Yeah, I think it'll probably be the DA:I for the Mass Effect series. I've had to lower my expectations so when I do purchase the game I won't be disappointed.
Combat is trickier than before as it seems they got rid of auto heal which is nice. The jump/stride/sprint with your rockets are a cool feature and adds better movement and tactical responses.
The story so far is meh (hardly that far into it). You can load save data from previous mass effect games, however, my connection was down and I couldn't do this. I wasn't that far into the game for it to have any impact I wager. As stated, I am not that far into the game, but I can already predict what is going to happen next as they just throw one bad circumstance after another, but we'll see, it might surprise me.
But what there is so far is an alien race that has a shoot first ask questions later. It does allow the player to get a handle of combat but it felt forced as you didn't even have the option to attempt to communicate with them.
I think I am going to play through the first trilogy again before purchasing it outright. It's not feeling like a "must own" title, but one I do want to play.
that's probably all I am going to share. The game isn't hooking me so it's probably going to be shelved till I actually buy it and have time to play and invest into it.
Woo hoo! ME:A is live! And I have my pretty new rig to run it in 21:9 hi-def - 3440x1920 or some such.
Now for the bad - so far, so much uncanny valley. Other than making full use of my screen, I actually preferred the visuals of the earlier games - so much for 5 years of progress.
The game itself feels a bit 'meh', but I am plodding through the early tutorial mission, and I am a slow and steady completionist.- it has not had time to get going, but I was hoping it might have hooked me a little more.
One of the key things we see early is your omnitool has a scanner, that you are going to use frequently, as in, a lot. I fear that is going to get old fast.
So far, playing an engineer, I have been through exactly one firefight (told you I was slow!) and still have no clue how to activate my overload ability.
One thing seems clear - this is a game of exploration, unlike most of the first series. I am really going to have to police myself online to avoid spoilers until I have completed the first play through.
And yes, I do expect that I will continue and compete the game, but it is only 1:30AM and I already find myself happy to quit for the night and come online to briefly review it here, before grabbing some sleep. That does not hold as much promise of a launch day experience as I might have hoped - but I am also older and more cynical as each new game is released, so don't let my negative ninnying distract you. Go in with low expectations, and I suspect many here will enjoy the game despite themselves - at least I hope that I do.
Here's the thing, if I am suppose to have low expectations for a product, I am not dropping $80 Canadian on it. I can wait for either a sale or goty edition, or if I am really patient, for the game to be Vaulted and play it then.
I guarantee by July, there will be at least a 25% tag making it semi more reasonable.
Remember, the goal of an EA game is to sell as much product as possible to the masses, not to entertain the hard core RPG crowd, who are a minority among modern gamers. Anyone looking for an in-depth modern RPG experience is always going to be disappointed by a AAA title these days, as that market is not broad enough to justify the insane budget they will spend on this things - budget that will be spent on things that matter not a whit to us, including /way/ too much on marketing!
Go in with your eyes open, and enjoy the game for what it is.
@deltago the benefit of going in early is that I will get a relatively spoiler-free experience, and get to make up my own mind about the game, unpolluted by reviews. Also means I will have to duck out of this thread about now . Otherwise, pretty much agree with everything you said.
Dragon Age and Mass Effect are like the 3 hr. summer blockbusters of RPGs. Big and flashy. If you'd asked yourself 6 months ago what Andromeda would be like, the only correct answer would have been "Dragon Age: Inquisition" in space.
"If it were only rough around the edges, that might not even matter. But the game suffers in other areas, like tedious side-quests that feel more like filler than worthwhile content, and big, empty open spaces with very little to do---not to mention the lack of enemy variety and often underwhelming main story.
This is not to say the game is necessarily bad. It's still a Mass Effect game that feels like a worthy piece of the franchise (which was always a little grindy and tedious at times.) There's plenty to like about Andromeda, including a very likable protagonist and supporting cast."
Replace "Mass Effect" or "Andromeda" with "Dragon Age Inquisition" and the text is still true. That's what I find so shocking. And I have read many more reviews that could also just as likely be describing Dragon Age Inquisition instead. You just need to replace the titles and the rest of the text still holds true.
I would have preferred that one Bioware studio learns from the mistakes of the other Bioware studio. The Mass Effect and Dragon Age series should influence each other in their strong points. But that is not what's happening. Instead they infect each other with their weak points.
