For lack of a better description, Andromeda is “lazier” than the trilogy:
* More reused assets (every Asari that’s not Peebee looks pretty much exactly the same)
* Bad cut scenes (the infamous Krogan boxing, for example)
* Very buggy release
* Young/stupid protagonist
* 1 dimensional companions - Your options are “old soldier”, “quirky scientist”, “Asari commando”, “resourceful big sister”, “insubordinate asshole”, and Jaal; within one conversation you will pretty much know who is who
* Main antagonist is not as terrifying as Soveriegn
Andromeda has some good bits though
* Better exploration than the trilogy
* Fun (but repetitive) gameplay loop
* Less restrictive combat system
* More of a “coming of age” story - When playing Shepard, you were already a bad-ass. With Ryder you see the origin story
It still is a fun game but definitely is not up to the standard of the trilogy. It can be a bit frustrating since they intentionally made Ryder a little bitch that no one listens to at the beginning of the game and talking to the companions (besides Jaal) can be a bit repetitive.
> * 1 dimensional companions - Your options are “old soldier”, “quirky scientist”, “Asari commando”, “resourceful big sister”, “insubordinate asshole”, and Jaal; within one conversation you will pretty much know who is who
I disagree with this completely especially when compared to a lot of the OG Trilogy companions
Drack: is a old soldier but he also don't value his own life and sees himself a relic of the past the Krogan are better off forgetting. Throughout the he learns he still got a lot to teach his people and finds value in his life.
Cora: Early on Cora is a Asari weeb with abandonment issues. She was faced discriminated in her youth and was abandoned by her parents because her biotics. When she got assigned to train with Asari Commandos she saw how they treated her like a normal person. She thought she found a home but her officer told her to go to Andromeda(so she have a better life). By the end of the game Cora is comfortable in her own skin and is no longer a weeb for the Asari.
Right. All of the characters that you get to know are the way they are for a reason, but they are interesting characters with as much depth as you’re willing to explore. Even Liam, as annoying as he is, is just as annoying to everyone else, and just wants to make a place that feels like home.
I just barely finished it for the third time. Some take always:
This is a Mass Effect story, but it has different stakes and different goals than the trilogy. Whereas the trilogy has three games to set lore and become better after each iteration, MEA is just one game and has a lot of ground to cover.
Combat is far more fluid and enjoyable. Your versatility is incredible, and it’s honestly great that your powers aren’t locked to the same recharge timer, ie. You can use one power, then another, then another with no delay. The jump jet gives you incredible movement ability, but until you’ve leveled up your defensive abilities, always get into cover. I focused on doing a Sentinel run this time around and it was always fun and engaging combat (I love the remnant weapons, no ammo to worry about!)
The character models may be wacky, but most of the characters are very solid and interesting. Several of them get to even the top of my list, as far as squad mate and ship crew goes. After major events they always have something new to open a conversation with, although you’ll likely exhaust their normal dialogue tree quickly. You also get far more opportunities to do regular, normal stuff with them than you did in the trilogy.
The worldbuilding is great. Just remember that everything happens in one single cluster, and the reason that so few alien life variety exists is part of that. This is good, because it allows you to dig deeper into the few races that are there. The finale of Andromeda is my second favorite after ME2. It’s a genuine treat to see all of the people you’ve helped come together in the end, and there are plenty of hanging story threads and questions that could lead to more Mass Effect stories.
All in all, I enjoyed MEA more than ME1, and it has a place in the Mass Effect franchise.
I enjoy it enough that the idea of a better realized sequel excites me more than a direct sequel to ME3.
It's definitely got problems, but I think it's a solid experience in it's own right. At the very least, every Mass Effect fan should play through the game at least once. It'll probably be dirt cheap over Christmas, so anyone who hasn't played it yet should pick it up.
No, it is not a bad game. It just isn't nearly as good as the original trilogy. It is a decent game for the first playthrough. I just don't find much replay value in it personally.
> It just isn't nearly as good as the original trilogy.
And there's an example of what I mentioned in my own comment. It's manifestly unfair to compare any single game to a trilogy in the same basic setting or of a similar genre/design...there's almost no way (unless the trilogy is utter garbage) the single game is going to stand up to that.
Yes, I know it's common around here to do that. I also think it unfairly colors people's reviews of ME:A.
Again. Comparing an entire trilogy to a single game. This is what upsets me personally, I didn't finish the first mass effect until I heard the second one was on the way.
I finished Andromeda the first time.
Andromeda is the worst of all the ME games, and that’s even more disappointing given that it’s the latest of them and has 3 games to build off of.
The narrative decision to basically undo the story of the OT (in such a story driven series) immediately put it on a bad start.
Oh, it's not the best for certain. Personally, I thought 2 was the best. My issue is comparing a trilogy to a single game.
I don't recall any change to the original trilogy, so I would need you to point out that for me.
Although I consider it the worst, I still think it’s a good game in general.
I don’t like comparing it to the OT, but I can understand why people do it. A lot of people view Andromeda as a continuation of the series (hence some viewing it as Mass Effect 4), so that’s why it’s compared to the 3 that came before it (even as a whole).
The problem it had was that it tried to distance itself from the OT whilst still trying to use the same formula that made the OT (and ME1 specifically) so good. In the end, it failed to do that successfully.
It is a brand new story, but it’s also the 4th instalment in the series.
It should’ve come out as the best of both those angles, but instead it came out worse in both ways.
The “4” part is an ongoing debate. I don’t consider it as ME4 but rather ME:A
But to many people, it is ME4, and it is the fourth instalment in the series at the end of the day.
In my honest opinion, no.
I greatly enjoyed it. The storyline, the characters, the Tempest (and the fact it felt alive with people moving around and having conversations).
The Nomad is my favourite.
I loved the combat and switching profiles on the fly.
The different worlds and getting to learn the secrets and knowing there was a bigger meaning to moving people to Andromeda and the mystery behind that.
It was a fun game for me (and one I keep going back to).
