[N7] New Mass Effect Andromeda{no spoilers}

Thread Rating: 5 votes, 5.00 average.
(5 votes)
Results 1,626 to 1,650 of 1650

  1. Post
    and yet offer no reason why, except "I don't want it to".
    Hardly a compelling argument.

  2. Post
    I'd rather they left the original trilogy as the only games set in the Milky Way. The way they ended the trilogy was fine, now leave it be Bioware (please). :P

    The reason MEA works so well for me is because while being set in the same universe with the same lore, it has very few ties to the original games, and most importantly it does not engage in revisionism for the sake of making a new game. I'd like to the Andromeda story continued (still haven't even finished the game yet lol).

  3. Post
    ChrisB wrote:
    and yet offer no reason why, except "I don't want it to".
    Hardly a compelling argument.
    I'm at a charity event drunk on the liquor, Sunday's bounty will be plentiful lol.

    Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

  4. Post
    MEA2, Based in Andromeda, on rails, third person story driven corridor shooter ala Trilogy.


  5. Post
    just make it a moba

  6. Post
    InvisibleShadow wrote:
    I'd like to the Andromeda story continued (still haven't even finished the game yet lol).
    This.
    I'm not having a lot of free time, but every session is a blast.

  7. Post
    MEA2 done right would be great, I'm still holding out hope that they deliver too on the single player DLC for MEA....hard to say where that's at (if anywhere) without an official statement that's not vague-o-rama. Essentially, I'm happy as long as Mass Effect continues in some direction in the future: that's all, simple shit really

    The whole thing with the Kotaku article and the general 'mood' around Mass Effect right now is a ****ing downer to say the least...so giving the franchise some time to marinate/chill may not be the worst thing in the world.

    It's going to be interesting/risky with Edmonton throwing all the A-team devs into one basket on this upcoming Destiny-like: for BioWare's sake, I hope it's amazing.

  8. Post
    May as well feed my knowledge.

    Name:  ImageUploadedByGP Forums1494829134.686562.jpg
Views: 118
Size:  265.8 KB

  9. Post
    ChrisB wrote:
    I think you meed to step back and have a very careful think about what each of those endings were, and how they affect everything else.
    There is simply no satisfactory way to move forward from there. I think you need to park the fanboy, and think about it.
    Off the top of the bat Synthesis is a complete no go zone, for so many reasons.
    The other 2 are only marginally less problematic.
    And still you're ignoring the fact that ME4 would completely undermine a core pillar of the entire trilogy even more so than the ending itself. And that is choice and consequence. Choosing a canon ending screws that entirely.
    ME MW is dead. BioWare killed it with a combination of over-simplification, and lack of foresight.
    A concurrent MW game, or even one set before might work, but offers up far to many issues in of itself. And that's ignoring the inevitable eventual elephant in the galaxy... the ME3 endings that will happen regardless of what happens in the new game.

    If ME is to continue it should be in Andromeda, and built from there. The reason it's set there in the first place (imo) is because BioWare and EA know's how badly they ****ed up the MW continuity and had to abandon it.

    MW is dead
    ME is sleeping
    Maybe we'll see another, but this is EA we're talking about, and I would think its likely that not only is ME gone, but BioWare making RPGs may be a thing of the past as well.
    You didn't mention the shoot the star child in the face option, which is clearly the canon ending.

  10. Post
    Well there is the everybody dies ending too. So we come back a few thousand years later and do the Reaper thing again. Pass
    As I said there is no way to go back to The MW. BioWare dun gone brok'd it good. Just more evidence of how much of a disastrous cluster **** the endings really were.

  11. Post
    I think if they're creative enough (but going by the actual ME3 endings and whatever the **** they gave us in Andromeda, that ain't likely) they could, or as I have said a few times, they could just do stuff far beforehand, there's plenty of time to play around with (one planet is a ****ing big place, let alone a whole galaxy). And, I mean, Earth is going to end eventually in reality, and it's not like there aren't any stories we can tell in the meantime

    They've already tainted Andromeda pretty badly in my mind, but it does look like I don't have to fear them releasing another similar game right away, anyway

  12. Post
    InquisitorZim wrote:
    You didn't mention the shoot the star child in the face option, which is clearly the canon ending.
    I like that ending too, bittersweet wee recording with Liara on the warning tip.

