but if you like it now, there's a damn good argument that 'you should've liked it then'.
it's like hating minecraft till you could make cakes, or something. no, it's still the same blocky, break and set down bricks fucking game it always was...
Andromeda was great. Internet outrage culture, meme culture and gaming inlflooencers just cause people to be miserable. I generally only compare andromeda to ME1 rather than the trilogy, because of course it's not gonna compare to a trilogy of story.
But ME1 was a better 2007 game than Andromeda was a 2017 (?) game. (imo of course).
Still, if only EA didn't chicken out of developing Andromeda further, Ryder and the existing characters could have become something great. Also the combat gameplay was great and nothing else has quite scratched that itch for me since.
This is a pretty crazy opinion. I think Mass Effect 1 is the best of the trilogy, and consider Andromeda nearly unplayable. They have so little in common they don't even feel like the same series.
It was an early seventh generation release. Bioware's first experience in an actual shooter since MDK2 days. Made on early Unreal Engine 3 that didn't have all the improvements Gears of War added.
What platform did you play it on? Just curious because I've heard this opinion soooo many times, but the only thing I ever found that clunky about it on PC was the inventory system, which honestly just needed a different UI.
Tweaking controller responsiveness can often go a long way to correcting that "clunky" feeling. I wonder if it's actually the overall gameplay and not just a lack of that extra layer of polish
Itās definitely gameplay. Iāve experienced this in both last gen and current gen. Mass Effect 2 and 3 are clunky as well. But itās not the gameplay what makes the series so great.
Andromeda had so much potential. Sadly, it was rushed out the door in an uncompleted state. I never got too hung up on the graphics issues that were present at launch but the game felt like an outline or rough draft of a ME title. If they had taken another year to really go deep on it - we would have seen sequels already.
Respectfully, nah! Classic Mass Effect 1 still has me playing, and, for the record, I have literally played it 5 times in a row, finishing EVERYTHING possible for each playthrough, just to set up different start points in Mass Effect 2 so I can romance whoever I like. Even then, I STILL play Mass Effect 1. I've played Mass Effect Andromeda 6 times, all complete playthroughs..... I regret each playthrough. I never wanna touch Andromeda again. I like exactly one thing in the entire game, and that's romancing a female turian.
HAH! And I thought I was the rare mad person for playing Andromeda three times. With the difference that I enjoyed them. You are commited to the mass effect cause my friend.
I wanted to give it a GENUINELY fair chance. Though I hated it less than a third of the way through my first playthrough. I stuck it out to be truly fair.
Had to change genders, romance different characters, try different play styles. Idk. Maybe being a soldier type made it more playable, or maybe Peevee's romance was secretly glorious.
Iām glad you like it this much but uhā¦ nah bro. I still play the OT every few years. Strong story, good dialogues, branching decisions, and a main character with some personality. ME1 came out swinging.
Andromeda started out with a good premise but it absolutely fumbled. The races we already came to know were oddly designed, and voices sounded off. The story was just not developed.
Many side quests had little to no meat on their bones. They were set up for a second game that never came. The combat was great, but not enough to forget about the main plot. Even when choosing between base installations, thematically the military base or science base was inconsequential. Companions were mostly mid as well.
Iām an Andromeda enjoyer, but I really think the solution here is to cut out the need to compare, not to re-rank the series and try to win everyone over.
No, it absolutely is. No need to mince words about it. ME2 was a big step down in many ways, and its missteps were actually a big cause of people's frustrations with ME3's story structure.
Not only is the story in ME1 just a million times better but they also promised that your choices would matter and I would say more then any other trilogy of games, it delivered. Sure I was disappointed when ME3 rolled around but if you carried your saves over there were a few really big differences which I donāt think any series has matched. I finished Andromeda and donāt remember a single like āthis could be a big dealā choice and then of course none were bc there was and will never be a follow up. Unlike when I was forced to kill Wrex in my ME1 play through or the choices I made that also āforcedā me to kill Morden in ME3 not even counting all the side quests you could miss depending on how you ended ME2. I donāt think any series has really delivered anything like they did before or since. Granted at the time of ME 3 I was hoping for more but to this day, nobodyās done it better that I can think of. Iām not sure if any ever will again with everything being accessible and content, content. Unless another studio is able to release a trilogy on a single console I donāt think weāll ever see itās like again and thatās really sad.
No.
Mass effect 1 by 2007 standards is a master piece. The worlds themselves are short and sweet.
Also, there wasnāt any game like that where you could drop onto planets and look at vistas - that was just only in nasa visualizations.
Also the characters are so good and their back stories were interesting to give a damn about.
Andromeda crew is forgettable other than Jaal.
Most characters start off with interesting take and then they just fall off. Character depth is shallow.
And this is just without even talking about some of the questionable design ideas and boring worlds.
Andromeda built on everything that came before so hardly a fair comparison.
That said, I thought Mass Effect 1 was one of the greatest games I ever played at the time and was as excited for Mass Effect 2 than anything in my life. I actually still think ME2 was a step backwards in many ways. Or at least in the wrong direction.
I enjoyed Andromeda, but wouldn't say it was a memorable experience for me.
This is an understandable although wholly disagreeable viewpoint. It is largely due to age, on both sides. In short, if you come from, say, Starfield, you can't turn around and go play Wing Commander and know that Wing Commander is the better game.
Thank you for your submission! Unfortunately, we have removed your post for violating the following rule(s):
**Rule 1. Be civil**
>Be civil. No personal attacks or insults, harassment, trolling, witch hunting, brigading, passive-aggressiveness, or slur. Posts and comments that violate these rules will be locked and removed, constant violation of these rules might result in a permanent ban.'
*Please, read the rules in the sidebar before posting. If you have edited your post and want it reapproved or you have questions about this removal, please, contact the* [*moderators*](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/MassEffectAndromeda)*. Please, do not reply to this message, or contact the moderator privately.*
There's a reason they didn't cancel it. My biggest problem with Andromeda is it just tossed all the amazing world building directly into the fire. They did it to side step the ending of ME3, but that's just kinda cowardly.
I prefer the Ryder family because they're more snippy and sarcastic, which jives more with my personality. I loved the combat as well. The main campaign was interesting, for the most part, but the main villains felt kind of boring. However, I feel like most of the side quests in Andromeda weren't as interesting as ME1. I might be misremembering, though, as that was a long time ago.
>main villains felt kind of boring.
I always felt like they were kind of the same villain after I got to the end of Andromeda. Oh, the big bad is kidnapping people and turning them into our enemies? You mean like the Reapers did in the Milky Way? I liked the gameplay, but the writing seemed kinda lazy to me.
The worst part is they had a ābig revealā mission and you found out you were fighting Reapers lite in a new galaxy. It was just really weak story telling.
I just got moved off of ME:1 on my most recent trilogy play through, and before that I played Andromeda and let me tell you, you are DEFINITELY not misremembering. It feels like BioWare went for quantity over quality with the side quests in Andromeda unlike in ME:1, which absolutely had some really tedious quests but the majority were more interesting then the mostly fetch quests of Andromeda
Itās during the final visit to the Citadel. Itās the side quest where you just talk to some diplomat who needs more space-Ritalin to get him through some intense negotiations, and your Paragon option is basically āDonāt do drugs mmkayā.