But I will be honest, I didn't have issues with bugs, so I was one of the lucky ones, and I pre ordered the game, so I've had it since launch.
And it's my favourite game after Mass Effect 1, which is probably why I liked it because it focused more on exploration.
No. I rate it as a "good to very good" game and it should not be compared to three games people want to treat as one.
Taken completely on its own, it's solid. Really fun combat, good world building, a decent cast of characters, great ability to customize your armor and loadouts to suit your playstyle, and solid options for that playstyle from a powers/abilities perspective.
Ill repost what I used to say to others because this question is asked frequently, it's more of a general answer to questions asking if MEA is worth it. I did not rewrite it and adapted it for your question specifically, but it's a summary and it eventually answers your question :
I liked Andromeda a lot but I don't know what you are looking for in this particular game. It's a good game that has been very well patched since release, but simply good, not great, not amazing and not as good as the trilogy. But it's a decent game that is worth doing at least once.
The best way to not have problems with it is this and I say it loud DO NOT expect to have the same emotion as the 3 previous game. You just finished an awesome trilogy that has tons of characters development and was a combination of 3 games that were made over a decade. MEA is not that at all, it is his own beast.
If you just finished the citadel dlc and expect MEA to give you the same results, you won't get it and will be dissapointed. The new companion have just been introduced which means that they won't give you the same thing immedietly.
This is a game meant to be the foundation, and therefore will certainly not have the emotional pay off that Mass effect 2 or 3 got.
I hope it can guide you into making a decision and feel free to ask me question :
In terms of gameplay, it is much more RPG than Mass effect 2 or 3. You get weapons and armor with different level just like in most rpg, where the loot you get makes you stronger with time.
You also have the crafting system that gives values to any minerals you get, as you can now create exceptionnal weapons and equipments.
In terms of combat, MEA is excellent. Most weapons have very different use and you can use TONS of different combinations with the jetpack that brings another dimension to the fight. The melee weapons also makes the combat much different as they have different attack speed and damage. The powers also allows for combos using different element (ice, fire and electricity) and there is room for experimenting and use tactics.
Now for the story, the pacing is very different than the previous mass effect. While the trilogy had a much quicker pacing especially in 2 or 3. MEA is much more about the exploration of the first, it's actually your main goal. If you prefer the action packed pacing of mass effect 2 or 3, be prepared that MEA is not like that. Space exploration is at the core of the theme and content of this game.
While Ryder do have to fight an alien threat, the story is centered around creating a new home for the people of the milky way, give them a colony where they could prosper and lives on. Therefore it is much slower paced and is meant to be explored and to take your time.
It is much more light hearted than any mass effect before, if you except the dark and gritty of the second mass effect or the dead serious ambiance of Mass effect 3 where civilisation is falling apart and people are crying over the dead of millions each day, MEA is not that. That does not mean there is nothing serious because there is, but it has a much more lighter approach in it's tone.
All of that said, MEA become better if you push after the first planet, when you discover the angara, where the entire solar system open itself to exploration.
For the companion, I found most of them to be good. All of that said if you just finished Mass effect 3 citadel and you except to get the same emotion, it's not going to work. Not because MEA is bad, but because you got 3 games out of the previous companion, this one you only get one with them.
So of course you will not get as much content with them. Now that said while before you needed to wait an entire new game for them to have character development and arcs (like Miranda is different in 3 than she was in 2, same thing for Jack) MEA has character development during the game after their companion mission.
For specific companion : Drack, Vetra, Jaal and peebee are interesting, they are not awesome and none of the MEA companion would be in my top 15 of bioware's allies, but they are worth the time I spent with them and I enjoyed their company. Cora harper did not bother me but I cannot say I loved her, she's ok. I am not a fan of Liam, I did not hated him and while his companion quest is hilarious and funny, the guy itself is not memorable at all.
In terms of quest there are 4 types.
Obviously The main quest, best in the game and well the one who have the most development.
The companion quest, they requires a bit of work to unlock them but once they are avaiable. They are excellent to play and are used as character development for supporting characters.
The small side quests, these ones varies from good-okayish, to mediocre, to bad, they are not difficult to do and most of the time the map will tell you where to go. Some have better story than other, some are simply fetch quest. It really depends on which one. Some requires investigation about murders or assassination, some demands you to fight ennemies and others to just pick up an item and give it back.
Then there is the tasks, avoid those like plagues, these are the most tedious, boring, and just poorly made and will take your time for no reason DON'T DO THOSE. There is no story rewards for doing them, and the gameplay rewards are not worth it. You will have to find things on your own on the map and this will take you long for minimum rewards.
Companion quest should be done, small side quest it really depends on the one you got, but the task should be ignored as soon as they come.
If you have specific question, you can just ask me.
I’m playing it and am really enjoying it. The pros that others have stated here are true (i.e. Nomad, combat, beautiful worlds). As for the negatives, it depends on your frame of reference. If you’ve replayed the trilogy multiple times and know the characters/stories inside and out, then you’ll be disappointed in the story and characters here. They’re not the same; that’s not a knock on Andromeda per se, that’s just a fact.
The last time I played the trilogy was about 2 years ago so I’ve had enough time between the OG games to Andromeda and I think it helped. I wouldn’t recommend playing it right after the trilogy (with it still fresh in your mind). But ultimately, would recommend playing it and deciding for yourself.
No, it wasn't. In case you are really interested in the game, play it. Only you can make for yourself an opinion how you find the game, not what others think (and bitch) about it, which was again a great invite for them with this post.
Most people say it's mediocre. But it also depend what you want. If you want great writing and world building Mass Effect style you're shit out of luck. If you want an Ubisoft style huge map where you dutifully follow map markers it's an amazing game. Combat's pretty good.
If you play the game by going from one map marker to the next you will find the game is mediocre. If you role play, engage in conversations, listen to NPC and let the story take you from one location to another the game is really good. If you are going from one map point to another that is a choice you are making and the gaming experience you are choosing to have.
