Mass Effect: Andromeda - Yay or Nay?

Started by LittleHarlot, March 28, 2017, 03:41:06 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

LittleHarlot

Hey guys! This is a discussion forum based on the new Mass Effect game. I've noted in the shoutbox we often take over chatting about ME and I figure why not have a place to actually discuss our adventures?

Share your character images, your experiences with specific romances and all in all an opinion on certain quests and the plot of the game!

Maybe perhaps once I get a little farther I'll do a character profile and share it with you guys.

How far is everyone without spoilers and what sort of builds do you have?

CopperLily

I'm loving it - I read a review that summarized it as "DA: Inquisition in Space" and that's pretty accurate. I'm not quite as hooked as I was with ME3, but in fairness ME3 was the climax of a huge series.

Right now I'm essentially playing a ME3-style Vanguard, and having a blast. And nursing a huge crush on the Lady Turian.

AllieCat

I love it too. Although my crush is Cora. Not a choice for my Ryder unfortunately :(

vin26m

Single player:

I just finished the first vault and I'm already bored.  Getting anything done takes forever.  I like the idea and the setting, but the story, execution, dialogue, facial expressions, etc. are all very meh.  I can see why most reviews give it 8/10 or less.

Multiplayer:

In general, the combat is fun, though.  I've stopped playing the campaign and have been playing multiplayer exclusively for the past few days.

I've been playing a Human Vanguard (aka Vangod).  Charge, melee, maybe Nova, maybe shotgun, Charge...  It's a great way to blow off steam, and the last time I could play this way (rushing across a distance and getting into someone's face, then pounding them in the face) was as a warrior in World Of Warcraft.

Weapons and powers seem weak in multiplayer.

Next, I'll probably focus on a Kineticist, where unshielded/unarmored enemies are not enemies but ammunition.  Kill a few, Ascend, Pull one (or a group), Throw them at other enemies, Pull, Throw, etc.  Basically being Darth Vader.

Anyone interested in an Andromeda RP?  Solo or group.


wander

There's a Mass Effect hack for Apocalypse World out there online for those interested in a light system.

Lyron

I wanted to like the game. XD I got to the Kadara Port planet with a Vanguard-esque build and stopped. Too much busywork, and I wasn't as drawn to the cast in this one. The combat was fun though.


M/M Players for Groups: A Registry


Music junkie here!
Love random song shares.
Anyone, any genre, any time.

Aleph

I enjoyed it, I completed it about a week ago now. There were only two problems I had. 1) The way the game works is a little bit samey as the other 3 games. Lots of mining for materials, having to pick up mission at point 'x', run to point 'y', shoot some stuff, run back to point 'x' again. Once you start planet hopping throw in 3-4 cut scenes that you're going to watch over and over. I swear I never want to see the ship land at Aya again. 2) The characters all felt a little familiar. There's the attractive military woman sidekick, the duty-bound but kinda edgy Turian, the Krogan who gives a squishy way too much respect early on and I swear Gil and Joker are related, etc.

Those complaints aside though, it was fun! I enjoyed playing it and the story was interesting, leaving a lot of entry points for loose-end tying DLC, even an Andromeda 2.

NightLux

Quote from: Haru329 on April 24, 2017, 05:31:48 PM
I wanted to like the game. XD I got to the Kadara Port planet with a Vanguard-esque build and stopped. Too much busywork, and I wasn't as drawn to the cast in this one. The combat was fun though.

I found that by the time that the story really got interesting, it was nearly done.  There were times I was like "Is there going to be a DLC to fill this in?" that it just... I mean, I finished it but I'm already thinking I'll wait for a DLC to come out, start a new game plus, play through a PeeBee/Male Ryder, wait for the next DLC, play through a Female Ryder (and something?)... but that's not like the original Mass Effect where I was addicted.  Maybe its the fact that each planet seems totally separate from the others - no real progression beyond getting some upgrade for making Andromeda more viable.  But the Nexus doesn't change, no real change to the planets, etc.

The core is there.  It just needs to be fleshed out.

Also, screw Kadara Port.  I hate having to go down to the slums, run outside before I can finally use my fast travel points.
[tr][td]
[/td][td]
RP Status: Seeking new partners
RL Status: Looking forward to my birthday!
Solo Status: 0 (due) / 3 (total)
In Development: 0
Group Due: 0 (due) / 0 (total)
[/td][/tr][/table]

Inkidu

I gave it a hard pass because I wasn't satisfied with 3, and the more I thought about it, the more dissatisfied I was with ME 2. Then I noticed how the stories of ME 1, 2, and 3 didn't work, and slowly, it all began to unravel once you take away the colorful likable characters and the improved combat, you start to see how empty the places you visit are when compared to ME 1, how incongruous the plots are, how ME 2 didn't answer any big questions from ME 1, how ME 3 felt rushed to wrap up the impossible.

And honestly, it just showed that BioWare couldn't write a story of that magnitude. Then I read that Mass Effect Andromeda's head writer left before the game was released, and while that might not be a big deal on the individual game basis, but for what could potentially be a massive interconnected narrative, you want the same lead writer. You cannot replace Tolkien with Pratchett when it's time to pen Two Towers. Voice is real.

I never expected their junior studio to be able to handle the demand for the game either, and well, I feel in the right. 
If you're searching the lines for a point, well you've probably missed it; there was never anything there in the first place.