  13. Post
    Anyone else on ps4 getting stuttering and freezing drive across the map? I'm thinking I need an ssd

  14. Post
    Yes. Lasts about two seconds.

  15. Post
    ChrisB wrote:
    I think you meed to step back and have a very careful think about what each of those endings were, and how they affect everything else.
    There is simply no satisfactory way to move forward from there. I think you need to park the fanboy, and think about it.
    Off the top of the bat Synthesis is a complete no go zone, for so many reasons.
    The other 2 are only marginally less problematic.
    And still you're ignoring the fact that ME4 would completely undermine a core pillar of the entire trilogy even more so than the ending itself. And that is choice and consequence. Choosing a canon ending screws that entirely.
    ME MW is dead. BioWare killed it with a combination of over-simplification, and lack of foresight.
    A concurrent MW game, or even one set before might work, but offers up far to many issues in of itself. And that's ignoring the inevitable eventual elephant in the galaxy... the ME3 endings that will happen regardless of what happens in the new game.

    If ME is to continue it should be in Andromeda, and built from there. The reason it's set there in the first place (imo) is because BioWare and EA know's how badly they ****ed up the MW continuity and had to abandon it.

    MW is dead
    ME is sleeping
    Maybe we'll see another, but this is EA we're talking about, and I would think its likely that not only is ME gone, but BioWare making RPGs may be a thing of the past as well.
    I just had to go back and re-watch the ending sequences...I dunno, the destroy option has some scope to continue the MW. It specifically says that "we can rebuild everything that was destroyed" and even shows a restored citadel. There would have to be some other "big bad" involved obviously. Hell, something with a smaller scope would be cool. Maybe a game where you are fighting to rebuild but there are various factions trying to take over or interfere and you need to choose one to side with?

  16. Post
    Again, this ignores the biggest issue. You are ignoring the fact that this is one of three choices. So 2 others that people selected are now invalid. When you shit on a central design pillar (choice and consequence) and build on that you tarnish everything else. Just saying you can choose one, is not acceptable. Who are you making the sequel for? Because it sure as hell isn't the people who chose something other than the new "canon" ending. You are telling any player who selected the non-canon ending that their choices did not matter. In a choice oriented aRPG. That's about as daft a starting point as I can think of.

    Then there are all the problems with who died, the fact that the Relays are destroyed or damaged (and no one knows how to repair them) so you've eliminated a core travel mechanic.
    Also note that the Citadel is destroyed in Destroy (and Control?), so the control point for the entire relay network is gone. That kinda ****s things up a bit. Remember it's only because of the relays that your able to visit the other non Sol worlds.

    The issues are legion.

    Leaving the MW behind really is the only choice. Andromeda has less baggage. The Andromeda setting also wasn't the issue with the game, so I don't see why people think that another game set there is going to be a problem.

    Make Andromeda 2 a couple of generations later (like what Fallout 2 was to Fallout 1). Allow the settlers to have cities, and new societies. You lose nothing, and don't have to deal with all the broken shit in the MW, or any games unhappy with having a new game set in a galaxy completely different from the one they shaped over 3 previous games.

    I really think people need to get over MW as a ME setting. I doubt BioWare want to touch it. Its far too problematic. People's affection for it, is actually part of the problem. You will not satisfy a significant percentage of the fanbase by going back there. You can however correct the stumblings made in MEA. A good game, with so much promise moving forward. Assuming its given a chance to.
    Last edited by ChrisB; 16th May 2017 at 4:36 pm.

  17. Post
    Eh, I don't think the problem is a logistical one. If they want to figure a way to keep the MW alive, they will. There's nothing insurmountable there (the relay thing isn't a hard one to overcome, they did it for Andromeda).

    I'd prefer them sort it out, and upset some people by "telling any player who selected the non-canon ending that their choices did not matter" (though that was already the case when they made those endings in the first place, invalidating all the choices made before them) rather than continue on with the lacklustre place that is Andromeda.

  18. Post
    Why are people equating the Andromeda setting as being the issue? Its not. The game was, not where it was set.
    The issues with Andromeda had nothing to do with where events took place.