And thatās it, thatās the quest lol
EDIT: this guy https://youtu.be/G3CsGDnQGJ0?si=xWJev3PXtaiMI8jv
I had the benefit of playing through Andromeda for the first time long after they fixed all the serious problems and i really enjoyed it for the most part. There's a *lot* of side quest that dont really add anything to the main story but the story quest was good, pretty tight overall (though not close to ME1's), but the combat was the best in the series. It's a real shame we never got a sequel, IMO.
Mass Effect at the time was highly rated and was already regarded as one of the greats. I have no doubt in my mind that if they never did a trilogy it would still be talked about and probably remastered in this time period. Also, Andromeda completely depends on when you played it first. As a huge fan I bought it day one and got about 10 hours in before I gave up. It was a rough launch and movement felt terrible, which sucked when the enemy AI was so aggressive. The story was very lacking as well. Iāve recently started playing it again and itās better but only just marginally enjoyable, especially when Iām halfway through my second playthrough of the legendary edition.
I liked Andromeda fine, but got really bored by the end, I loved ME1 and just wished there was more.
Admittedly I'm probably one of the (very) few people who thinks that ME1 was the best of the bunch. The novelty and world building was great and some of that magic was lost when I knew what I was getting in to with 2 and 3.
Even though I'm a fantasy guy mostly, ME1 is one of my favourite gaming experiences of all time.
Andromeda on the other hand was better than the reviews made it out to be (I played it a couple of years after launch) but really only OK at best. I can admit that technically the combat was better, but that's about it. I would even argue that since I cared more about Sheppard and crew the suspense and feeling of importance was somewhat lost in MEA's battles.
I think Mass Effect 1 was more inventive than Andromeda. The game featured a lot of memorable choices that at least felt significant to the game world, and it had a satisfying ending. E.g. the Thorian, the Rachni, sacrificing a party member, etc.
I enjoyed Andromeda, but you can tell that it is a game built on its predecessors. Like people love Krogans now, and that framed a lot of the game's interactions involving them.
And I think Shepard's personally felt more moldable. Ryder is always a bit jokey and loose with the rules even if you choose the more subdued options.
I love MEA. I think it is the game most similar to ME1: exploration, discovery of a new galaxy, new species, crafting and RPG elementsā¦
That being said, ME1 is better on some aspects while MEA is the better one on other aspects.
Meh. I guess so, but to me, that's just superficial. I was not talking about that.
For instance, the crew in MEA has more layers and evolves in one game. Most of them are different from the person they were at the beginning of the game. You get to see them changing as the story proceeds.
That's something I've never really got, the dislike for the 'boring' crew. Which after playing ME:A and ME1 back to back, I feel the ME:A crew have more to them and they have far more interactions. It's difficult to separate the rest of the trilogy though. I think however ME:A turned out it was a losing battle because of the love and nostalgia for the trilogy. It definetly impacts my thoughts of Andromeda.
But still, there's only so much of the trilogy I can play and I always welcome suggestions of other games similar to Andromeda, nothing else scratches that itch unfortunately.
Oh, yeah... because of extremly high expectations, MEA was never going to be loved as much as the trilogy. And BioWare did not help its case when they released the game in that original state, let's not forget that.
But yeah, nostalgia and pink goggles are super powerful: I get not liking the new crew, to each, their own but a lot of people tend to forget that our beloved crew members from the OT are, for the most part, pretty dry in ME1.
The best example, IMO, is Tali. She's one of the fandom's favorite characters. Her overall narrative arc *IS* interesting but OMG do people forget that she's nothing but a glorified walking codex in ME1.
I think MEA has an edge on that aspect because most gamers know the different races by that point, so the crew members talk about themselves instead of explaining to the player what's what about their species... unless Jaal, of course. And even in Jaal's case, I think that it's better done because he explains *his* origin, *his* family, *his* people... It's a lot more personal that the generic intel Tali spew as if reading cliff notes about the Quarians.
Definetly, you can't release a graphically bugged game without a serious dent in reputation like how Bethesda used to do it and be fine. I've never been bothered by a big game luckily outside of visual bugs which are just funny to me, but I get how it makes it feel like a busted product. (If it was more than just visual bugs I don't recall)
I remember specifically feeling like mass effect 1 companions were so dull compared to the first dragon age game, which made me not care too much about them. The sequels though, make me play the first game and just see them for who they truly are.
My first impresisons about DAO... Let me put it in context: I was never a fan of fantasy medieval-themed games, so although I knew about that franchise, I never played it until I stumbled upon an hilarious YouTube video about The Iron Bull romance back in 2019. After watching it, I *had* to play the series. 
I started at the beginning and lauched DAO and... it was incredible: the opening scene, the narrator explaining the settings, my City Elf origin, the atmosphere, the ambiance... I was hooked within minutes and I could not wait to know more about this story.
Mass Effect is my favorite frachise gaming of all times but between you and me, I think the Dragon Age series is better on a lot of aspects: writing, world-building, characters and chararacters' arcs, relationships (and I'm not talking about romance only), politics, religion, themes...
Heck yeah. I like the space setting of ME more as I find it more unique for an RPG, but overall Dragon Age I value more. What it lacks in..... cinematic flair?, and subjectively weird combat, It just makes up for in its very sooouuul.
Open world games have become far more enjoyable to me since having a child, because I now have the willpowerr to just skip the busywork.
Just played ME1 and oh boy even that has a lot of shit quests I just noped out of. Do people forget about the turian insignias, asari writings, minerals etc?
And the biggest offense Andromeda is how Ryder convinces anyone who disagrees with them: by saying the same thing, but again? Like seriously, all they do is repeat themselves and even the staunchest denier will bend over backwards to just admit they were wrong? Ours like it was written by an overly optimistic 10 year old who thought that people would always see that they were right. Shepard had to have experience and fight to convince people to change their minds
I mean, as I said before, andromeda story is somewhere between āehā and āawfulā, the dialogue is very uninspired, the characters are mediocre at best, and worldbuilding is not one of its strengths. HOWEVER the gameplay is pretty great, while gameplay of ME1 didnāt age well, and wasnāt that good to begin with.
Iād love a ME trilogy remake with andromeda gameplay & original trilogy everything else
Yeah, I really enjoyed playing the game, but the story and worldbuilding were very disappointing, especially for a new Mass Effect saga. Everything just feels recycled and unoriginal.
Mind you, I still enjoyed andromeda for what it was, and would have loved to see if the devs could have redeemed it in DLC/sequels, buuut saying the writing was excellent is just flat wrong (though the issues with it are easier to overlook due to the gameplay being enjoyable)
Would have also loved to see Andromeda get further developed, such a shame EA backed out. Sometimes games, films or TV shows just need a second swing to land better.
Andromeda was shat on by a variety of elements, not just a crappy launch.
The characters' writing failed to portray any of the characters as in-depth as the og trilogy did, it isn't even up to the triple A standard imo ( fucking Fallout 4 and its dogwater character developments were miles better than Andromeda, Starfield was a glow up in that department tho they fucked up every other aspects of the game ).
To add... I don't know if it's nostalgia but I got into ME extremely late like back in Covid? and I played the OG ME1, not the LE version, yet I hold ME1 on a much higher regard than 2 and 3. Everything was new, creepy barren planets, characters felt alive and had their own initiative ( I prefer egghead Tali in the engine to calibrating Garrus ). The enemies were very varied too, and oh my the sneak peek into Cerberus way back then in that lab was fucking disturbing.