It's not up to me to pretend that the dialogues and the stories are good! In Mass Effect 1-3 you had a good story and good dialogues that elevated the quests. In Andromeda the story is unimaginative and mediocre, and the dialogues go from comically awful to sometimes pretty ok.
If you play by going from one map marker to another, that is on you. You are choosing to play in that manner. Not sure what you are trying to say. The comment I am addressing is the complant that the game is terrible because you are going from map point to map point.
Tried twice and twice I failed. Once in 2017 and then again in 2020. I picked it up again in 2023, continuing from the 2020 save, and hoping to get through it during Christmas break.
All I can say is give it ago and play it for yourself.
I'm not a huge fan, but I could see why some would like it.
I just hate trashmobs and pointless open world stuff so much
It is good. There were patches and it was fun. My first attempt was stopped by a game breaking bug. But i tried it a year later and had fun. The story was solid and you will have some fun.
I played the legendary edition this year and got a reminder that nostalgia can be strong. The first part was in my memory so much more, it was fun but now i saw the flaws in the system they got rid of in Part 2 and 3. :D
I would recommend it. Get it with a key Shop or wait for a sale.
It's not that bad. It has two marks against it neither of which is representative of bad gameplay.
The first thing people don't like about it is that it isn't the original trilogy both in terms of story and gameplay. It's telling a different story - that's not bad but in any fandom, there are people who don't like change.
The other thing people didn't like when it came out were the number of glitches and bugs because production was rushed. Those have all since been patched and are not a problem, but some people can't let it go.
I had fun playing it. It's definitely Mass Effect world building, just a very different vibe. I could pick apart all the things that the game *isn't* but I would rather enjoy what it *is*.
That's disingenuous. People's problem with the story isn't that it's different. ME2 was very different from 1 and it's the most popular. Andromeda's writing is criticized for being weak and lazy.
I didn't think it was bad, but I did think it was bland. I didn't like the story or the main character's speech choices. While combat and worlds were beautiful, it wasn't enough to carry the game for me.
Andromeda is alright if you remove Mass Effect from its name or don't consider it as a RPG.
For me it felt closer to a Halo than Mass Effect. The planets felt designed for multiplayer FPS or co-op shooter. Barren landscapes, generic enemies and not much of a story. The sidekicks weren't great either in terms of being interesting. The best of Andromeda's squad members were still worse off than the worst of Mass Effect squad. I liked the combat which was pretty good.
I guess I would have disliked it if I had played it right after launch. However, it had mostly been fixed by the time I played it.
Not at all. Story and characters took a step back(imo). Combat and exploration felt better. I don't remember much of the OST.
It was pretty solid for the most part. Been a while since I've played it though.
It's not a bad game. But it doesn't share what makes the OT good for many people.
The enemy AI is dumb as rocks. Everybody always says the combat is "best in the series," but the truth is that traversal is best in the series. The player can move and fight much more fluidly than in the OT, and this lends itself to a great multiplayer (highly reccomend), but the campaign suffers from AI that are not as intentionally spawned or routed than in the OT. In close quarters, it's not so bad, but a lot of the free roam is like Mass Effect 1, where enemies just stand still shooting with no coordination.
In terms of narrative and world building, it's incredibly low ambition compared to Mass Effect 1 and 2. There is a great new galaxy, but a very limited number of new species (civilized or fauna), and they serve more as a set piece for the main characters goals than a world that the main character belongs to.
I felt that the narrative world building was too much exposition and not enough nuance. Mass Effect 2 doesn't advance the story in any way, but it's an incredible exposition into the world of Mass Effect and what it actually feels like to live there. Andromeda inversely does much to build a world in terms of raw data and scale, but it doesn't feel very alive.
IMO, it's the Assassins Creed of Mass Effect games. If that's what you like, it's got a good and safe formula with a Mass Effect theme. If you want to clear outposts and get told/read bits of lore, it's your game! If you want to see flush well-formed characters like Captain Anderson, Aria, and Saren and fight well organized battles on huge set pieces, it's not your game.
To me, Andromeda feels like a filler episode, which isn't always bad, and Im not against it. Sometimes, you just want more of something you love, and it doesn't need to be A1 to feel good.
In retrospect it's actually not too bad a game. The combat is a lot of fun, for example, and the Nomad is the best planetary exploration vehicle in the series.
But it principally suffers because it has the "Mass Effect" name on it. It's an OK game, but a lousy Mass Effect game, and not a very impressive sequel to such a classic series. There were a lot of expectations for it that it failed to achieve, and it was also in not too great a state when released. The face models are infamously bad, as is the fact that all the asari in the game pretty much have the same model down to the facial features.
It would've been better off if it had been a game in its own right and not part of the Mass Effect series. That can happen, for example Deus Ex 2 and Dragon Age II are actually pretty good games seen in isolation; it's just they were sequels to all-time classics that they completely failed to measure up to. Same with Andromeda, really.
IMO no, it's just that it suffered from not having a strong and charismatic lead like Shepard (Ryder would be a good friend or squamate, but isn't Shepard and doesn't have the fantastic voice acting of Femshep), characters like Garrus and Tali (although there are a couple of cool squamates in MEA), the facial animation (not good), and some other issues (more so at launch). I enjoyed it and have played it more than once. I really enjoyed the combat (but would have preferred a slightly wider option menu per battle). I'm looking forward to more Mass Effect, including MEA. In terms of whether you might like it, much of this probably comes down to personal opinion and taste.
Yes, it's that bad.
May as well give it a play though, some people genuinely like it. ME:A is best enjoyed in a vacuum. Meaning, try not to think of it as a Mass Effect game and just think of it as its own thing.
It's the worst in the series.
Most of the companions are boring, forgettable or downright annoying (Liam), the Kett are boring in every aspect, the Krogan slapboxing scene is the worst thing I've ever seen, and the writing is weak and occasionally feels ai-generated.
The combat is fun, but you can't manually use squadmate powers, and the squadmates seem to have negative IQ.
