I must be a sucker for games with a bad reputation because I kinda liked this
Seemed like many people hated on this game when it came out, but I thought it was great. Just as good as the other Mass Effect games.
i obviously knew coming in this was not going to live up to the original trilogy, which i think softened the blow.
it really is frustrating how the biggest draw of the series (the choices and dialogue) are so unbelievably stripped down. there is one ending, and i feel like doing all the side content didn't actually matter at all, which is wild developmental choice after mass effect 2 and 3.
the main appeal of this entry that keeps it as a positive score to me is that the actual gameplay itself is engaging. firefights are frenetic and mobile, with new abilities and weapons, and the nomad is fun to drive around.
otherwise the game just feels like a stripped down version of the originals. the world-building is still neat, but not as good, the score is cool sometimes, but not as good, and the characters are mostly interesting, but again, not as good.
lastly, hearing about the development of this game explained why there are so many QOL nightmares, but it doesn't make them more bearable. i should not need to endure 7 different loading screens through one side mission, nor should exploring the hub ship involve so much work going up and down floors to talk to people. it leads to the experience feeling sluggish and like a chore at times, and caused me to straight up cut out doing a chunk of side content and engaging in optional conversations, as it was boring to get to those objectives.
this is my first long review in a while, and while i know i harped on this game for the most part, it's still got some merit, especially in the gameplay. and while most things from the original are stripped down, they are still the foundation of what i consider to be one of, if not my favourite video game series ever, meaning that stripped down version is still enjoyable for the most part.
it's just a shame because of what this IP's legacy was.
6/10
it really is frustrating how the biggest draw of the series (the choices and dialogue) are so unbelievably stripped down. there is one ending, and i feel like doing all the side content didn't actually matter at all, which is wild developmental choice after mass effect 2 and 3.
the main appeal of this entry that keeps it as a positive score to me is that the actual gameplay itself is engaging. firefights are frenetic and mobile, with new abilities and weapons, and the nomad is fun to drive around.
otherwise the game just feels like a stripped down version of the originals. the world-building is still neat, but not as good, the score is cool sometimes, but not as good, and the characters are mostly interesting, but again, not as good.
lastly, hearing about the development of this game explained why there are so many QOL nightmares, but it doesn't make them more bearable. i should not need to endure 7 different loading screens through one side mission, nor should exploring the hub ship involve so much work going up and down floors to talk to people. it leads to the experience feeling sluggish and like a chore at times, and caused me to straight up cut out doing a chunk of side content and engaging in optional conversations, as it was boring to get to those objectives.
this is my first long review in a while, and while i know i harped on this game for the most part, it's still got some merit, especially in the gameplay. and while most things from the original are stripped down, they are still the foundation of what i consider to be one of, if not my favourite video game series ever, meaning that stripped down version is still enjoyable for the most part.
it's just a shame because of what this IP's legacy was.
6/10
Just as good, if not better then Mass Effect 1... shame it's the fourth game.
Tl;dr: One word: disappointing
I bought Andromeda on some Steam sale yonks ago and made an attempt to actually play it back in 2021 after finishing Mass Effect Legendary Edition. I bounced so firmly off it it's taken me three years to try again.
I don't think the game is as shit-tier awful garbage dreadful as people like to make out. Don't misunderstand me here--it's not great, or even good--but it had just enough meat to keep me occupied for ~50 hours or so, and would have in my reckoning been rated higher if a company other than Bioware had made it. The Mass Effect trilogy--especially ME2--are some of my favourite games of all time--but after the intense hype of the original trilogy, it's patently clear that ME4, no matter how it looked, was going to disappoint to some degree. Unfortunately, it disappointed me a lot. And that's the key word I can use here: disappointing. Mass Effect: Andromeda is... disappointing.
Disappointment I: "Open World"
It seems late 20-teens Bioware, known for structural and mostly linear games, heard about that whole 'open world' thing and took it to the nth degree. It doesn't work for them. The worlds are too massive and sprawling, chocked full of nonsense side quests that are clearly designed just for you to spend time doing them. It's like they heard the critique for Inquisition about the open worlds being too big and went "all right, we'll keep on form!". By 30 hours in I was sick of planet exploration, especially when the 'exploration' involved seeing a marker on a mini-map, driving there, shooting some guys, and then leaving. Organic exploration like LoZ: BOTW can be incredibly rewarding, but this felt closer to Bethesda's marker chasing and left me very annoyed.
I also just hate filler in games. Personally, I would much prefer a streamlined 30 hour game that has all the fat cut off and plays beautifully to a 60+ hour game that only hits that length because of several 10+ hour sidemissions where you have to go and scan rocks. No, I wish I was joking. I am not.
Disappointment II: Characters
One of Bioware's strengths has always been its character writing, even making lovable jerks at least somewhat compelling. In Andromeda, I can tell you what each character is like--they're at least tonally distinct--but they feel like watered down versions of their original trilogy counterparts. Dreck? Wrex but older, just as grumpy and endearing. Lexi? Is like Liara by ME3, except her obsession is her patients rather than the fate of the galaxy.