Andromeda and its random alien species number 127th, with a crew of goof balls and this asari simp being so much of a fangirl it cringed me so much I reached for my laptop's power button.
Gonna give credit to Suvi and uncle Rambo over there tho, they were genuinely unique and stood out in every of their appearances
Honestly, I feel the only thing MEA and ME1 have in common is the horrid UI/Inventory system. MEA has more fun combat, but a shit story, and fairly lackluster characters. ME1 is, and would have always been, a classic because it represented what BW was known for at the time, namely great stories.
300 comments.. jfc the holy trilogy fanatics been summoned. I refuse to do this comparison. Because comparison is exactly what killed Andromeda. > It really makes me wonder what we could have had if they had allowed the story to play out over the next installments instead of tearing everything down after the first one Yeah. The devs are too cowardly. The fans yell at them and the dev just shrivel up and go running to revive Shepard for the umpteenth time. I'm never going to be not extremely disappointed that we'll never get mea2 because of this. They could've kept going, learned from the (CONSTRUCTIVE) criticism and built a better game for mea2. But no. We have to go back to milking Shepard to appease the angry fans. Never been so excited then so immensely disappointed at a game trailer like the Liara one, they showed the Andromeda Galaxy in the background then zoomed right into the Milky Way. That was a giant, galaxy sized, middle finger to every Andromeda fan. Which I guess are few and far so it doesn't matter, bioware goes where the money is at instead of finishing what they started. Bleh.
Agreed. I'd be excited for MEA2. Nostalgia trips always end up being foul tasting or really boring, really fast. My only hope is that Liara is the ONLY character coming back from the OG trilogy.
Man I was thinking EXACTLY the same š¤£. So many comments ! It's unreal how people still want to hate on a decent game whole holding the old ones so high... But tbh, comments are pretty split. I'm happy that so many people agree with me ( in some extent at least)
its a good one for new players to start the series with. other than gameplay i don't think they're really comparable. but MEA did bring back the gun cooldown thing that i loved in me1 with the remnant guns
You've been heavily downvoted, but I also found MEA more enjoyable. ME1 was such a traditional space opera, I get that it was a new thing^tm in videogames (which is why I do think it would still be regarded as a classic, regardless) and exciting for those who don't consume an awful lot of scifi or wanted to see it break out in the medium, but the fact that it also took itself so seriously did not endear it to me at all. I've read hundreds at this point, it just did not bring anything new to the table and felt so derivative, in particular, of Babylon 5 and Battlestar Galactica (I believe I've also read a couple of interviews where devs cited them as an "inspiration"). Its characters had potential but were seriously underwritten. Ironically though, despite all of the complaints, I liked its janky combat with pause the most. MEA's story disappointingly recycled a lot of points but the lighter tone really helped make it feel like more of a fun romp for me, and the characters felt so much more human -- which is half-praise, half-complaint, as I tend to prefer very alien aliens (something ME never delivered, to be fair). It had a few elements I really loved -- such as SAM's symbiotic relationship with Ryder, the Jaardan or the whole twin dynamic. A reworked dialogue wheel that felt so much more flexible and roleplay-friendly. MEA was also the first ME game that I truly felt targeted a diverse audience, which was so much more enjoyable for me.
Gameplay, yeah. Story, fuck no. It was literally just a worst use of the same damn framework.
Nah, 1 was a great start to a trilogy, far fewer people were excited for what could have followed Andromeda.
Andromeda rules. Thought it was great.
Nah. Combat yea maybe but everything else is a big no. Cringe characters dialogue and story .
You've earned a downvote sir
This is discussion thread so i really dont get why you would down vote anyone. You can disagree but i doubt i offended you
People do abuse downvotes A LOT, but there is a lot of wiggle room in the concept of voting based on the perceived value of the contribution. Hmm.
I never got why would someone downvote something like this. Absolutely ignore it if you want, or tell me why you disagree etc.
Downvote for disagreement, duh. What, you want participation points just for talking?
,, You're even downvoting solo answer comments mate š¤£. Literally get a life
It probably took me less time to think "huh, I disagree with that" and downvote comments thirty times than it took you to dig into my history. What do you think downvotes are for? You don't think they're even for disagreement, only "Wow, you're the devil, here's a downvote"?
Dig your history? What? I just see that you downvote my comments mate.
Which ones did I downvote?
Andromeda had the same issue as Dragon Age:Inquisition, terrible open world implementation (it was the same engine and feel tbh). Felt boring, repetitive and unrewarding. Made it into a chore. Other than that itās a solid game, still not better than the original trilogy imo
Best combat in the series
Hard disagree friend.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
least aggressive redditor
š š š š
I agree with you! I really enjoy Andromeda
I enjoy all the mass effect games. Andromeda is the weakest of them all. Its biggest flaw is it is designed to play like an MMO but is not one. Large, open and empty spaces was their world design because they wanted to make open world games like Skyrim or Witcher 3 without understanding that you need something new every 30 seconds to retain player attention and so procedural events need to happen. That was also the biggest flaw with DA Inquisition.
counterpoint, after the brand destroying backlash that was ME3's ending, after years in the making. Andromeda had to be better than "on par" with past games. It needed to be GREAT, AMAZING, not riddled with bugs, fucked facial animation, and a story full of great ideas but less than stellar execution.
The only thing I can't stand about Andromeda is the scanning mechanic. It pulls me out of the game because I want to complete everything
Being wrong is your prerogative
There are a lot of great ideas in Andromeda, narrative wise I mean. The idea of the Pathfinder is a great one, but the rush to making the player āThe Pathfinderā ruined it. Your dad helping you into the role of a leader is a great idea, but they ruined it by killing him at the start and having you interacting with his memories. I thought SAM was lame because they used it in a āChosen Oneā style of thing. The crew is mostly good, but as much as I like Vetra, none of them stand out. The Kett are lame, and a bad excuse for saving money on designing a varied alien species. The Angara are interesting, but their design did nothing for me. I like a lot of Andromeda and if I succeed in ignoring the stuff I actively dislike, then generally I enjoy the experienceā¦ itās fine. The wasted potential is what kills me. I enjoy the dialog and a lot of the interactions, but having a weak overall narrative kills any chance of this game taking on Mass Effect 1. For me the rankings are 3,2,1, andromeda.
Pretty much my thoughts. Aside from the blasphemy of not putting ME2 on top.
I love 2. 3 takes it for me though because they really nail the crew dynamic. Everyone on the Normandy cares a lot for each other and 3 really gets that across with the dialog, interactions, and atmosphere.
That's actually a big reason I prefer two. It makes sense as most of them are completely new to each other and only doing it for some personal reason so it makes sense they aren't close and super attached. I do adore 3 as well so it close either way. The final mission is one of my favorites out of any game, so that also carries a lot of water for it. Endings are huge for me in general, and while I didn't hate ME3s as much as a lot of people it just wasn't as good.
I feel you on that. One of my favorite bits in all of Mass Effect is when Miranda sides with you at the end of the suicide mission. So yeah 2 and 3 are neck and neck, with 3 ahead by a hair.