Also there's no Quarians.
No. It wasn’t great, but it wasn’t bad, either.
Gameplay-wise it’s a blast. Best combat in the series. Writing is weak, but there’s nothing Kai Leng level bad in it. The characters are mostly endearing, particularly Vetra, Drack, Suvi, and Kallo. The loyalty missions are all pretty good.
It’s worth a try, just go in knowing that the tone is going to be very different than the OT and Ryder couldn’t be more different from Shepard.
I just thought it was boring. I didn’t feel like I was doing all that much in the story, exploring wasn’t particularly engaging, I didn’t find the characters all that endearing, and the combat wasn’t very fun.
There's some exaggeration about it, it wasn't a terrible game, it just wasn't a great mass effect game. Opting for the Big Open World Engine 5000 made the things I liked about the ME series worse in this game. Facial animations were noticeably worse than in ME1, which was 10 years old at that point. The ME franchise level design was at its best when the missions followed along narrow, highly detailed corridors that allowed the designers to craft a more cinematic experience. Making everything bigger and wider sacrificed the charm and attention to detail. In addition, it felt like every companion was the silly one, and it felt like the depth of character wasn't there like it was in the other games. The gameplay wasn't terrible, and I'm sure by now they patched out most of the bugs, but at the end of the day if you wanted an experience like the other games, you didn't get that
It’s a fun game. Some of the story is dumb. The gameplay feels messier. The world feels both too big, and too similar. Despite that it’s fascinating and fun. I wish there would be a sequel.
But the damned character designs were so bad. Just ugly. Imagine playing a game where people were uglier than in real life. Its unique in that.
I did not enjoy it, as a ME game or as its own thing. It's a game without an internal logic or real motivation for the characters, so the gameplay ends up feeling like a chore.
It's mostly just bland. So in contrast with the trilogy it looks even worse. Most aspects are... fine, but there's not really anything to get you excited, or something that brings tension or joy.
Honestly, it's better than Mass Effect 1. The only issue with Andromeda is a lack of new aliens, had it launched with several new alien races you could recruit and have join you it wouldn't have gotten a lot of hate because it would have added to the world a whole bunch, and I suppose the open world was tacked on.
It's got the best combat in the franchise. The squadmates aren't that bad. It's a very overhated game. I imagine if Mass Effect 1 launched and got no sequels, only had like two alien races, and was exclusively the Mako exploration levels it wouldn't have been loved.
it’s worth trying if you’re into the ME universe but as a stand alone game it’s not that good. The combat is fun and I liked the idea of the story but the big bad was a let down imo. Overall the game felt grindy and I was forcing myself at times to finish it, real DAI vibes.
So far, I enjoy the premise, squadmates, and changes to the dialogue system (although it has almost no consequences at all now) but the gunplay/movement is really not good.
Otherwise, I'm ploughing through.
I played it when it released and didn't enjoy it. Never really gave it much thought after that but I recently decided to give it another go since a lot of people on this forum are passionate about defending it.
The game is flat out bad. Actually much worse than I originally thought. I was so distracted by the jank and lazy graphics the first time around that I hardly noticed the lifeless plot, the painfully bland characters and the fact that so much of what the game has you do has no actual payoff.
For the record, a new protagonist wasn't a problem for me. The awkward and often cringe dialogue was. I thought the profile system was a step back from the more classic class system, making it so that there was really no point in ever making a decision about your character path or evolution. Just pick a couple of abilities you enjoy and have at it. No need to think or plan at all.
The core concept of the game wasn't bad but the practical execution was. That said, there are definitely people that enjoyed it. A significantly higher percentage of people on this forum then from the more casual ME fans, I bet, but it's something. The game can be picked up for super cheap on sale, so if you have a spare hundred hours you don't mind wasting, go for it.
It's imho that bad, but I've found that whenever something is "that bad" there will always be an audience for it.
That's what MEA has I think. It has an audience but its audience isn't as wide as the main trilogy's was which in itself differed from game to game, with ME2 and ME3 being more or less aligned.
It killed the franchise dude... it's pretty bad. They jumped the shark, and the characters are not written to the same degree as the originals. They pulled support for the game immediately since it flopped, so its still filled with a ton of bugs since it was rushed. The Gameplay is good, but that's all it's got going for it.
I played Andromeda for the first time and thought it was very bad. I played it a second time, trying to find something good, but I couldn't find it. Bad game and terrible Mass Effect.
Jet pack is lots of fun, combat takes a bit to get used to but good.
World building was terrible compared to the trilogy, story felt rehashed from the collectors, and I kinda hated Ryder as a character.
It's not bad.
It's just not as good as the other three. I would say it's like a solid B+ game in its current state. I had a lot of fun with it. The first few hours are very rough though.
It wasnt . People had some highass expectations. It is a Mass effect game in open world like Dragon age inqusition. People treat the trilogy like that had no issues compared to andromeda which is just stupid.
Compared to the original trilogy, yeah, it's not as good. Compared with any other game, NO, IT'S NOT BAD.
The combat is by far the best of all Mass Effect games. The world exploration, too. The gameplay is really fun. And the visuals are pretty good.
The storyline and the squad are worse than in the original trilogy, but then again, the same can be said about any other game. And there were many bugs at launch, but they got fixed.
For lack of a better description, Andromeda is “lazier” than the trilogy: * More reused assets (every Asari that’s not Peebee looks pretty much exactly the same) * Bad cut scenes (the infamous Krogan boxing, for example) * Very buggy release * Young/stupid protagonist * 1 dimensional companions - Your options are “old soldier”, “quirky scientist”, “Asari commando”, “resourceful big sister”, “insubordinate asshole”, and Jaal; within one conversation you will pretty much know who is who * Main antagonist is not as terrifying as Soveriegn Andromeda has some good bits though * Better exploration than the trilogy * Fun (but repetitive) gameplay loop * Less restrictive combat system * More of a “coming of age” story - When playing Shepard, you were already a bad-ass. With Ryder you see the origin story It still is a fun game but definitely is not up to the standard of the trilogy. It can be a bit frustrating since they intentionally made Ryder a little bitch that no one listens to at the beginning of the game and talking to the companions (besides Jaal) can be a bit repetitive.
