LogFAQs > #876102216

CyborgSage00x0 posted...

I take back what I said about Andromeda. How since most of the scores are in the 70's range, it must truly be a game worthy of that score. But after seeing some videos of those god-awful facial animations and the pile of glitches...the gameplay and storytelling would have to be fucking next level to excuse that shit. And we know the story telling can't be good, since every cut scene/dialogue interaction has a character looking off screen into the abyss or whatever.

I've said it a few times in other topics, but the main reason Andromeda isn't being savaged worse than it is is because a lot of the more positive reviews basically boil down to "Well, the combat is good, and the multiplayer works fine, so you should at least give it a try." Occasionally with a bit of "The scenery is lovely" and "The crafting and resource management stuff is effective" thrown in.

All of which sort of misses the point that absolutely none of those things are what most people are going into a Mass Effect game looking for.

Based on most reviews (even the positive ones!) and watching gameplay videos, it's pretty clear that the narrative is hot garbage. The character interactions are weak at best and bleh at worst, and they're not helped by the poor animations and voice-over work that sounds like most of the VAs were bored while reading their lines (a problem BioWare has had occasionally in the past, but more dialogues seem tonally off in this one than in any of their previous games). Add in most of the complaints about how every female character (including the protagonist) look terrible, and just how much the Dragon Age: Inquisition comparisons come into play, and the end result is something that seems to fail on every single level that would actually matter to someone who was a fan of the previous Mass Effect games.

Which probably makes sense, considering that, realistically speaking, BioWare didn't actually make this game. It was made by the Montreal branch of BioWare - which is pretty much BioWare in name only (EA being nortorious for attaching respected brand names they own to multiple dev teams as a marketing ploy) - and whose only real prior major project before this was the multiplayer component of ME3. The only "main" BioWare name attached to the project (Mac Walters) is also one of the ones responsible for the most hated part of ME3 (the ending nonsense).

Ultimately, I'm kind of looking at it as a side-story game set in the same universe - it has more in common with Galaxy or Infiltrator than it does with ME1-3. The most charitable thing I can say is that it feels like a Mass Effect game made for a completely different audience than the one the original games were made for, and on that level, it might actually be somewhat successful.

But if you're actually looking at it as someone who was a fan of the previous games, you should probably avoid it like the plague.


---

"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family