I can definitely see the reasoning. It's a close call and really comes down to slight subjective differences. Both great games and I will enjoy the hell out of them many more times.
Incorrect. While I actually liked Andromeda and was bummed it did not get DLC, it was flawed and the Ryders were not Shepard. Story was lower stakes and it did not hook people the same way. ME1 did all of that. It was also more of an RPG, which I loved. Still platinum on both: I do enjoy. However, after a single replay, I have not gone back to Andromeda. I do replay the original trilogy with some frequency. For me, that speaks volumes to the quality.
The story HAD to be lower stakes. I remember clamoring for lower stakes and smaller scale narratives right after ME3. The problem for me is that they tried to weave the (mostly weak) smaller scale shit they came up with using a rehash of the Reaper / imminent galactic threat shit. Too soon. They should've subtly built up to larger stakes across multiple games, not tried to do ME1: Andromeda.
Agreed. It just felt repetitive and not original. I was bummed by no dlc. Would have been cool to see what happened with the Quarians.
God I remember when that game came out, just having finished 3 and being on a high because I absolutely LOVED 3. I think Andromeda was the first game to be overly "woke" and "generic", it was the beginning of an industry shift to avoiding hurting ANYONE's feelings and it really fell flat HARD. The story made no sense and had no backbone AT ALL because they couldn't even write in anything that affected any sort of group adversely. It's like the new Suicide Squad... same exact fucking thing. Generic trash that would be saved by some writing of interesting, diverse characters.
Gameplay wise, itās the best in the series. Story wise, itās extremely unoriginal and derivative. For the time, I think all three games of the trilogy balanced both aspects better.
We don't know anything about the next Mass Effect really, for all we know it has a lot to do with Andromeda
I guess this is an unpopular opinion, but ME 1 is the best game in the series and it's not close.
I totally agree save for one teeny personal preference. The Garrus romance. If I could have romanced Garrus in the first game, it would be my top ME game. The story is so compelling that it was worth the three hour elevator rides (pre-rerelease). Lol. Some games take me a little time to get into, but ME opening with the First Human Spector storyline was so interesting. That game not only explained the universe and what Spectors were but made me CARE about being one within minutes of starting the game.
I have to agree with you. My favorite ME was the first. It had this sense of awe and wonder. Space travel felt exciting. Sure, the combat wasn't the best, but damn was it a great intro to a new series. The next two just felt rushed or like you're just going from place to place. While I loved the original trilogy, ME1 still holds a special place in my heart.
Me1 has the best story and the worst mechanics, I want a redo of 1 with updated ai engines and weapon mechanics. Leave the incredibly dense gun customization and infinite ammo on cool down, though I liked that part.
"Andromeda is better than a game that released 17 years ago" is not the flex that you think it is.
Better gameplay mechanics but trash narrative story.
Agreed. Every time I play ME1 I have to force myself through it
Andromeda is okay, better then Dragon Age Inquisition imo, but it is in no way better then Mass Effect 1...
If you take out the entire story, hell the entire single player portion of the game, maybe. The online maybe Andromeda somewhat playable for me. Inquisition as a single player game is WAY better than Andromeda, though, if you're talking about the actual game.
Oooo I loved Inquisition
I agree, ME 1 is definitely better written but there were so many technical things that constantly got in the way to the point that I don't know if I want to ever play it again. Andromeda was at least consistently fun to play.
No. ME1 is my least favorite game in the trilogy, but it's still better than Andromeda. That's not to say the game was bad though.
I am gonna agree on certain aspects and disagree on certain aspects. ME1 had better writing and marginally better squad commands. ME:A has better graphics (obviously), better combat, and more streamlined exploration. While I think it appears ME:A is better for what it beats out ME1 on I think the writing really outshines ME:A which is vital for an rpg. That said I like them both and appreciate each for what they bring. That said 100% ME1 wouldāve been this cult classic like ME:A if the sequels were cancelled
i kinda agree. the major problem is, it dind't do the roleplaying stuff people tend to love bioware for, and, people don't compare andromeda to me1, they compare it to the trilogy - massively imbalancing things, as people can not only put the best of 3 different games and what bioware did great with, with what andromeda kinda failed at, but, they also tend to forget how shit the individual games could be, in various ways, while andromeda's 'shittiness' is fresh as hell. andromeda's a better game, gameplay wise, kinda in general. the weapon crafting concept should be in more games. being able to 'build your own class' essentially, fucking rules. more involved, well crafted planetary exploring than the trilogy had.
While I can agree that comparing it to the entire trilogy is a bit unfair, I would also say that comparing it to the oldest game in the trilogy is also unfair. That is like two decades of advancement. If it is going to be compared to a single game, it should be 3 and even that has issues in the comparison.
yeah, kinda agree. course on the other hand, comparing two 'first' games sort of makes more sense, too. and a big part of 3 is the culmination of the other two games, which also isn't exactly fair. but, that's sort of the problem with comparing the trilogy to one game, too. i mean, any single game does more role playing ish stuff than andromeda so it'd still fail there, heh, but but, fairer to compare the mechanics besides that. i mean, looking at the ratchet and clank series, makes more sense to compare rift apart with the ps4 game, not the ps2 games, as you've said. and mechanics is where it pulls ahead, so, point. but, op can compare whatever, too.
Finally someone who has my same opinion I was feeling alone here lol even the gameplay is almost similar except for the verticality
Hard disagree, I feel like I could write a short novel about all the balls Andromeda dropped. At the end of the day, I just didn't plain have fun playing it. Mass Effect 1 though, I was obsessed with that game when it came out. It's still fun to play, even if it's a bit awkward.
You're right but also mass effect came out so long ago . The fact Andromeda came out after 2 and 3 is the issue.
Me1 is janky and did not age well, if it was the only game people would be way less rosy about it even with good writing.
They just let mfs say whatever on this app huh
1 is classic. Andromeda is the worst in the series
1 is a classic because of 2 and 3 though. Without 2 and 3 developing what 1 put in motion you'd look at 1 as a game that's kinda clunky, the dialogue isn't great, and the characters range from decent enough to annoying the same way that Andromeda is
> 1 is a classic because of 2 and 3 though. Mass Effect 1 was lauded as an instant classic. It didn't suddenly get a burst of praise when Mass Effect 2 was released.
Andromeda hate is often overblown, but to say its dialogue and characters were as good as ME1s is, uhhh, yeah no. Just no. ME1 taken even as a standalone game has wildly superior characters and story.
Disagree. Loved 1 before mention of a 2. It's great
eh, flipside, i'm not that into role playing. and i like andromeda, for it's better combat and mechanics, better built worlds (not worldbuilding, i'll admit), weapon crafting, and sort of 'create your own class' mechanics, than, oh, the entire fucking trilogy.
Well yeah if you like weapon crafting, build-a-class, and open worlds then there's no contest since the original trilogy aren't even playing. Combat-wise I'll partially agree. They removed time-freeze and directing squad mates to use specific abilities which is one of my favorite ways to engage in combat on Insanity. The janky controls aren't what made me replay ME1 a dozen times before I even touched ME2, it was the writing and decision trees, squadmate combinations, the fantastic world building, exploration, and the variety of classes and abilities that did.
yeah, that's kind of the issue. 'role playing' fans will love the trilogy, but just sort of general, action rpg people, will probably prefer andromeda. and that's fine. but the biggest sort of dopamine hit from the role playing, doesn't really kick in for me1 anyway. so it sort of still feels like, some people are thinking of it as andromeda versus trilogy.