  19. Post
    ChrisB wrote:
    Again, this ignores the biggest issue. You are ignoring the fact that this is one of three choices. So 2 others that people selected are now invalid. When you shit on a central design pillar (choice and consequence) and build on that you tarnish everything else. Just saying you can choose one, is not acceptable. Who are you making the sequel for? Because it sure as hell isn't the people who chose something other than the new "canon" ending. You are telling any player who selected the non-canon ending that their choices did not matter. In a choice oriented aRPG. That's about as daft a starting point as I can think of.
    It wouldn't be the first time a game series selected an ending from many options and made it canon. I'm fairly certain the number of people against having their choice validated would be outnumbered by those that didn't care.

    ChrisB wrote:
    Then there are all the problems with who died, the fact that the Relays are destroyed or damaged (and no one knows how to repair them) so you've eliminated a core travel mechanic.
    Also note that the Citadel is destroyed in Destroy (and Control?), so the control point for the entire relay network is gone. That kinda ****s things up a bit. Remember it's only because of the relays that your able to visit the other non Sol worlds.
    You don't have to use the same cast of characters. In fact I'd prefer it if they didn't. Have the original crew enshrined in legend and start with a new group trying to make their way in a chaotic galaxy.

    As I mentioned above, the Destroy option literally shows a rebuilt Citadel and the narration states: "we can rebuild everything that was destroyed". If they can rebuild the citadel, then they should be able to rebuild some relays. In fact the Synthesis option shows the Reapers doing just that.

    Side Question (that just occurred to me): There are no relays in Andromeda, how are they able to visit different systems there?

    ChrisB wrote:
    Leaving the MW behind really is the only choice. Andromeda has less baggage. The Andromeda setting also wasn't the issue with the game, so I don't see why people think that another game set there is going to be a problem.

    Make Andromeda 2 a couple of generations later (like what Fallout 2 was to Fallout 1). Allow the settlers to have cities, and new societies. You lose nothing, and don't have to deal with all the broken shit in the MW, or any games unhappy with having a new game set in a galaxy completely different from the one they shaped over 3 previous games.

    I really think people need to get over MW as a ME setting. I doubt BioWare want to touch it. Its far too problematic. People's affection for it, is actually part of the problem. You will not satisfy a significant percentage of the fanbase by going back there. You can however correct the stumblings made in MEA. A good game, with so much promise moving forward. Assuming its given a chance to.
    I don't doubt for a minute that Bioware are not going to touch the MW setting. Hell, it looks like they aren't that keen in getting back to Andromeda anytime soon either. I just disagree with your opinion that there is no way of setting a story there. In fact the more I think about setting it in a galaxy struggling to rebuild with different factions scrambling for power, the more I like it.

    Or: Set it even further down the track as an Andromeda led expedition doing a "lets go see how things are going at home" kind of deal (although you'd have to use some kind of easier intergalactic travel trope like wormholes or something to make that viable)

  20. Post
    ChrisB wrote:
    Why are people equating the Andromeda setting as being the issue? Its not. The game was, not where it was set.
    The issues with Andromeda had nothing to do with where events took place.
    I for one, don't think that the setting was the main issue with the game. The main problem(as I see it) with ME:A was that it was too open world.

    Mind you, the MW setting did sort of play on the "Humans are a small faction fighting for traction" feeling, like you are a part of a larger political system trying to make some headway which did feel more realistic. The Andromeda scenario, to me, seems more like a road trip gone wrong. There just wasn't the same gravitas.

  21. Post
    ChrisB wrote:
    Why are people equating the Andromeda setting as being the issue? Its not. The game was, not where it was set.
    The issues with Andromeda had nothing to do with where events took place.
    I think that what they did with the Andromeda setting wasn't satisfactory... surely that's obvious

  22. Post
    What they did with something, is not an indicator of how good that thing is, only how well it was handled.

  23. Post
    A team leap would work. Maybe Ryder's are now in charge of the Nexus? You play as the child that was born in Andromeda.

  24. Post
    ChrisB wrote:
    What they did with something, is not an indicator of how good that thing is, only how well it was handled.
    Uhhhh, I mean, the way they handled it made it not good, lol - you're really making no sense here

    The lore of the races, the planets, the whole set-up they gave us for Andromeda was not good. There is no good basis for a second game on that front, at least not compared to MW.

  25. Post
    Changelog for today's hotfix patch.
    https://www.reddit.com/r/masseffect/...7_patch_notes/