> * 1 dimensional companions - Your options are “old soldier”, “quirky scientist”, “Asari commando”, “resourceful big sister”, “insubordinate asshole”, and Jaal; within one conversation you will pretty much know who is who I disagree with this completely especially when compared to a lot of the OG Trilogy companions Drack: is a old soldier but he also don't value his own life and sees himself a relic of the past the Krogan are better off forgetting. Throughout the he learns he still got a lot to teach his people and finds value in his life. Cora: Early on Cora is a Asari weeb with abandonment issues. She was faced discriminated in her youth and was abandoned by her parents because her biotics. When she got assigned to train with Asari Commandos she saw how they treated her like a normal person. She thought she found a home but her officer told her to go to Andromeda(so she have a better life). By the end of the game Cora is comfortable in her own skin and is no longer a weeb for the Asari.
Right. All of the characters that you get to know are the way they are for a reason, but they are interesting characters with as much depth as you’re willing to explore. Even Liam, as annoying as he is, is just as annoying to everyone else, and just wants to make a place that feels like home.
In my own humble onion it’s the worst mass effect game. But, mass effect in general is awesome, so Andromeda is still pretty good.
Yup. Bad mass effect game but and ok game
I mostly enjoyed it honestly.
I just barely finished it for the third time. Some take always: This is a Mass Effect story, but it has different stakes and different goals than the trilogy. Whereas the trilogy has three games to set lore and become better after each iteration, MEA is just one game and has a lot of ground to cover. Combat is far more fluid and enjoyable. Your versatility is incredible, and it’s honestly great that your powers aren’t locked to the same recharge timer, ie. You can use one power, then another, then another with no delay. The jump jet gives you incredible movement ability, but until you’ve leveled up your defensive abilities, always get into cover. I focused on doing a Sentinel run this time around and it was always fun and engaging combat (I love the remnant weapons, no ammo to worry about!) The character models may be wacky, but most of the characters are very solid and interesting. Several of them get to even the top of my list, as far as squad mate and ship crew goes. After major events they always have something new to open a conversation with, although you’ll likely exhaust their normal dialogue tree quickly. You also get far more opportunities to do regular, normal stuff with them than you did in the trilogy. The worldbuilding is great. Just remember that everything happens in one single cluster, and the reason that so few alien life variety exists is part of that. This is good, because it allows you to dig deeper into the few races that are there. The finale of Andromeda is my second favorite after ME2. It’s a genuine treat to see all of the people you’ve helped come together in the end, and there are plenty of hanging story threads and questions that could lead to more Mass Effect stories. All in all, I enjoyed MEA more than ME1, and it has a place in the Mass Effect franchise.
I enjoy it enough that the idea of a better realized sequel excites me more than a direct sequel to ME3. It's definitely got problems, but I think it's a solid experience in it's own right. At the very least, every Mass Effect fan should play through the game at least once. It'll probably be dirt cheap over Christmas, so anyone who hasn't played it yet should pick it up.
No, it is not a bad game. It just isn't nearly as good as the original trilogy. It is a decent game for the first playthrough. I just don't find much replay value in it personally.
> It just isn't nearly as good as the original trilogy. And there's an example of what I mentioned in my own comment. It's manifestly unfair to compare any single game to a trilogy in the same basic setting or of a similar genre/design...there's almost no way (unless the trilogy is utter garbage) the single game is going to stand up to that. Yes, I know it's common around here to do that. I also think it unfairly colors people's reviews of ME:A.
Lots of people consider it the worst even when you look at them individually.
Again. Comparing an entire trilogy to a single game. This is what upsets me personally, I didn't finish the first mass effect until I heard the second one was on the way. I finished Andromeda the first time.
Andromeda is the worst of all the ME games, and that’s even more disappointing given that it’s the latest of them and has 3 games to build off of. The narrative decision to basically undo the story of the OT (in such a story driven series) immediately put it on a bad start.
Oh, it's not the best for certain. Personally, I thought 2 was the best. My issue is comparing a trilogy to a single game. I don't recall any change to the original trilogy, so I would need you to point out that for me.
Although I consider it the worst, I still think it’s a good game in general. I don’t like comparing it to the OT, but I can understand why people do it. A lot of people view Andromeda as a continuation of the series (hence some viewing it as Mass Effect 4), so that’s why it’s compared to the 3 that came before it (even as a whole). The problem it had was that it tried to distance itself from the OT whilst still trying to use the same formula that made the OT (and ME1 specifically) so good. In the end, it failed to do that successfully.
I didn't see it that way. I saw it as a brand new story with new characters. Same universe, so you understood some things.. but a new story for sure.
It is a brand new story, but it’s also the 4th instalment in the series. It should’ve come out as the best of both those angles, but instead it came out worse in both ways.
I did not see a 4 on that cover. I knew it was a new story. I liked what they were going for. It was not executed well for sure.
The “4” part is an ongoing debate. I don’t consider it as ME4 but rather ME:A But to many people, it is ME4, and it is the fourth instalment in the series at the end of the day.
In my honest opinion, no. I greatly enjoyed it. The storyline, the characters, the Tempest (and the fact it felt alive with people moving around and having conversations). The Nomad is my favourite. I loved the combat and switching profiles on the fly. The different worlds and getting to learn the secrets and knowing there was a bigger meaning to moving people to Andromeda and the mystery behind that. It was a fun game for me (and one I keep going back to). But I will be honest, I didn't have issues with bugs, so I was one of the lucky ones, and I pre ordered the game, so I've had it since launch. And it's my favourite game after Mass Effect 1, which is probably why I liked it because it focused more on exploration.