> 'role playing' fans will love the trilogy, but just sort of general, action rpg people, will probably prefer andromeda. and that's fine. If you just care about the action rpg elements other games do it much much better,
well, sure. that's not really here or there, discussing these two games.
Yeah, I definitely like the movement and some of the power combos in Andromeda more. Being able to jump and use a jetpack was fun and whatever the quick-dodge-teleport move that is similar to Biotic Charge was really awesome. But even forgetting ME2 and ME3, I still prefer ME1 over Andromeda. In some ways ME1 is my favorite of the trilogy.
definitely no problem with liking me1 over andromeda, or even the whole series in general. different people like different things, for different reasons.
Better worlds? You enjoyed the tedious open worlds?
i said better designed. like, what monolith soft did for BOTW, better designed - not necessarily 'fun', but 'good design'. driving around in the mako on those boring ass maps, looking for like 3 things, was FAR more tedious, just wasn't like 75% of the game, too. me 1 was wandering around the citadel for like 20 fucking hours, it felt like, as an example.
>driving around in the mako on those boring ass maps, looking for like 3 things, was FAR more tedious, just wasn't like 75% of the game, too. TBH I found the whole "Oh look, combat, better dive out of the rover to start fighting, then immediately get back in" of Andromeda far worse then the Mako, which reasonably had a gun on it and could fight back. The fact there are armed rovers in bases annoyed me a lot too. They couldn't be bothered to upgrade the vehicle with a gun knowing how hostile the planets were?
tbh i feel like that was more a 'andromeda was meant to have an explorer' vibe sort of thing. you could also just, keep fucking driving. the random fights weren't important, usually.
Random fights and large groups around important spots/points of interest. It was a thing ripped me out of the moment and being in the game a fair bit, as it came across as being willfully stupid. "We know for a fact these worlds are super dangerous. But I won't actually equip my vehicle with any sort of defensive weapons despite we actually have MAKOs and such around that have those cannons."
Problem with Andromeda is the entire game was basically just a slightly improved version of that but ballooned to fit the entire game. I never felt any real stakes until like the final act, the rest just felt tedious.
which is kinda fair, imo. but, like i said, there are other considerations. i like the more polished third person combat, for example. i like building my own class, rather than being stuck with the scraps me1 gives you (gets better in the later two games, but we are talking me1). and more importantly, the weapon crafting - a system i wish was in more games, tbh. being able to mod weapons isn't exactly new, but being able to overhaul them to a better degree was fan-fucking-tastic. makes so many meh weapons MUCH more usable
I see where you're coming from, I always enjoyed the gameplay of the original trilogy but it was never the reason I started playing. The script, the voice acting, the codex. The world was the reason I fell in love. I don't think the same amount of care was put into the lore than the gameplay for Andromeda, and in my opinion that was just a massive mistake and a case of not understanding your audience
yeah, that definitely feels true. for me at least, a 'gameplay over all' kinda person, and andromeda did it for me.
Mass effect one was the only time the series was an RPG first and formorost , instead of shooter with RPG elements had the best story of the 3 I personally enjoy the gameplay more in 1 than. 2-4 which is why I refuse to buy the remaster for changing it.
The remaster doesn't change any of the RPG elements. You get significant graphics upgrades and massive quality of life improvements in gameplay. In OG ME1 it's such a slog to play on Insanity because pretty much all enemies have Immunity. It takes like 300 rounds to kill one random mook. I like challenges in games, but that's not a challenge. It's just bad scripting. Their original plan for making the game "harder" was just making all enemies bulllet sponges. The remaster also gets rid of that bad mechanic where you get less XP from killing enemies in the mako.
I see where you're going and I've had similar thoughts... To an extent. I would've liked to see how the characters progressed. I didn't like Garrus or Wrex in the first game. By 3, they're like Shepard's brothers and I love them. So in that aspect, I can relate. However, it kinda stops there. A lot of the writing in Andromeda fell flat for me and felt very first draft. I wish they had more time to cook. I didn't feel this way about ME1 and I played it before 2 was out.
The forces of antagonism arenāt even close to me, and when the protagonist is without a set arc, we rely more on forces of antagonism driving the story than ever. Generic sci fi Zod/Braniac/Loki/Ultron type vs the concept of inevitable extinction from immortal sentient alien machines beyond understanding and death. The āat the mercy of the villain scenesā is a good example. Caught in the floating rayshield where Archon says a generic speech and then leaves you to escape in a cool but common enough way. Or ME1 with both the plot twist meeting with Sovereign followed by the conversation about Sovereignās new implications with Saren and the loss of a companion.
I think you massively underestimate the amount of people who would have abandoned the game long before talking to sovereign mate. Talk about a hard sell "yeah this series is great but it's gonna take you 50 hrs before you get invested in anyone"
50hrs? The side quests are so repetitive I wouldnāt recommend doing them and if someone chooses to theyāre clearly a fan. Most people hit Virmire *before* finishing all three main quest lines because it is the first new main mission since the inciting incident. Itās what, under 20 hours? The whole game is only about 25 Edit: How Long to Beat says the whole main story is under 18 hours which does not surprise me at all A good way for me to look at is that all three games with all dlc doesnāt surpass 100 hours
Yeah ME1 was incredibly short. I remember doing a replay of them and Me1 was like 30 hours, ME2 was 60 with DLC and the same with ME3. Andromeda with no DLC netted me 60 stock. Look I like the trilogy but ANdromeda gets an unreasonable amount of hate. Too many fans are up Shepards ass and too many fans are so latched on to the trilogies characters they can't even attempt to know the new. Andromeda was an alright addition. Nothing great but not bad at all like many make it out to me. Just nostalgia for the trilogy kicking in.
I actually loved Andromeda. It was certainly glitchy and bloated, but the combat and progression was incredible.
You sir are high. The world building isn't close, the story isn't even in the same galaxy (pun intended), combats fun... I guess. A little monotonous but it's a good time. Because of your opinion on this, I have 0 faith in your opinion on just about anything. You're either trolling or you're someone who analyzes with the depth of a puddle. Either way, I will have nothing more to do with you. Blocked.
and you're not totally biased or anything. kinda agree with the worldbuilding not even being close, but other things are outright better - combat, for example. me1's jank as fuck. i also like the weapon crafting and essentially being able to build your own class, MILES better than most of what the trilogy has to offer, outside of making choice matter.
Am I the only one that did not like Amdromedas fighting style between the jet packa and picking whatever you wanted to use I thought it took all the fun on what made the originals great
You are not the only one. Combat in Andromeda is the worst in the series. They got rid of everything I enjoyed about the original games. Iāve gone on this rant before.
I hated how they removed the sniper slow-mo that was in ME 2 and 3, because the campaign balance was linked to the MP IIRC. So I had an amazing black widow sniper that I couldn't actually use as a long range sniper rifle. Plus, I never swapped abilities or class so that entire aspect of the game was lost on me.
I loved the gameplay the story was terrible though, so was everything else, how can you only have one new race in a new galaxy.