There is no real "BioWare studio" anymore. It's just an arm of the larger EA enterprise. The fact that the last products of BioWare as an actual company with its own payroll, management, and ownership were Mass Effect 1 and Dragon Age: Origins, and that those two happen to be their last true RPGs, are no coincidence. EA is run by business and marketing people, not artists. They don't see Mass Effect 1 as a work of art whose various pieces work together to create an experience that resonated deeply with certain people, they saw the things that got it media attention--explosions, guns, alien tits--and doubled down on all of them while applying what was, at the time, the received wisdom (business folks love received wisdom and are terrified of anything even resembling a risky idea) of action game design to create Mass Effect 2 to create a product that can be packaged and sold to a demographic rather than a following. EA's gamble paid off that time and Mass Effect 2 sold a huge number of copies (just as often such attempts fail and the corporate overlord silently murders their newly bought studio), so from a corporate perspective, that means MORE explosions, MORE fuckable aliens, MORE gratuitous spectacle will bring MORE dolla dolla bills and the board can buy themselves new Mercedes S63 AMGs.
That's what killed the BioWare RPG. If they hadn't sold to EA, they would have been, as @GreenWarlock noted, unable to pay for the development of future AAA-level games with the methods and audience they had, so there would have likely never been a Mass Effect 2, but instead they'd have had to either liquidate or lay off many of their employees and try to survive as a smaller scale developer, which would have been very difficult in the business climate at the time. The death of the BioWare RPG was inevitable.
I don't think there is anything glaringly bad about any of the BioWare games from the last decade. They aren't all-time greats, they sure as hell aren't perfect, but Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age: Inquisition and Mass Effect 2 and 3 all get a solid B grade at the very least. I wouldn't walk into any of them expecting some in-depth RPG experience. There are plenty of avenues for that. These games as easy fun with alot of shiny lights and production values. I don't have it yet, but I highly doubt Andromeda is going to disappoint my any more than the last 4 games have. They make solid titles.
Oh no.. not another Mizhena-incident :-/ Though I have to admit, it will make a perfect opportunity to compare the bashing they get vs what Beamdog got, like in reviews, on by aggressive dudes on youtube etc.
I'm gonna go ahead and predict two things: 1: the flak will be significantly less. 2: ppl will say that the flak was less because of how they acted afterwards, ie like with the above statement.
I haven't read anything about this except this one post by Shandyr though, so I might be way, way off and completely wrong in my assessment and predictions.
Wow.. this wasn't pretty. I haven't checked the full movie yet, but I looked at the first 6-7 minutes and the animations look like games from 5 years ago. https://youtu.be/7KWkao73HuU
You who played/are playing the game, what's you opinion on the animations? It's not like the animations themselves are going to make me not play the game, but I am curious on what your experiences are.
you do know Andromeda has been getting flak since it was announced.
Your comment made me google a little and I found, among other things, the movie above. I don't read much reviews anymore since there is no point. I prefer to read what sensible people say, like guys in here. So, no I didn't know they got flak since day one But I will read up some more now before buying the game since right now it feels more like a "wait for a discount"-game than a "buy at whatever the cost!!!"-game.
Question for those who has played it
How the hell does krogans join in on this super-expedition but not turians? That sound really strange at first glance.
There is going to be a short write up in the next issue of Wild Surge about the game's first couple hours.
IMO, the animations are tolerable (as I dont care too much about the look of a game), but I also played on Console.
I also recommend Angry Joe as a reviewer. He offers fare, well thought out criticism in his reviews without having a bunch of spoilers and covers everything.
It is a wait for a heavy discount title though. Like 50%
Afaik the problem is that Hainly casually mentioned her dead name, causing the ire of the transgender community.
Ire is probably a strong word. But yes, people complained. And yes, verisimilitude is a good thing even in fantasy and science fiction. People should behave like people.
The NPC says she's come to Andromeda to make a fresh start, but then infodumps her life story, which includes the fact that she is transgender and what her dead name was. The former, eh. The latter I've never seen a real live trans person do.
This apology was prompted by legitimate complaints (not directed at @Kurona)
Well well well... doesn't this sound familiar somehow...?
Should I even bother trying to discover what the problem is this time?
In a nutshell, as far as I have understood, the problem is that the transgender character has not been implemented in the "right, proper way".
For some reason people DEMAND that transgender characters (and LBGTQ characters in general) behave in fantasy and fiction settings exactly like in our reality.
And people DEMAND that societies in fantasy and fiction settings treat their LBGTQ citizen the very same way that societies treat them in reality.
I will never understand this nor do I even want to. And let me say that this will be my last post on this issue for now.
It's odd, but I don't have to like a character to see that character as well-written and well-designed. This may be I can consider Oscar Wilde and H.L. Mencken great writers, though I doubt I would like them personally.
For example, I find Quayle annoying as heck, but even though he's the best spell-slinger in BG1, I rarely take him. Does that make me gnomist? No, he's just hard to get to and by the time I can recruit him, my party is usually set. Likewise, I don't particularly care for Khalid's personality, but I understand why he is the way he is (to know is to understand as the French say, albeit in French) and I often include him in my party because he can be an effective tank and an effective archer.