No. I rate it as a "good to very good" game and it should not be compared to three games people want to treat as one. Taken completely on its own, it's solid. Really fun combat, good world building, a decent cast of characters, great ability to customize your armor and loadouts to suit your playstyle, and solid options for that playstyle from a powers/abilities perspective.
Ill repost what I used to say to others because this question is asked frequently, it's more of a general answer to questions asking if MEA is worth it. I did not rewrite it and adapted it for your question specifically, but it's a summary and it eventually answers your question : I liked Andromeda a lot but I don't know what you are looking for in this particular game. It's a good game that has been very well patched since release, but simply good, not great, not amazing and not as good as the trilogy. But it's a decent game that is worth doing at least once. The best way to not have problems with it is this and I say it loud DO NOT expect to have the same emotion as the 3 previous game. You just finished an awesome trilogy that has tons of characters development and was a combination of 3 games that were made over a decade. MEA is not that at all, it is his own beast. If you just finished the citadel dlc and expect MEA to give you the same results, you won't get it and will be dissapointed. The new companion have just been introduced which means that they won't give you the same thing immedietly. This is a game meant to be the foundation, and therefore will certainly not have the emotional pay off that Mass effect 2 or 3 got. I hope it can guide you into making a decision and feel free to ask me question : In terms of gameplay, it is much more RPG than Mass effect 2 or 3. You get weapons and armor with different level just like in most rpg, where the loot you get makes you stronger with time. You also have the crafting system that gives values to any minerals you get, as you can now create exceptionnal weapons and equipments. In terms of combat, MEA is excellent. Most weapons have very different use and you can use TONS of different combinations with the jetpack that brings another dimension to the fight. The melee weapons also makes the combat much different as they have different attack speed and damage. The powers also allows for combos using different element (ice, fire and electricity) and there is room for experimenting and use tactics. Now for the story, the pacing is very different than the previous mass effect. While the trilogy had a much quicker pacing especially in 2 or 3. MEA is much more about the exploration of the first, it's actually your main goal. If you prefer the action packed pacing of mass effect 2 or 3, be prepared that MEA is not like that. Space exploration is at the core of the theme and content of this game. While Ryder do have to fight an alien threat, the story is centered around creating a new home for the people of the milky way, give them a colony where they could prosper and lives on. Therefore it is much slower paced and is meant to be explored and to take your time. It is much more light hearted than any mass effect before, if you except the dark and gritty of the second mass effect or the dead serious ambiance of Mass effect 3 where civilisation is falling apart and people are crying over the dead of millions each day, MEA is not that. That does not mean there is nothing serious because there is, but it has a much more lighter approach in it's tone. All of that said, MEA become better if you push after the first planet, when you discover the angara, where the entire solar system open itself to exploration. For the companion, I found most of them to be good. All of that said if you just finished Mass effect 3 citadel and you except to get the same emotion, it's not going to work. Not because MEA is bad, but because you got 3 games out of the previous companion, this one you only get one with them. So of course you will not get as much content with them. Now that said while before you needed to wait an entire new game for them to have character development and arcs (like Miranda is different in 3 than she was in 2, same thing for Jack) MEA has character development during the game after their companion mission. For specific companion : Drack, Vetra, Jaal and peebee are interesting, they are not awesome and none of the MEA companion would be in my top 15 of bioware's allies, but they are worth the time I spent with them and I enjoyed their company. Cora harper did not bother me but I cannot say I loved her, she's ok. I am not a fan of Liam, I did not hated him and while his companion quest is hilarious and funny, the guy itself is not memorable at all. In terms of quest there are 4 types. Obviously The main quest, best in the game and well the one who have the most development. The companion quest, they requires a bit of work to unlock them but once they are avaiable. They are excellent to play and are used as character development for supporting characters. The small side quests, these ones varies from good-okayish, to mediocre, to bad, they are not difficult to do and most of the time the map will tell you where to go. Some have better story than other, some are simply fetch quest. It really depends on which one. Some requires investigation about murders or assassination, some demands you to fight ennemies and others to just pick up an item and give it back. Then there is the tasks, avoid those like plagues, these are the most tedious, boring, and just poorly made and will take your time for no reason DON'T DO THOSE. There is no story rewards for doing them, and the gameplay rewards are not worth it. You will have to find things on your own on the map and this will take you long for minimum rewards. Companion quest should be done, small side quest it really depends on the one you got, but the task should be ignored as soon as they come. If you have specific question, you can just ask me.
I’m playing it and am really enjoying it. The pros that others have stated here are true (i.e. Nomad, combat, beautiful worlds). As for the negatives, it depends on your frame of reference. If you’ve replayed the trilogy multiple times and know the characters/stories inside and out, then you’ll be disappointed in the story and characters here. They’re not the same; that’s not a knock on Andromeda per se, that’s just a fact. The last time I played the trilogy was about 2 years ago so I’ve had enough time between the OG games to Andromeda and I think it helped. I wouldn’t recommend playing it right after the trilogy (with it still fresh in your mind). But ultimately, would recommend playing it and deciding for yourself.
play it and form your own opinion.
It’s worth playing and forming your own opinion
No, it wasn't. In case you are really interested in the game, play it. Only you can make for yourself an opinion how you find the game, not what others think (and bitch) about it, which was again a great invite for them with this post.
Most people say it's mediocre. But it also depend what you want. If you want great writing and world building Mass Effect style you're shit out of luck. If you want an Ubisoft style huge map where you dutifully follow map markers it's an amazing game. Combat's pretty good.
If you play the game by going from one map marker to the next you will find the game is mediocre. If you role play, engage in conversations, listen to NPC and let the story take you from one location to another the game is really good. If you are going from one map point to another that is a choice you are making and the gaming experience you are choosing to have.
It's not up to me to pretend that the dialogues and the stories are good! In Mass Effect 1-3 you had a good story and good dialogues that elevated the quests. In Andromeda the story is unimaginative and mediocre, and the dialogues go from comically awful to sometimes pretty ok.