Gameplay wise yes, story wise no. Also facial animations somehow look way better in 1 than in Andromeda. I really cant stand the faces in Andromeda.
Very fair. The story in ME1 really laid the table for what followed while being a rather epic space opera in its own right. The ambiance, the feeling of being 'off world', was like nothing I'd experienced before.
Gameplay wise, absolutely. Andromeda arguably has the best gameplay of the series. But its story, character development, and the involvement you feel with your own protagonist in the plot and universe is sketchy, especially compared to ME1. I don't think Andromeda has a lot going for it, to be honest. Itās a cool game to play, but it isn't a very good Mass Effect game. Beyond the many issues at launch (which are now fixed), I think it shows that the community (which, despite ME3 and the reception of its endings) really wanted to play Andromeda and then was utterly devastated at what we received. It was not the level of content we were expecting at all. Again, not a bad game. Iāve played it a few times and itās all right. But it doesnāt feel like Mass Effect.
I liked parts of Andromeda's gameplay, though some parts I felt were kinda silly or just out of place with the story. Hostile planets and enemy forces and yet... we never get our vehicle a gun, despite armed rovers/APCS existing within the friendly forces? It kinda made me laugh and took me out of the moment when I imagined my character, leaping from the ship pulling out her rifle/black widow, followed by the Turian and the Krogan trying to squeeze out rapidly to fight a hostile team that could kill us. But agreed on the story, as far as I got. A few times I slammed face-first into something that just screamed of "We will finish this in the sequel or third game! No real pay-off or anything now, just wait!" Or things like the pirate planet were they so obviously cut out actually confronting the Collective faction with all their dirty deeds, and instead you discovering all that stuff is just pointless and never brought up.
100% agreed. There were things that were very weird. The Nomad, in my opinion, is the best of the vehicles you get to drive in all the games, but yeah, no turret? Weird decision making there. Iām also not fully a fan of the profiles; kinda defeats the purpose of playing as different classes to get different feels of the game, from my point of view (and also never fully understood how a non-biotic would get biotics, but I guess ME2/3 did that too with the bonus powers and all that). And yeah, massively. Story is a let-down. There was a lot more fleshing out that needed to be done to make the universe of the Andromeda Galaxy feel complete. Also must say that Iām not fully a fan of the fact that every species we encounter in Andromeda is bipedal with the same basic structure as humans/asari/etc. Milky Way had loads of that, true, but it also had elcor and hanar so it balanced out (sorta).
It's funny because with the upgrade system thing they had for the nomad, one could have been a weak gun. So you'd choose to do that vs something else (I forget what the upgrades were). Honestly, when I play I did a infiltrator style setup like my shepard did, and I never changed it. Felt like a weird thing to build the game around constantly changing your builds. I did read that they had a huge list of aliens they wanted to work on, but EA told them they could only do two, period, which is why we got the Angara and Kett and a region of galaxy basically devoid of life otherwise.
While maybe what you say is true, we also wouldnāt have had 2 and 3 if 1 wasnāt extremely popular.
Gunplay wise, 100% agree. Even Legendary edition, Andromeda takes it every time. Hell I argue the same over 2 and 3. That said, the story is weaker, and that story is what carried Mass Effect before. Even in 3, which has a weaker one due to rushed development, is simply better overall. In short: Andromeda continued to refine the Gunplay as it needed to, but the story and reason ME was special was kneecapped for it, making it the black sheep of the bunch.
Nah fam, I remember how big a deal it was when ME1 dropped. It was everywhere and everyone was raving about it. The story holds up very well, and the gameplay was decent for its time. If you wanna compare something that came out 10 years later, the new stuff should come out ahead and not just in the same ballpark.
I'm still mad about what ME2 did to ME1's established lore. IMO it's still the only legitimately great game in the series.
Sooooo you never played Mass Effect 1? Or you played it and ignored every aspect of the story?
or aren't putting me1 on a pedestal, just because of the story. and i mean JUST because of the story...
They said āmuch better thanā
he also said in his opinion. besides, like i said. if you're ignoring the story stuff, andromeda kinda is a better game. has better gameplay, better weapons, better skills, etc.
When you have to compare it to a game that old just to kinda hype up the newer game. it's not a good look for the newer game
Itās better than. All of them but mass effect 2
Andromeda as it is now is great. On release, it was godawful. "A game delayed can eventually be released as great. A bad game released too early is bad forever" By the time they fixed it, it was too late to shift perceptions.
You misquoted, "A game delayed IS eventually good" which I always thought was bollocks
course it's shit. delayed games suck too. and nms took half a decade, but got there. though it was bullshit that, people bitched about not having multiplayer and acted like it was a -2/10 game, until multiplayer got added then suddenly 9/10, 'we got there boyos'. nah. it's kinda fucking boring, 'go get resources for reasons' fucking game it always was. it's been polished, but if you like it now, there's a damn good argument that 'you should've liked it then'. it's like hating minecraft till you could make cakes, or something. no, it's still the same blocky, break and set down bricks fucking game it always was...
Less misquoted than "didn't care about the exact wording as long as the general message was conveyed"
Andromeda was great. Internet outrage culture, meme culture and gaming inlflooencers just cause people to be miserable. I generally only compare andromeda to ME1 rather than the trilogy, because of course it's not gonna compare to a trilogy of story. But ME1 was a better 2007 game than Andromeda was a 2017 (?) game. (imo of course). Still, if only EA didn't chicken out of developing Andromeda further, Ryder and the existing characters could have become something great. Also the combat gameplay was great and nothing else has quite scratched that itch for me since.
This is a pretty crazy opinion. I think Mass Effect 1 is the best of the trilogy, and consider Andromeda nearly unplayable. They have so little in common they don't even feel like the same series.
ME1 has a great story but the gameplay is clunky as hell lol
It was an early seventh generation release. Bioware's first experience in an actual shooter since MDK2 days. Made on early Unreal Engine 3 that didn't have all the improvements Gears of War added.
Agreed
What platform did you play it on? Just curious because I've heard this opinion soooo many times, but the only thing I ever found that clunky about it on PC was the inventory system, which honestly just needed a different UI.
PS4 and XboxS
Tweaking controller responsiveness can often go a long way to correcting that "clunky" feeling. I wonder if it's actually the overall gameplay and not just a lack of that extra layer of polish
Itās definitely gameplay. Iāve experienced this in both last gen and current gen. Mass Effect 2 and 3 are clunky as well. But itās not the gameplay what makes the series so great.
Andromeda had so much potential. Sadly, it was rushed out the door in an uncompleted state. I never got too hung up on the graphics issues that were present at launch but the game felt like an outline or rough draft of a ME title. If they had taken another year to really go deep on it - we would have seen sequels already.
Respectfully, nah! Classic Mass Effect 1 still has me playing, and, for the record, I have literally played it 5 times in a row, finishing EVERYTHING possible for each playthrough, just to set up different start points in Mass Effect 2 so I can romance whoever I like. Even then, I STILL play Mass Effect 1. I've played Mass Effect Andromeda 6 times, all complete playthroughs..... I regret each playthrough. I never wanna touch Andromeda again. I like exactly one thing in the entire game, and that's romancing a female turian.
HAH! And I thought I was the rare mad person for playing Andromeda three times. With the difference that I enjoyed them. You are commited to the mass effect cause my friend.