And, beyond that, character motivations and arcs are basically non-existent. Characters enter fully formed, requiring no help from Ryder beyond a practical "Hey, can you punch this asshole in the face for me please?". Cora could have been very easily set up as a narrative foil to Ryder, but I didn't feel it; there were a few passive-aggressive comments here and there and then once I saved the asari, she was more than happy to let me be the boss. Vetra needed to change the relationship with her sister in the wake of a new galaxy, but did she feel fundamentally changed by the end? Nah, not really.
This trend tracks across the whole game, and feels especially narratively hollow as the relationships mirror the recruitment/loyalty quest from ME2. But the loyalty quests (barring Jacob's, who was done incredibly dirty and I won't touch on in this spoiler) had weight: the squad were going on a potential suicide mission. They needed to round out their affairs in the wake of potential death. In Andromeda, I guess I need to go help Liam save a random ship because, uh... he feels bad?
Ryder's characterisation was a problem too. I think ME:A suffers from the same thing Fallout 4 does: too structured a protagonist. For Shepard, it was a mere matter of choosing a gender, appearance, and a loose history; Ryder comes with a sibling and parents I have to be invested in. Which I'm not. I have no reason to care for these guys; they may as well be 2d cutouts for all I care for them. Expecting me to buy in to Ryder's feelings of inadequacy and the complicated relationship with their dad feels unnecessary. I think the whole things could've been avoided if we had a generic background to choose from and could expand our character through dialogue options through the course of the game.
Disappointment III: MENUS!!!!
The menus in this game were INSANELY unintuitive to use. Every single thing was locked behind some menu or other with blue text on a black background. Bringing squad members? Menu with their faces. Choosing weapons? Big long list of weapons in a menu with the ability to compare them. Journal? Laid out in a menu. Saving? In a menu. Abilities? Another complicated menu.
It was just fucking menu purgatory, and not to be dramatic or anything but they genuinely did impede my enjoyment of the game. They also loaded SO SLOWLY and on PC having to mash space to dismiss 400,000 pop-ups that appear in some sub-menu because I've been avoiding it for the last 4 hours because it's not useful or natural to use just puts me off even further. It was unnecessarily frustrating, especially since the ME3 menus--although obviously very dated in 2024--at least made sense and gave me the ability to meaningfully compare between, for example, weapons.
Disappointment IV: Narrative
As I said above, coming off the insane success and popularityand rabid fandom of the original trilogy, Bioware knew that they really needed to do something crazy and out of the scope of the original games. Unfortunately, the narrative in Andromeda never managed to excite me. With the main quests, I understand what we were doing and why--but I felt no connection to anyone in particular or care about them dying. I didn't worry about the fate of the galaxy. My reaction could be surmised as 👍.
It also feels like Bioware came in knowing the destination and had to work out how to get there. I think that can work as a narrative strategy--if you also spend the time to make it feel organic. Instead, it felt sometimes like a lot of useful coincidences aligned to make things happen in certain ways.
Don't even get me started on the quarian ark.
So why two stars?
Despite all my disappointment, the game wasn't a total write-off. The combat was an elevated experience over the Trilogy--using biotics and a shotgun actually felt like a rewarding playstyle!
The voice acting was all good as well, and I liked the diversity of accents.
Also, while the 3d models could sometimes look a little uncanny valley, the environments--despite their overall scale--were gorgeous. Each planet was beautiful and the planet scanning--although somewhat trapped behind a dreaded menu--was also gorgeous.
Overall
I was disappointed, really. With EA's recent layoffs from Bioware, I really wonder about the longevity of the Mass Effect (and, by proxy, Dragon Age) franchises. Letting go of some of the most talented writers and watching on Twitter as developers and key project managers jump ship does not look good.
Although I am a Mass Effect/sci-fi girlie, this is ostensibly the summer of Dragon Age: Dreadwolf. I'm very interested to see how it pans out. I think, if it's anything like Andromeda, I'll be waiting for it to go on sale and will play it seven years later and critique it all the while.
I bought Andromeda on some Steam sale yonks ago and made an attempt to actually play it back in 2021 after finishing Mass Effect Legendary Edition. I bounced so firmly off it it's taken me three years to try again.
I don't think the game is as shit-tier awful garbage dreadful as people like to make out. Don't misunderstand me here--it's not great, or even good--but it had just enough meat to keep me occupied for ~50 hours or so, and would have in my reckoning been rated higher if a company other than Bioware had made it. The Mass Effect trilogy--especially ME2--are some of my favourite games of all time--but after the intense hype of the original trilogy, it's patently clear that ME4, no matter how it looked, was going to disappoint to some degree. Unfortunately, it disappointed me a lot. And that's the key word I can use here: disappointing. Mass Effect: Andromeda is... disappointing.
