You didn't read them.

You mean qualitative analysis using media terms? I'm not great but I'm not trashing it without reason. And I'm also not alone, as I pointed out. Better writers than I described the issues we have with DA:I in the meta critic reviews.

Dragon Age 2 deconstructs a lot of Bioware and Western RPG clichés, including the main hero.  It was so much different from everything else they have done. It was a ballsy move, but it didn’t go over that well with diehard fans or critics. They ended up going overboard with the clichés and power fantasy in Inquisition.

 

The tone of DAO and DA2 doesn’t seem to match what Bioware is going for these days now anyways. Grounded dark fantasy is out, epic high fantasy is in. I guess we have the Witcher and a new Nier to fill that void.

Because it just sucks since the entire game is rushed and a cash-in to DAO's success. Doing something different doesn't make it successful.

Maybe not financially yet, but they still haven't regained the trust they had before the ME3 debacle and DAI is a game with A LOT of flaws. They most certainly are in a pit, it's just made of bad decisions.

They are in a much better position than they are during DA2 and ME3 were the entire BSN is a toxic cesspool.

Just because I like AC series doesn't make me a fanboy. You just don't like the things that I say and that's cool.

Bashing ME yet you praise AC for being innovative is BS since the former is much more repetitive than the latter.

Well, it certainly won't play the exact same thing as Assassins Creed that's for sure....

Ironic since N7Phantom is an AC fanboy.

This argument stupid. He's posting in this forum probably because he has criticisms, like everyone else here. Rather he's a fan or not he has the right to do so, and it's a ridiculous notion to think you must be an avid fan for Andromeda to post in this forum. Forums are to share thoughts about about a subject; rather you hate it or love it doesn't matter.

It's okay to have criticisms but declaring that a game will suck because the ME3's ending is **** is stupid. 

Just don't be surprised when turd 2.0 ruins the Andromeda as well. Mass Effect Triangulum doesn't have a good ring but hey, anything to save an unsalvagable mess right?

What I'm honestly curious about is how anyone even trusts bioware to not screw this up. At least star wars force awakens had a director who had previous good works under their belt and got George Lucas away from the chair. But this game? One of the two responsible for how the ME3 turned out, a team whose big accomplishment was the Omega DLC, And an author whose unofficial ending had humanity become gods because of genetic destiny. And what you've basically told them is it's okay to never fix issues as long as you chsnge the setting. Maybe someone should tell that to Zack Snyder. If you want to fix the problems of Man of Steel and Batman vs Superman, just set it in Malibu California instead of metropolis. That'll fix everything.

Just tell me. What has the Mass Effect team shown or done in the last 2 years to show they've learned a damn thing from their previous mistakes? What has EA done to show it learned from its previous mismanagement?

Where is the quality assurance that's apparently so obvious to see? When the folks in charge of writing and game design leave the company in the production, where exactly is the goddamn golden sign that this game is going to be good?

I will let the game tell me if they learn or not. If that is your opinion then why are you posting in this entire forum dedicated for Mass Effect: Andromeda?

The ones who want to move this to a new galaxy, imo, are the ones who wouldn't stop whining. Because they can't accept their endings not being portrayed in the games, and can't accept a story where shepards not the be all and end all of everything. They have to run away to a whole new galaxy just to accept that there can be more stories in mass effect.

 

It's ironic that argument is  pointed more on those who can't accept the endings. Bioware address the fact that the Milky Way after the endings is an unsalvageable mess and making a sequel on that setting is nothing but a polished turd. Unless you are a fan of IT and you are willing to accept that Shepard's story never happened because Milky Way is the only setting in Mass Effect.

If Mass Effect Andromeda were trying to stand on its own merits it wouldn't be called Mass Effect. It'd be Andromeda. By naming it as the 4th game in the franchise,  it is directly leeching off of the series as a means of establishing its merit as a game. They could have approached this in any number of ways, from pretending the ending didn't happen to making an alternate timeline story. Instead by making it not just a sequel but a direct sequel with a direct line back to the 3rd game through shepards message to our character,  they are throwing aside any illusion of being a fresh new start. It's a games whose very existence is flawed in why it needs to come about. 

 

And for a person who keeps throwing out how I should quit bitching and man up, you certainly have a lot of bitching you like to do about other posters. I get being annoyed at seeing opinions you don't agree with being posted. But what does it mean to be a complainer about complainers? At least there's a minute amount of legitimacy in complaining about a company and staff who influence a product. Calling me a ****** won't make the negativity train stop.

All of your whining will never erase the mess of ME3 endings. You're suggesting that Shepard's story never happened. It's just making the IT canon.

When andromeda gets fucked over by another deus ex machina and they move on to another galaxy, leaving behind any logic or reason the series had, don't come whining to the forums about it then.

Because when people pointed out the problem with a running away from glaring plot problems approach, you didn't want them to have a say because that would make them entitled or crazy.

Andromeda will get fucked over by bad writing. They will ruin the setting by making the consequences for your choices too big to do, and they will cut and run without addressing any of your concerns.