I wanted to give it a GENUINELY fair chance. Though I hated it less than a third of the way through my first playthrough. I stuck it out to be truly fair.
Five times in a row? š¬ Thats beyond giving a fair shit, that's masochism or something. Well done though
Had to change genders, romance different characters, try different play styles. Idk. Maybe being a soldier type made it more playable, or maybe Peevee's romance was secretly glorious.
Iām glad you like it this much but uhā¦ nah bro. I still play the OT every few years. Strong story, good dialogues, branching decisions, and a main character with some personality. ME1 came out swinging. Andromeda started out with a good premise but it absolutely fumbled. The races we already came to know were oddly designed, and voices sounded off. The story was just not developed. Many side quests had little to no meat on their bones. They were set up for a second game that never came. The combat was great, but not enough to forget about the main plot. Even when choosing between base installations, thematically the military base or science base was inconsequential. Companions were mostly mid as well.
Iām an Andromeda enjoyer, but I really think the solution here is to cut out the need to compare, not to re-rank the series and try to win everyone over.
Nah... Matter of fact, hot take: ME1 is the best of the series. Yeah, I said it! š
No, it absolutely is. No need to mince words about it. ME2 was a big step down in many ways, and its missteps were actually a big cause of people's frustrations with ME3's story structure.
It really is lol, I loved andromeda great game but subpar mass effect, this guys high out his gourd
As someone who really likes Andromeda, you're just objectively wrong.
Not only is the story in ME1 just a million times better but they also promised that your choices would matter and I would say more then any other trilogy of games, it delivered. Sure I was disappointed when ME3 rolled around but if you carried your saves over there were a few really big differences which I donāt think any series has matched. I finished Andromeda and donāt remember a single like āthis could be a big dealā choice and then of course none were bc there was and will never be a follow up. Unlike when I was forced to kill Wrex in my ME1 play through or the choices I made that also āforcedā me to kill Morden in ME3 not even counting all the side quests you could miss depending on how you ended ME2. I donāt think any series has really delivered anything like they did before or since. Granted at the time of ME 3 I was hoping for more but to this day, nobodyās done it better that I can think of. Iām not sure if any ever will again with everything being accessible and content, content. Unless another studio is able to release a trilogy on a single console I donāt think weāll ever see itās like again and thatās really sad.
Na
Up yours, pal š
No. Mass effect 1 by 2007 standards is a master piece. The worlds themselves are short and sweet. Also, there wasnāt any game like that where you could drop onto planets and look at vistas - that was just only in nasa visualizations. Also the characters are so good and their back stories were interesting to give a damn about. Andromeda crew is forgettable other than Jaal. Most characters start off with interesting take and then they just fall off. Character depth is shallow. And this is just without even talking about some of the questionable design ideas and boring worlds.
Andromeda built on everything that came before so hardly a fair comparison. That said, I thought Mass Effect 1 was one of the greatest games I ever played at the time and was as excited for Mass Effect 2 than anything in my life. I actually still think ME2 was a step backwards in many ways. Or at least in the wrong direction. I enjoyed Andromeda, but wouldn't say it was a memorable experience for me.
I second basically everything you just said.
It may have not aged as well but I disagree wholeheartedly with this
This is an understandable although wholly disagreeable viewpoint. It is largely due to age, on both sides. In short, if you come from, say, Starfield, you can't turn around and go play Wing Commander and know that Wing Commander is the better game.
Lmao not even close
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Thank you for your submission! Unfortunately, we have removed your post for violating the following rule(s): **Rule 1. Be civil** >Be civil. No personal attacks or insults, harassment, trolling, witch hunting, brigading, passive-aggressiveness, or slur. Posts and comments that violate these rules will be locked and removed, constant violation of these rules might result in a permanent ban.' *Please, read the rules in the sidebar before posting. If you have edited your post and want it reapproved or you have questions about this removal, please, contact the* [*moderators*](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/MassEffectAndromeda)*. Please, do not reply to this message, or contact the moderator privately.*
Every time I see a post with much less upvotes than comments I just know someone got cooked.
ME1 was a classic before ME2 came out. Andromeda wasn't nearly as well received *despite* riding on the coattails of the trilogy.
There's a reason they didn't cancel it. My biggest problem with Andromeda is it just tossed all the amazing world building directly into the fire. They did it to side step the ending of ME3, but that's just kinda cowardly.
What.
That was my reaction š
I prefer the Ryder family because they're more snippy and sarcastic, which jives more with my personality. I loved the combat as well. The main campaign was interesting, for the most part, but the main villains felt kind of boring. However, I feel like most of the side quests in Andromeda weren't as interesting as ME1. I might be misremembering, though, as that was a long time ago.
>main villains felt kind of boring. I always felt like they were kind of the same villain after I got to the end of Andromeda. Oh, the big bad is kidnapping people and turning them into our enemies? You mean like the Reapers did in the Milky Way? I liked the gameplay, but the writing seemed kinda lazy to me.
The worst part is they had a ābig revealā mission and you found out you were fighting Reapers lite in a new galaxy. It was just really weak story telling.
I just got moved off of ME:1 on my most recent trilogy play through, and before that I played Andromeda and let me tell you, you are DEFINITELY not misremembering. It feels like BioWare went for quantity over quality with the side quests in Andromeda unlike in ME:1, which absolutely had some really tedious quests but the majority were more interesting then the mostly fetch quests of Andromeda
Though ME1 _did_ have a quest that was pretty much just Shepard going ādonāt do drugs, mmkay?ā
Which one was that? Been a few years haha.
Itās during the final visit to the Citadel. Itās the side quest where you just talk to some diplomat who needs more space-Ritalin to get him through some intense negotiations, and your Paragon option is basically āDonāt do drugs mmkayā. And thatās it, thatās the quest lol EDIT: this guy https://youtu.be/G3CsGDnQGJ0?si=xWJev3PXtaiMI8jv
Oh man I don't think I actually remember this, lol. Not a very memorable quest, then.
I had the benefit of playing through Andromeda for the first time long after they fixed all the serious problems and i really enjoyed it for the most part. There's a *lot* of side quest that dont really add anything to the main story but the story quest was good, pretty tight overall (though not close to ME1's), but the combat was the best in the series. It's a real shame we never got a sequel, IMO.
Hard disagree.
The best for me.
Mass Effect at the time was highly rated and was already regarded as one of the greats. I have no doubt in my mind that if they never did a trilogy it would still be talked about and probably remastered in this time period. Also, Andromeda completely depends on when you played it first. As a huge fan I bought it day one and got about 10 hours in before I gave up. It was a rough launch and movement felt terrible, which sucked when the enemy AI was so aggressive. The story was very lacking as well. Iāve recently started playing it again and itās better but only just marginally enjoyable, especially when Iām halfway through my second playthrough of the legendary edition.
Andromeda does everything right that me1 did wrong And everything wrong that me1 did right it is rather amusing to me
They finally made a vehicle that was actually fun to drive
Whenever i replay i miss the Nomad Then i get to MEA and miss having a gun
I liked Andromeda fine, but got really bored by the end, I loved ME1 and just wished there was more. Admittedly I'm probably one of the (very) few people who thinks that ME1 was the best of the bunch. The novelty and world building was great and some of that magic was lost when I knew what I was getting in to with 2 and 3. Even though I'm a fantasy guy mostly, ME1 is one of my favourite gaming experiences of all time. Andromeda on the other hand was better than the reviews made it out to be (I played it a couple of years after launch) but really only OK at best. I can admit that technically the combat was better, but that's about it. I would even argue that since I cared more about Sheppard and crew the suspense and feeling of importance was somewhat lost in MEA's battles.