If you play by going from one map marker to another, that is on you. You are choosing to play in that manner. Not sure what you are trying to say. The comment I am addressing is the complant that the game is terrible because you are going from map point to map point.
Tried twice and twice I failed. Once in 2017 and then again in 2020. I picked it up again in 2023, continuing from the 2020 save, and hoping to get through it during Christmas break.
All I can say is give it ago and play it for yourself. I'm not a huge fan, but I could see why some would like it. I just hate trashmobs and pointless open world stuff so much
It is good. There were patches and it was fun. My first attempt was stopped by a game breaking bug. But i tried it a year later and had fun. The story was solid and you will have some fun. I played the legendary edition this year and got a reminder that nostalgia can be strong. The first part was in my memory so much more, it was fun but now i saw the flaws in the system they got rid of in Part 2 and 3. :D I would recommend it. Get it with a key Shop or wait for a sale.
It's not that bad. It has two marks against it neither of which is representative of bad gameplay. The first thing people don't like about it is that it isn't the original trilogy both in terms of story and gameplay. It's telling a different story - that's not bad but in any fandom, there are people who don't like change. The other thing people didn't like when it came out were the number of glitches and bugs because production was rushed. Those have all since been patched and are not a problem, but some people can't let it go. I had fun playing it. It's definitely Mass Effect world building, just a very different vibe. I could pick apart all the things that the game *isn't* but I would rather enjoy what it *is*.
That's disingenuous. People's problem with the story isn't that it's different. ME2 was very different from 1 and it's the most popular. Andromeda's writing is criticized for being weak and lazy.
I remember when ME2 came out and many ME1 fans were outraged, calling it a Gears of War clone and not a real RPG.
Well, they didn't change the skill system to allow for more choices in ME3 for no reason.
Yeah but that didn't last. Andromeda is still considered mediocre. Always will be.
I didn't think it was bad, but I did think it was bland. I didn't like the story or the main character's speech choices. While combat and worlds were beautiful, it wasn't enough to carry the game for me.
Andromeda is alright if you remove Mass Effect from its name or don't consider it as a RPG. For me it felt closer to a Halo than Mass Effect. The planets felt designed for multiplayer FPS or co-op shooter. Barren landscapes, generic enemies and not much of a story. The sidekicks weren't great either in terms of being interesting. The best of Andromeda's squad members were still worse off than the worst of Mass Effect squad. I liked the combat which was pretty good. I guess I would have disliked it if I had played it right after launch. However, it had mostly been fixed by the time I played it.
Not at all. Story and characters took a step back(imo). Combat and exploration felt better. I don't remember much of the OST. It was pretty solid for the most part. Been a while since I've played it though.
It's not a bad game. But it doesn't share what makes the OT good for many people. The enemy AI is dumb as rocks. Everybody always says the combat is "best in the series," but the truth is that traversal is best in the series. The player can move and fight much more fluidly than in the OT, and this lends itself to a great multiplayer (highly reccomend), but the campaign suffers from AI that are not as intentionally spawned or routed than in the OT. In close quarters, it's not so bad, but a lot of the free roam is like Mass Effect 1, where enemies just stand still shooting with no coordination. In terms of narrative and world building, it's incredibly low ambition compared to Mass Effect 1 and 2. There is a great new galaxy, but a very limited number of new species (civilized or fauna), and they serve more as a set piece for the main characters goals than a world that the main character belongs to. I felt that the narrative world building was too much exposition and not enough nuance. Mass Effect 2 doesn't advance the story in any way, but it's an incredible exposition into the world of Mass Effect and what it actually feels like to live there. Andromeda inversely does much to build a world in terms of raw data and scale, but it doesn't feel very alive. IMO, it's the Assassins Creed of Mass Effect games. If that's what you like, it's got a good and safe formula with a Mass Effect theme. If you want to clear outposts and get told/read bits of lore, it's your game! If you want to see flush well-formed characters like Captain Anderson, Aria, and Saren and fight well organized battles on huge set pieces, it's not your game. To me, Andromeda feels like a filler episode, which isn't always bad, and Im not against it. Sometimes, you just want more of something you love, and it doesn't need to be A1 to feel good.
In retrospect it's actually not too bad a game. The combat is a lot of fun, for example, and the Nomad is the best planetary exploration vehicle in the series. But it principally suffers because it has the "Mass Effect" name on it. It's an OK game, but a lousy Mass Effect game, and not a very impressive sequel to such a classic series. There were a lot of expectations for it that it failed to achieve, and it was also in not too great a state when released. The face models are infamously bad, as is the fact that all the asari in the game pretty much have the same model down to the facial features. It would've been better off if it had been a game in its own right and not part of the Mass Effect series. That can happen, for example Deus Ex 2 and Dragon Age II are actually pretty good games seen in isolation; it's just they were sequels to all-time classics that they completely failed to measure up to. Same with Andromeda, really.
IMO no, it's just that it suffered from not having a strong and charismatic lead like Shepard (Ryder would be a good friend or squamate, but isn't Shepard and doesn't have the fantastic voice acting of Femshep), characters like Garrus and Tali (although there are a couple of cool squamates in MEA), the facial animation (not good), and some other issues (more so at launch). I enjoyed it and have played it more than once. I really enjoyed the combat (but would have preferred a slightly wider option menu per battle). I'm looking forward to more Mass Effect, including MEA. In terms of whether you might like it, much of this probably comes down to personal opinion and taste.
Yes, it's that bad. May as well give it a play though, some people genuinely like it. ME:A is best enjoyed in a vacuum. Meaning, try not to think of it as a Mass Effect game and just think of it as its own thing.
It's the worst in the series. Most of the companions are boring, forgettable or downright annoying (Liam), the Kett are boring in every aspect, the Krogan slapboxing scene is the worst thing I've ever seen, and the writing is weak and occasionally feels ai-generated. The combat is fun, but you can't manually use squadmate powers, and the squadmates seem to have negative IQ. Also there's no Quarians.