Disappointment I: "Open World"
It seems late 20-teens Bioware, known for structural and mostly linear games, heard about that whole 'open world' thing and took it to the nth degree. It doesn't work for them. The worlds are too massive and sprawling, chocked full of nonsense side quests that are clearly designed just for you to spend time doing them. It's like they heard the critique for Inquisition about the open worlds being too big and went "all right, we'll keep on form!". By 30 hours in I was sick of planet exploration, especially when the 'exploration' involved seeing a marker on a mini-map, driving there, shooting some guys, and then leaving. Organic exploration like LoZ: BOTW can be incredibly rewarding, but this felt closer to Bethesda's marker chasing and left me very annoyed.
I also just hate filler in games. Personally, I would much prefer a streamlined 30 hour game that has all the fat cut off and plays beautifully to a 60+ hour game that only hits that length because of several 10+ hour sidemissions where you have to go and scan rocks. No, I wish I was joking. I am not.
Disappointment II: Characters
One of Bioware's strengths has always been its character writing, even making lovable jerks at least somewhat compelling. In Andromeda, I can tell you what each character is like--they're at least tonally distinct--but they feel like watered down versions of their original trilogy counterparts. Dreck? Wrex but older, just as grumpy and endearing. Lexi? Is like Liara by ME3, except her obsession is her patients rather than the fate of the galaxy.
And, beyond that, character motivations and arcs are basically non-existent. Characters enter fully formed, requiring no help from Ryder beyond a practical "Hey, can you punch this asshole in the face for me please?". Cora could have been very easily set up as a narrative foil to Ryder, but I didn't feel it; there were a few passive-aggressive comments here and there and then once I saved the asari, she was more than happy to let me be the boss. Vetra needed to change the relationship with her sister in the wake of a new galaxy, but did she feel fundamentally changed by the end? Nah, not really.
This trend tracks across the whole game, and feels especially narratively hollow as the relationships mirror the recruitment/loyalty quest from ME2. But the loyalty quests (barring Jacob's, who was done incredibly dirty and I won't touch on in this spoiler) had weight: the squad were going on a potential suicide mission. They needed to round out their affairs in the wake of potential death. In Andromeda, I guess I need to go help Liam save a random ship because, uh... he feels bad?
Ryder's characterisation was a problem too. I think ME:A suffers from the same thing Fallout 4 does: too structured a protagonist. For Shepard, it was a mere matter of choosing a gender, appearance, and a loose history; Ryder comes with a sibling and parents I have to be invested in. Which I'm not. I have no reason to care for these guys; they may as well be 2d cutouts for all I care for them. Expecting me to buy in to Ryder's feelings of inadequacy and the complicated relationship with their dad feels unnecessary. I think the whole things could've been avoided if we had a generic background to choose from and could expand our character through dialogue options through the course of the game.
Disappointment III: MENUS!!!!
The menus in this game were INSANELY unintuitive to use. Every single thing was locked behind some menu or other with blue text on a black background. Bringing squad members? Menu with their faces. Choosing weapons? Big long list of weapons in a menu with the ability to compare them. Journal? Laid out in a menu. Saving? In a menu. Abilities? Another complicated menu.
It was just fucking menu purgatory, and not to be dramatic or anything but they genuinely did impede my enjoyment of the game. They also loaded SO SLOWLY and on PC having to mash space to dismiss 400,000 pop-ups that appear in some sub-menu because I've been avoiding it for the last 4 hours because it's not useful or natural to use just puts me off even further. It was unnecessarily frustrating, especially since the ME3 menus--although obviously very dated in 2024--at least made sense and gave me the ability to meaningfully compare between, for example, weapons.
Disappointment IV: Narrative
As I said above, coming off the insane success and popularity
It also feels like Bioware came in knowing the destination and had to work out how to get there. I think that can work as a narrative strategy--if you also spend the time to make it feel organic. Instead, it felt sometimes like a lot of useful coincidences aligned to make things happen in certain ways.
Don't even get me started on the quarian ark.
So why two stars?
Despite all my disappointment, the game wasn't a total write-off. The combat was an elevated experience over the Trilogy--using biotics and a shotgun actually felt like a rewarding playstyle!
The voice acting was all good as well, and I liked the diversity of accents.
Also, while the 3d models could sometimes look a little uncanny valley, the environments--despite their overall scale--were gorgeous. Each planet was beautiful and the planet scanning--although somewhat trapped behind a dreaded menu--was also gorgeous.
Overall
I was disappointed, really. With EA's recent layoffs from Bioware, I really wonder about the longevity of the Mass Effect (and, by proxy, Dragon Age) franchises. Letting go of some of the most talented writers and watching on Twitter as developers and key project managers jump ship does not look good.
Although I am a Mass Effect/sci-fi girlie, this is ostensibly the summer of Dragon Age: Dreadwolf. I'm very interested to see how it pans out. I think, if it's anything like Andromeda, I'll be waiting for it to go on sale and will play it seven years later and critique it all the while.