Author Topic: What went wrong with Mass Effect Andromeda?  (Read 42 times)

Offline Starfox

  • Master Keeper
  • Totally Awesome Member - Won A Cookie!
  • *****
  • Posts: 2360
  • Did anybody see my lenses?
    • The Foxhole
What went wrong with Mass Effect Andromeda?
« on: June 14, 2017, 12:05:32 PM »
Kotaku as a nice and long item analyzing the problems that plagued the development of the latest installment in the Mass Effect franchise leading to the general disappointment. I have yet to play the game (and maybe never will) so I will leave you the pleasure to read the thing and I won't comment further.

Offline Doc_Brown

  • Forums Keeper
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 434
  • Weaver of Tales
Re: What went wrong with Mass Effect Andromeda?
« Reply #1 on: June 14, 2017, 07:43:06 PM »
While admittedly speaking with the benefit of hindsight, I feel like Mass Effect's overall story arc isn't nearly as strong as it could be.  The first game established the Reapers as cosmic horrors, but BioWare then consistently downplayed their threat with each subsequent entry.  None of the races bother building up their military strength until the third game--when the Reapers have already arrived and it should therefore be too damn late--and the second game was largely spent squabbling with their minions The Collectors, despite knowing full well they were on their way.   

I feel like the whole Effective Military Strength aspect of the third game should have been the focus of the second, and then the third game should have been about fighting a heroic but ultimately losing battle against the Reapers.  The objective could then become about ensuring the Andromeda Initiative is successfully launched, which in turn would have given the events of Mass Effect: Andromeda poignancy and weight.  It's hard to care what happens in ME:A when you realize the Initiative is pointless since everything turned out okay back home.
Roads?  Where we're going we don't need roads.

Offline Starfox

  • Master Keeper
  • Totally Awesome Member - Won A Cookie!
  • *****
  • Posts: 2360
  • Did anybody see my lenses?
    • The Foxhole
Re: What went wrong with Mass Effect Andromeda?
« Reply #2 on: June 16, 2017, 06:22:07 AM »
Quote
and then the third game should have been about fighting a heroic but ultimately losing battle against the Reapers.

That's talking in hindsight knowing that there is now a Mass Effect Andromeda. In truth they couldn't go that way back then. A fourth game was nothing certain and without a fourth game to compensate losing the battle in the third fans would have gone ballistic even more than with the botched ending we had -- loosing Shepard is one thing but loosing the war? Plus there was five years between ME3 and Andromeda... too much of a wait to pull that kind of trick. It's an interesting option to explore if you intend to release the next game 3 or 6 months later... which had absolutely no chance to happen.

For me the real error in the first trilogy was when they decided to switch the threat focus from the Reapers (which indeed were perfect cosmic horrors, as villains go you can't do much better) to the starchild in ME3. That really sucked because they just tuned down the scale of horror from unbearable to... mundane and cosmically stupid.

But the justification of Andromeda can be there. It depends on how you finished ME3. Because Bioware added a fourth option to finish the game with the patch they issued to try to correct the botched ending. Dismiss the starchild as the idiocy it is and continue to fight. In that case Shepard goes on fighting, looses, everybody dies and the game ends on the message that Liara prepared to help the future cycle (that's the option I took the last time I played ME3 until the end -- and the option I will always take if I ever want to replay ME3 until the end because the original three colors endings are just that stupid). In that case it gives Andromeda the dimension you suggest.

 

everything