It's just like comic books and retcons/character deaths. They used to mean something because nobody ever did it and took it back. Then DC did it with the death and return of superman. Then marvel did it. Then dc did it again. And now look at comics, where you can't go 5 years without a universe reboot and characters being retconned back to square 1 of development.

LOL, just move on man. Whining about it will never ever change it.

In the current incarnation of RPGs sure, but if there were a return to a more skills-based system with dialogue and skill checks as alternatives to straight combat, it could be done. I'm not expecting that any time soon, but it's a nice thought.

 

Imagine purple Hawke talking Meredith out of existence like in Planescape...

Too bad Planescape was never been successful financially despite being a great RPG.

I think, as well, that video games are not faithful depictions of how the actual story would occur. A novelization of any video game isn't going to have the PC/protagonist actually kill the number of enemies that we're able to kill in the game. The novelization is also going to have the protagonist take the most direct route to accomplish their goals, whereas in a game we're rewarded for going off track and putting ourselves in harm's way. Game mechanics don't equal realism.

 

Someone pointed out in another thread that in The Witcher books, monsters are becoming more and more rare, and Geralt hardly does any Witcher jobs for the most part. But in the games, there are hundreds of monsters to kill. Because if there weren't, there would be a whole lot less content in the game. And fighting enemies is a large portion of RPGs.

 

Are we to believe that because Hawke bought additional backpacks, s/he is able to carry additional large weapons and armor? A backpack isn't going to be able to carry the increased inventory, we would need a pack mule or a cart. But for gameplay purposes it's easier to just have us buy a backpack. Would every single enemy in a video game fight to the death rather than retreat or surrender? Even wild animals, who would more realistically run away the first chance they got? No, but then we wouldn't get the experience for killing them or would have to chase them down to finish them off. That wouldn't be convenient gameplay.

 

So I don't assume Hawke actually kills all of the enemies we see in the game. I don't believe the HOF kills as many enemies as we see in the game. I don't believe Geralt/the Inquisitor/Shepard/Revan kills etc etc

In Exile has a point, RPGs and videogames in general are power fantasies http://tvtropes.org/...in/PowerFantasy.

Because they're the ****!

So as your favorite AC.

Then why people are still playing it like hotcakes if it's a shitty franchise?

Why does COD is still selling like hotcakes since its just as awfully repetitive as AC?

Dude AC4 is one of the most fun games to be a pirate and you can't stand Ubisoft because of that?! Assassin's Creed is one of the most successful games ever, it's got a great story, good characters, combat gameplay is off the charts, and their open worlds of real places are astonishing! Just try to play them and take your time with it.

Funny since AC4 is a **** game and the franchise goes downhill since AC:Revelations.

That won't happen again. The only reason it happened the first time was because BioWare did not properly plan out the trilogy and there was a change in lead writer. If BioWare future proofs their story, instead of coming up with it as they go, this won't be an issue.

And they gave the players too much choices that they don't even address in their respective sequels aside from that they don't have any concrete plan on creating a trilogy.

How so? DAO did fairly well, but suffered on consoles due to being more of a PC-centric title. DAII was a financial disappointment that suffered on all platforms due to oversimplified mechanics and its short development cycle. DAI is the first game of the series to truly gain its footing, but still suffers from inconsistencies and flaws that were largely created from its new innovations.

 

Without a doubt, the Mass Effect trilogy is more successful, more popular, and its trilogy arc is a large contributor to why it's the overall better BioWare IP. If we just have solo games in which we are constantly shuffling protagonists, I don't believe we'll ever fully get to appreciate them or their companions and a lot of potential for character development will have been lost.

And expect another ME3 level trainwreck again.

GTA V wasn't made in mainland Europe. The UK is not apart of MAINLAND Europe.

UK is stil in EUROPE.

Why is $81 million so hard to believe? Is it because it was made in Poland which is in the EU and has a rapidly increasing economy??? The Witcher 3 is the most expensive game to made in mainland Europe.

LOL, that was GTA V. Get your fact straight, your fanboyism is showing.

It will be as close to ME2 as they can possibly manage I imagine, there will end up having been no real reason to switch galaxies besides BioWare being too craven to stay in the Milky Way

Change is always good, staying the same and not to change is bad.

That's the idea, more content for everyone.

 

"Romances" as they are are simply a boring low quality checklist of sexual orientations. (at least most of them)

So it is better to just let them go in favor of more "meat" story-wise if that's the best BW can do.

Just like removing inventory and exploration in ME2-ME3 since they are awful and it provides a "better" story, right?

A paragon Shepard could've easily chose to ignore the council and focus on sovereign 
 
 

It wasn't the only reason he joined the reaper he'd also thought submission was preferable to excitation, they also did take him as a serious threat since he's working with the geth.
 

The main antagonist in ME1 wasn't a threat to one species but the whole galaxy, ME2/3 the antagonist were more focused on one particular species than the whole galaxy.

Its not a bias, the whole "take back earth" in ME3 and the collector's targeting humans in ME2 speaks for itself.