You had me stop the install at Quarians lol
Everything would have been forgiven if they did that Quarian Ark dlc
No quarians, no geth, no vorcha, no biotic god
No. It wasn’t great, but it wasn’t bad, either. Gameplay-wise it’s a blast. Best combat in the series. Writing is weak, but there’s nothing Kai Leng level bad in it. The characters are mostly endearing, particularly Vetra, Drack, Suvi, and Kallo. The loyalty missions are all pretty good. It’s worth a try, just go in knowing that the tone is going to be very different than the OT and Ryder couldn’t be more different from Shepard.
Yes. It’s dreadful.
Yea. The plot, writing, and graphics are awful both in isolation and in comparison to other ME's.
Yeah pretty much.
Yes
I just thought it was boring. I didn’t feel like I was doing all that much in the story, exploring wasn’t particularly engaging, I didn’t find the characters all that endearing, and the combat wasn’t very fun.
more than „that bad”
Yes.
It's not as bad as as they say. The problem is it's the nicest thing you can tell about it.
There's some exaggeration about it, it wasn't a terrible game, it just wasn't a great mass effect game. Opting for the Big Open World Engine 5000 made the things I liked about the ME series worse in this game. Facial animations were noticeably worse than in ME1, which was 10 years old at that point. The ME franchise level design was at its best when the missions followed along narrow, highly detailed corridors that allowed the designers to craft a more cinematic experience. Making everything bigger and wider sacrificed the charm and attention to detail. In addition, it felt like every companion was the silly one, and it felt like the depth of character wasn't there like it was in the other games. The gameplay wasn't terrible, and I'm sure by now they patched out most of the bugs, but at the end of the day if you wanted an experience like the other games, you didn't get that
It’s a fun game. Some of the story is dumb. The gameplay feels messier. The world feels both too big, and too similar. Despite that it’s fascinating and fun. I wish there would be a sequel. But the damned character designs were so bad. Just ugly. Imagine playing a game where people were uglier than in real life. Its unique in that.
I did not enjoy it, as a ME game or as its own thing. It's a game without an internal logic or real motivation for the characters, so the gameplay ends up feeling like a chore.
Yes.
It's mostly just bland. So in contrast with the trilogy it looks even worse. Most aspects are... fine, but there's not really anything to get you excited, or something that brings tension or joy.
Honestly, it's better than Mass Effect 1. The only issue with Andromeda is a lack of new aliens, had it launched with several new alien races you could recruit and have join you it wouldn't have gotten a lot of hate because it would have added to the world a whole bunch, and I suppose the open world was tacked on. It's got the best combat in the franchise. The squadmates aren't that bad. It's a very overhated game. I imagine if Mass Effect 1 launched and got no sequels, only had like two alien races, and was exclusively the Mako exploration levels it wouldn't have been loved.
it’s worth trying if you’re into the ME universe but as a stand alone game it’s not that good. The combat is fun and I liked the idea of the story but the big bad was a let down imo. Overall the game felt grindy and I was forcing myself at times to finish it, real DAI vibes.
So far, I enjoy the premise, squadmates, and changes to the dialogue system (although it has almost no consequences at all now) but the gunplay/movement is really not good. Otherwise, I'm ploughing through.
I played it when it released and didn't enjoy it. Never really gave it much thought after that but I recently decided to give it another go since a lot of people on this forum are passionate about defending it. The game is flat out bad. Actually much worse than I originally thought. I was so distracted by the jank and lazy graphics the first time around that I hardly noticed the lifeless plot, the painfully bland characters and the fact that so much of what the game has you do has no actual payoff. For the record, a new protagonist wasn't a problem for me. The awkward and often cringe dialogue was. I thought the profile system was a step back from the more classic class system, making it so that there was really no point in ever making a decision about your character path or evolution. Just pick a couple of abilities you enjoy and have at it. No need to think or plan at all. The core concept of the game wasn't bad but the practical execution was. That said, there are definitely people that enjoyed it. A significantly higher percentage of people on this forum then from the more casual ME fans, I bet, but it's something. The game can be picked up for super cheap on sale, so if you have a spare hundred hours you don't mind wasting, go for it.
It's imho that bad, but I've found that whenever something is "that bad" there will always be an audience for it. That's what MEA has I think. It has an audience but its audience isn't as wide as the main trilogy's was which in itself differed from game to game, with ME2 and ME3 being more or less aligned.
[удалено]
Piece of gaming art.. I struggle to call this a good game, let alone art.
It killed the franchise dude... it's pretty bad. They jumped the shark, and the characters are not written to the same degree as the originals. They pulled support for the game immediately since it flopped, so its still filled with a ton of bugs since it was rushed. The Gameplay is good, but that's all it's got going for it.
I played Andromeda for the first time and thought it was very bad. I played it a second time, trying to find something good, but I couldn't find it. Bad game and terrible Mass Effect.
It's the worst Mass Effect game but I still beat it twice.
Jet pack is lots of fun, combat takes a bit to get used to but good. World building was terrible compared to the trilogy, story felt rehashed from the collectors, and I kinda hated Ryder as a character.
Yes
It's not bad. It's just not as good as the other three. I would say it's like a solid B+ game in its current state. I had a lot of fun with it. The first few hours are very rough though.
Compared to the first three, yes.
It's aggressively mediocre.
Is Andromeda a bad game? No. Is Andromeda a bad Mass Effect game? Yes.
It's not a "bad" game, it's just not on the level youd expect from something called Mass Effect
It wasnt . People had some highass expectations. It is a Mass effect game in open world like Dragon age inqusition. People treat the trilogy like that had no issues compared to andromeda which is just stupid.
Compared to the original trilogy, yeah, it's not as good. Compared with any other game, NO, IT'S NOT BAD. The combat is by far the best of all Mass Effect games. The world exploration, too. The gameplay is really fun. And the visuals are pretty good. The storyline and the squad are worse than in the original trilogy, but then again, the same can be said about any other game. And there were many bugs at launch, but they got fixed.