In BG2, Aerie is often described as "annoying" but her age is the human equivalent of 15 or 16; consider a high school sophomore having endured all she went through. Her character is well written and develops over the course of the game. She might be the best person that you meet.
Anomen, likewise, is not popular and not likeable. However, if you include him in your party and follow through to the end, you see why he is the way he is. There are plenty like him in my kids' high school, the richest one in the state. Add an abusive father, a mother and sister who are doting, and being a member of the minor noble/merchant class, of COURSE he's going to be pompous. But his sister's murder comes so soon after his mother's death; the path he chooses can develop him in one way or another. He's not a likeable character, necessarily, but a good one whom we can see grow and change.
Edwin and Viconia, meanwhile, might be the two most popular characters in the series. Edwin is, in some ways, the sleezo nerd well all unfortunately know. Do nerds complain about this? Viconia is probably the most manipulative, abusive character in the game, but we all understand that, as a Drow on the run, that's who she is. Do people complain that her dark skin is promoting a stereotype? Probably someone somewhere has, but it's not the narrative.
There will be characters in the game who are nice and not so nice, otherwise you're going to have a boring game. If you choose to have characters that are diverse, representing this group and that group, statistically some of those will be unsavory.
So the demanding I ignore, unless there is something truly offensive that a character says or does. And even then it might be in line with the character, like Keldorn attacking Viconia. As P.G. Wodehouse said, the treatment is everything, and he wrote enough to know.
Basically, some people are perennially offended and indignant, because, in the words of "Dirty" Harry Callahan, "in the final analysis, he enjoyed it".
So the demanding I ignore, unless there is something truly offensive that a character says or does. And even then it might be in line with the character, like Keldorn attacking Viconia. As P.G. Wodehouse said, the treatment is everything, and he wrote enough to know.
Basically, some people are perennially offended and indignant, because, in the words of "Dirty" Harry Callahan, "in the final analysis, he enjoyed it".
Just out of curiosity, are you claiming to be in a position to decide for transgender people what they should find problematic or not?
I doubt anyone who complained about the character did so because they enjoy being perennially offended and indignant. I imagine they complained because the character lacked verisimilitude and more specifically misrepresented transgender people.
So the demanding I ignore, unless there is something truly offensive that a character says or does. And even then it might be in line with the character, like Keldorn attacking Viconia. As P.G. Wodehouse said, the treatment is everything, and he wrote enough to know.
Basically, some people are perennially offended and indignant, because, in the words of "Dirty" Harry Callahan, "in the final analysis, he enjoyed it".
Just out of curiosity, are you claiming to be in a position to decide for transgender people what they should find problematic or not?
I doubt anyone who complained about the character did so because they enjoy being perennially offended and indignant. I imagine they complained because the character lacked verisimilitude and more specifically misrepresented transgender people.
No, of course not. But I don't want to know that I'm wrong, I want to know WHY I'm wrong. If it's because the character is unlikeable, that doesn't carry much weight. If it's because people in the modern Western world aren't that way, that doesn't seem valid either. (I discussed this wrt Keldorn in another thread, where he should be seen more as a Prussian Junker than you and me.) In short, I am certainly willing to listen. However, if a character is unlikeable or doesn't conform to what a particular group wants, that doesn't make the character bad or wrong or hateful. I need solid, tangible reasons, not the angry word-salad that unfortunately is what all sides normally devolve into.
Comments
I might give this one a miss.
Combat is trickier than before as it seems they got rid of auto heal which is nice. The jump/stride/sprint with your rockets are a cool feature and adds better movement and tactical responses.
The story so far is meh (hardly that far into it). You can load save data from previous mass effect games, however, my connection was down and I couldn't do this. I wasn't that far into the game for it to have any impact I wager. As stated, I am not that far into the game, but I can already predict what is going to happen next as they just throw one bad circumstance after another, but we'll see, it might surprise me.
But what there is so far is an alien race that has a shoot first ask questions later. It does allow the player to get a handle of combat but it felt forced as you didn't even have the option to attempt to communicate with them.
I think I am going to play through the first trilogy again before purchasing it outright. It's not feeling like a "must own" title, but one I do want to play.
Now for the bad - so far, so much uncanny valley. Other than making full use of my screen, I actually preferred the visuals of the earlier games - so much for 5 years of progress.
The game itself feels a bit 'meh', but I am plodding through the early tutorial mission, and I am a slow and steady completionist.- it has not had time to get going, but I was hoping it might have hooked me a little more.
One of the key things we see early is your omnitool has a scanner, that you are going to use frequently, as in, a lot. I fear that is going to get old fast.
So far, playing an engineer, I have been through exactly one firefight (told you I was slow!) and still have no clue how to activate my overload ability.