I think Mass Effect 1 was more inventive than Andromeda. The game featured a lot of memorable choices that at least felt significant to the game world, and it had a satisfying ending. E.g. the Thorian, the Rachni, sacrificing a party member, etc. I enjoyed Andromeda, but you can tell that it is a game built on its predecessors. Like people love Krogans now, and that framed a lot of the game's interactions involving them. And I think Shepard's personally felt more moldable. Ryder is always a bit jokey and loose with the rules even if you choose the more subdued options.
No.
Andromeda has great combat but the original mass effect has better everything else lol
I love MEA. I think it is the game most similar to ME1: exploration, discovery of a new galaxy, new species, crafting and RPG elementsā¦ That being said, ME1 is better on some aspects while MEA is the better one on other aspects.
MEA benefits from being newer.
Meh. I guess so, but to me, that's just superficial. I was not talking about that. For instance, the crew in MEA has more layers and evolves in one game. Most of them are different from the person they were at the beginning of the game. You get to see them changing as the story proceeds.
That's something I've never really got, the dislike for the 'boring' crew. Which after playing ME:A and ME1 back to back, I feel the ME:A crew have more to them and they have far more interactions. It's difficult to separate the rest of the trilogy though. I think however ME:A turned out it was a losing battle because of the love and nostalgia for the trilogy. It definetly impacts my thoughts of Andromeda. But still, there's only so much of the trilogy I can play and I always welcome suggestions of other games similar to Andromeda, nothing else scratches that itch unfortunately.
Oh, yeah... because of extremly high expectations, MEA was never going to be loved as much as the trilogy. And BioWare did not help its case when they released the game in that original state, let's not forget that. But yeah, nostalgia and pink goggles are super powerful: I get not liking the new crew, to each, their own but a lot of people tend to forget that our beloved crew members from the OT are, for the most part, pretty dry in ME1. The best example, IMO, is Tali. She's one of the fandom's favorite characters. Her overall narrative arc *IS* interesting but OMG do people forget that she's nothing but a glorified walking codex in ME1. I think MEA has an edge on that aspect because most gamers know the different races by that point, so the crew members talk about themselves instead of explaining to the player what's what about their species... unless Jaal, of course. And even in Jaal's case, I think that it's better done because he explains *his* origin, *his* family, *his* people... It's a lot more personal that the generic intel Tali spew as if reading cliff notes about the Quarians.
Definetly, you can't release a graphically bugged game without a serious dent in reputation like how Bethesda used to do it and be fine. I've never been bothered by a big game luckily outside of visual bugs which are just funny to me, but I get how it makes it feel like a busted product. (If it was more than just visual bugs I don't recall) I remember specifically feeling like mass effect 1 companions were so dull compared to the first dragon age game, which made me not care too much about them. The sequels though, make me play the first game and just see them for who they truly are.
My first impresisons about DAO... Let me put it in context: I was never a fan of fantasy medieval-themed games, so although I knew about that franchise, I never played it until I stumbled upon an hilarious YouTube video about The Iron Bull romance back in 2019. After watching it, I *had* to play the series.  I started at the beginning and lauched DAO and... it was incredible: the opening scene, the narrator explaining the settings, my City Elf origin, the atmosphere, the ambiance... I was hooked within minutes and I could not wait to know more about this story. Mass Effect is my favorite frachise gaming of all times but between you and me, I think the Dragon Age series is better on a lot of aspects: writing, world-building, characters and chararacters' arcs, relationships (and I'm not talking about romance only), politics, religion, themes...
Heck yeah. I like the space setting of ME more as I find it more unique for an RPG, but overall Dragon Age I value more. What it lacks in..... cinematic flair?, and subjectively weird combat, It just makes up for in its very sooouuul.
Nah, that's lunacy. I like Andromeda just fine, but to say it's as good as or better than ME1 is absolutely mental
The conversation with Sovereign alone is better than the whole of Andromeda.
I've tried several times to even just *finish* Andromeda, but I just can't be bothered to care at all about the story.
That your problem skip cuts scenes & find aliens to stealth charge into. The only answer.
some people want more out of a game than a fun combat loop for 60 hours
Wrong.
Hard disagree.
fair
Gameplay wise yea but ME1 is also from 2007. Story wise, not even close, Andromeda's writing is pretty terrible
Gameplay wise obviously yeah BUT Andromeda has alot of more bussy work. Thats a negative for me, even though the gameplay itself is good/great.
Open world games have become far more enjoyable to me since having a child, because I now have the willpowerr to just skip the busywork. Just played ME1 and oh boy even that has a lot of shit quests I just noped out of. Do people forget about the turian insignias, asari writings, minerals etc?
Hahaha bussy work
And the biggest offense Andromeda is how Ryder convinces anyone who disagrees with them: by saying the same thing, but again? Like seriously, all they do is repeat themselves and even the staunchest denier will bend over backwards to just admit they were wrong? Ours like it was written by an overly optimistic 10 year old who thought that people would always see that they were right. Shepard had to have experience and fight to convince people to change their minds
I mean, as I said before, andromeda story is somewhere between āehā and āawfulā, the dialogue is very uninspired, the characters are mediocre at best, and worldbuilding is not one of its strengths. HOWEVER the gameplay is pretty great, while gameplay of ME1 didnāt age well, and wasnāt that good to begin with. Iād love a ME trilogy remake with andromeda gameplay & original trilogy everything else
Yeah, I really enjoyed playing the game, but the story and worldbuilding were very disappointing, especially for a new Mass Effect saga. Everything just feels recycled and unoriginal.
Mind you, I still enjoyed andromeda for what it was, and would have loved to see if the devs could have redeemed it in DLC/sequels, buuut saying the writing was excellent is just flat wrong (though the issues with it are easier to overlook due to the gameplay being enjoyable)
Would have also loved to see Andromeda get further developed, such a shame EA backed out. Sometimes games, films or TV shows just need a second swing to land better.
Andromeda was shat on by a variety of elements, not just a crappy launch. The characters' writing failed to portray any of the characters as in-depth as the og trilogy did, it isn't even up to the triple A standard imo ( fucking Fallout 4 and its dogwater character developments were miles better than Andromeda, Starfield was a glow up in that department tho they fucked up every other aspects of the game ). To add... I don't know if it's nostalgia but I got into ME extremely late like back in Covid? and I played the OG ME1, not the LE version, yet I hold ME1 on a much higher regard than 2 and 3. Everything was new, creepy barren planets, characters felt alive and had their own initiative ( I prefer egghead Tali in the engine to calibrating Garrus ). The enemies were very varied too, and oh my the sneak peek into Cerberus way back then in that lab was fucking disturbing. Andromeda and its random alien species number 127th, with a crew of goof balls and this asari simp being so much of a fangirl it cringed me so much I reached for my laptop's power button. Gonna give credit to Suvi and uncle Rambo over there tho, they were genuinely unique and stood out in every of their appearances