NightLux

Quote from: Inkidu on May 05, 2017, 09:49:42 PM
I gave it a hard pass because I wasn't satisfied with 3, and the more I thought about it, the more dissatisfied I was with ME 2. Then I noticed how the stories of ME 1, 2, and 3 didn't work, and slowly, it all began to unravel once you take away the colorful likable characters and the improved combat, you start to see how empty the places you visit are when compared to ME 1, how incongruous the plots are, how ME 2 didn't answer any big questions from ME 1, how ME 3 felt rushed to wrap up the impossible.

I think this is the case with most open-world games.  The same can be said of Skyrim and Witcher 3, individually, and KOTOR (and SWTOR too) when taken together.  You visit places and just scratch the surface then move on.  Yet most of those are regarded in high esteem.  The biggest problem I had with the original ME trilogy is it happened too fast, especially 3.  There should have been more political maneuvering, bickering.  Everything just falls too neatly into place, no real hard decisions for either Paragon or Renegade, etc.

Andromeda suffers from this more because with the exception of a few party members, none of the characters stand out.  Hell, I can't tell you the Big Bad's title/name off the top of my head.  PeeBee is the best of them, then maybe Cora/Vetra (although she has sister issues!).  I just felt that they aren't spending enough time on the story and making it make sense.  I almost feel Andromeda's plot itself should have been split between 1 and 2.  Oh, and why the hell doesn't anyone have a real fleet?  Did the AI expect hugs and kisses upon arrival?  The in-game explanation doesn't make any sense.

Quote
And honestly, it just showed that BioWare couldn't write a story of that magnitude. Then I read that Mass Effect Andromeda's head writer left before the game was released, and while that might not be a big deal on the individual game basis, but for what could potentially be a massive interconnected narrative, you want the same lead writer. You cannot replace Tolkien with Pratchett when it's time to pen Two Towers. Voice is real.

I never expected their junior studio to be able to handle the demand for the game either, and well, I feel in the right.

Bingo.  The other issue is that LotR had a straight line, a job to be done and everything revolved around it.  The original trilogy, in concept, had the same thing, but got lost along the way.  Andromeda is the exact opposite - you start with this world of opportunity (which is really shallow) and then it slowly harrows down into the plot.  By the time you understand what's really going on, you're 60% through and it doesn't have enough time left to make it meaningful.
[tr][td]
[/td][td]
RP Status: Seeking new partners
RL Status: Looking forward to my birthday!
Solo Status: 0 (due) / 3 (total)
In Development: 0
Group Due: 0 (due) / 0 (total)
[/td][/tr][/table]

Inkidu

Quote from: NightLux on May 06, 2017, 10:18:55 AM
I think this is the case with most open-world games.  The same can be said of Skyrim and Witcher 3, individually, and KOTOR (and SWTOR too) when taken together.  You visit places and just scratch the surface then move on.  Yet most of those are regarded in high esteem.  The biggest problem I had with the original ME trilogy is it happened too fast, especially 3.  There should have been more political maneuvering, bickering.  Everything just falls too neatly into place, no real hard decisions for either Paragon or Renegade, etc.

Andromeda suffers from this more because with the exception of a few party members, none of the characters stand out.  Hell, I can't tell you the Big Bad's title/name off the top of my head.  PeeBee is the best of them, then maybe Cora/Vetra (although she has sister issues!).  I just felt that they aren't spending enough time on the story and making it make sense.  I almost feel Andromeda's plot itself should have been split between 1 and 2.  Oh, and why the hell doesn't anyone have a real fleet?  Did the AI expect hugs and kisses upon arrival?  The in-game explanation doesn't make any sense.

Bingo.  The other issue is that LotR had a straight line, a job to be done and everything revolved around it.  The original trilogy, in concept, had the same thing, but got lost along the way.  Andromeda is the exact opposite - you start with this world of opportunity (which is really shallow) and then it slowly harrows down into the plot.  By the time you understand what's really going on, you're 60% through and it doesn't have enough time left to make it meaningful.
There's a distinction to be made between open-world game and an open-world RPG here. The former is GTA, and the later is Baulder's Gate. It's open world in that you decide which order to visit key locations (though they often resolve the same way for most players, ie, I always do the Circle Tower first in DA Origins because it's annoying as balls and required for another key area to even start, so get it out of the way, or I go to Ferros to grab Liara and round out the party).

ME 1 didn't happen too fast. ME 3 was only fast because ME 2 didn't go anywhere. They should have built up the crucible in ME 2. They didn't. The writer (and i know it was more than a single person, but for convenience's sake) who did ME 2 and 3 hated world building, actively loathed it. ME 1 loved world building. Think back how many background questions you got to ask Jenkins or any given regular Joe on the Citadel as opposed to ME 2 or 3. Think about how they worked so hard to make Shep sound like he knew what he was talking about and proactive. Sure no one has real agency in a video game, but 2 and 3 made him into an idiot. I mean when you kill Kai Leng (terrible chracter that he is) you don't even get to chose your response. It has to be for Thane, because you should have feels for Thane, obviously. Those games spend more time telling you how you should feel instead of you deciding how you should feel.
If you're searching the lines for a point, well you've probably missed it; there was never anything there in the first place.