One thing seems clear - this is a game of exploration, unlike most of the first series. I am really going to have to police myself online to avoid spoilers until I have completed the first play through.
And yes, I do expect that I will continue and compete the game, but it is only 1:30AM and I already find myself happy to quit for the night and come online to briefly review it here, before grabbing some sleep. That does not hold as much promise of a launch day experience as I might have hoped - but I am also older and more cynical as each new game is released, so don't let my negative ninnying distract you. Go in with low expectations, and I suspect many here will enjoy the game despite themselves - at least I hope that I do.
And with that, goodnight!
I guarantee by July, there will be at least a 25% tag making it semi more reasonable.
Go in with your eyes open, and enjoy the game for what it is.
@deltago the benefit of going in early is that I will get a relatively spoiler-free experience, and get to make up my own mind about the game, unpolluted by reviews. Also means I will have to duck out of this thread about now
That's what killed the BioWare RPG. If they hadn't sold to EA, they would have been, as @GreenWarlock noted, unable to pay for the development of future AAA-level games with the methods and audience they had, so there would have likely never been a Mass Effect 2, but instead they'd have had to either liquidate or lay off many of their employees and try to survive as a smaller scale developer, which would have been very difficult in the business climate at the time. The death of the BioWare RPG was inevitable.
I'm gonna go ahead and predict two things:
1: the flak will be significantly less.
2: ppl will say that the flak was less because of how they acted afterwards, ie like with the above statement.
I haven't read anything about this except this one post by Shandyr though, so I might be way, way off and completely wrong in my assessment and predictions.
https://youtu.be/7KWkao73HuU
You who played/are playing the game, what's you opinion on the animations? It's not like the animations themselves are going to make me not play the game, but I am curious on what your experiences are. Your comment made me google a little and I found, among other things, the movie above. I don't read much reviews anymore since there is no point. I prefer to read what sensible people say, like guys in here. So, no I didn't know they got flak since day one
Question for those who has played it
How the hell does krogans join in on this super-expedition but not turians? That sound really strange at first glance.
IMO, the animations are tolerable (as I dont care too much about the look of a game), but I also played on Console.
I also recommend Angry Joe as a reviewer. He offers fare, well thought out criticism in his reviews without having a bunch of spoilers and covers everything.
It is a wait for a heavy discount title though. Like 50%
The NPC says she's come to Andromeda to make a fresh start, but then infodumps her life story, which includes the fact that she is transgender and what her dead name was. The former, eh. The latter I've never seen a real live trans person do.
This apology was prompted by legitimate complaints (not directed at @Kurona)
For example, I find Quayle annoying as heck, but even though he's the best spell-slinger in BG1, I rarely take him. Does that make me gnomist? No, he's just hard to get to and by the time I can recruit him, my party is usually set. Likewise, I don't particularly care for Khalid's personality, but I understand why he is the way he is (to know is to understand as the French say, albeit in French) and I often include him in my party because he can be an effective tank and an effective archer.
In BG2, Aerie is often described as "annoying" but her age is the human equivalent of 15 or 16; consider a high school sophomore having endured all she went through. Her character is well written and develops over the course of the game. She might be the best person that you meet.
Anomen, likewise, is not popular and not likeable. However, if you include him in your party and follow through to the end, you see why he is the way he is. There are plenty like him in my kids' high school, the richest one in the state. Add an abusive father, a mother and sister who are doting, and being a member of the minor noble/merchant class, of COURSE he's going to be pompous. But his sister's murder comes so soon after his mother's death; the path he chooses can develop him in one way or another. He's not a likeable character, necessarily, but a good one whom we can see grow and change.
Edwin and Viconia, meanwhile, might be the two most popular characters in the series. Edwin is, in some ways, the sleezo nerd well all unfortunately know. Do nerds complain about this? Viconia is probably the most manipulative, abusive character in the game, but we all understand that, as a Drow on the run, that's who she is. Do people complain that her dark skin is promoting a stereotype? Probably someone somewhere has, but it's not the narrative.
There will be characters in the game who are nice and not so nice, otherwise you're going to have a boring game. If you choose to have characters that are diverse, representing this group and that group, statistically some of those will be unsavory.
So the demanding I ignore, unless there is something truly offensive that a character says or does. And even then it might be in line with the character, like Keldorn attacking Viconia. As P.G. Wodehouse said, the treatment is everything, and he wrote enough to know.
Basically, some people are perennially offended and indignant, because, in the words of "Dirty" Harry Callahan, "in the final analysis, he enjoyed it".
I doubt anyone who complained about the character did so because they enjoy being perennially offended and indignant. I imagine they complained because the character lacked verisimilitude and more specifically misrepresented transgender people.