Originally Posted by
Volband
My one problem with all the focus on the bugs and glitches (which are warranted, yes) is that it makes it so, that people might think that the bland, utter shit voice acting and writing is not an issue. It is.
I always say this: Prison Break was a shit TV show, but I ate it up all the way, and I couldn't be happier that it is getting a mini-series right now. There is nothing inherently wrong with liking something that's not good, but Andromeda is having a hard time because of the legacy and expectations of the franchise. If a no name company would relese this game as "Space Adventures" then no would care, critics would give a 6-7 and say that if these guys keep working at it, then in a few years they might contest the big developer companies. But we are talking about Bioware here.
The biggest leeway of this game is actually its constant criticism. It's understandable that people get annoyed, when a game they think is "OK" constantly being trashed, and it can trigger them to swing to the opposite.
I don't know who said that ME 1 did not have good characters or story and it only expanded later, but lol. Saren was pretty much one of the best villains in the ME trilogy, and you had sooooo many conversation options. It focused on the RPG aspect a lot, and even though Shepard had a cartoonish personality, it just goddamn worked. When Shepard told someone off, you listened to him.
76 on metacritic, 4.5 on user score. This game was done by the company, who made the Shadow Broker DLC to ME2 and Omega+Citadel to ME3. Three DLC-s which greatly expanded on their main game, showing that the developers had a ton of new, great ideas, which could potentially mark the way of the development of future ME games.
We got this instead.