Early review: Mass Effect: Andromeda is Dragon Age: Inquisition in space

A week of playtime is nowhere near enough to fully review sprawling galactic epic.

Read the whole story

 

[KGFish]

freakout87[/url]":24ijkjnm]I've noticed one near-universal complaint from people who are disappointed or otherwise negative about this game: they all mention some kind of behind the scenes drama or issue with EA. I'm not disputing the accuracy of any of those comments, but I also find that it makes it difficult for me to take them as valid critiques of the actual game, because it's hard to shake the impression that these people have some weird axe to grind that doesn't have much to do with gameplay.

From the sounds of things the actual game is quite good, but flawed. Like pretty much every Mass Effect ever. I'm looking forward to firing it up myself next weekend.

What I see from most reviews is that the writing is dreadful. Really, really awful. The quotes people use back it up. The reviews that don't say it's bad don't give any contrasting evidence that there's any good writing on offer either.

I honestly don't get the impression that the game is good but flawed, I get the impression that it's fundamentally bad, with very little hope for redemption. I guess most people at least like the combat (squad AI notwithstanding)?

The annoyances with the UI, squad AI, facial animation etc. all have at least some hope of being patched out, but if the writing's genuinely as bad as the snippets I've seen, then I don't see any point buying it. That's never getting fixed.

It's just so disappointing - they have this entirely new galaxy to play with, and we get what, 2 new humans-in-makeup alien species and a bunch of floating rocks? It just seems the whole thing has been created by people with almost no imagination. I loved the first trilogy, but given what I've read, I can't even see myself picking this up as a 75% off sale item.

This is... troubling.

Just for context, while I played all ME games on the hardest setting (save ME:2, where I ran into an unsolvable fight because engineers don't have the fire power necessary to overcome terrible teammate AI), the story and writing is what hooked me (we'll ignore the absolutely atrocious ending in ME:3 and its setup through the game). Wrex and Garrus, Jeff "Joker" Moreau, Liara, Mordin, even Legion.... the characters and their stories are absolutely among the best in any video game. They MADE Mass Effect.

But it seems that those parts are not present. Reading the review, I get that there are small gems, but I disagree when they are compared to "small gems" in ME. Shooting bottles with Garrus wasn't a small gem discovered on the side. It was the ME world in a nutshell: two bad-asses sharing a quiet moment before the storm. It was an absolutely necessary moment to set the tone. As far as I can tell, it's also really hard to not encounter.

Can anyone chime in around their experience of how the world is built? So far, it seems that its small side moments are just that - small side moments - that don't do anything to build the relationship between the characters and the story.

 

[KGFish]

But it seems that those parts are not present. Reading the review, I get that there are small gems, but I disagree when they are compared to "small gems" in ME. Shooting bottles with Garrus wasn't a small gem discovered on the side. It was the ME world in a nutshell: two bad-asses sharing a quiet moment before the storm. It was an absolutely necessary moment to set the tone. As far as I can tell, it's also really hard to not encounter.

Can anyone chime in around their experience of how the world is built? So far, it seems that its small side moments are just that - small side moments - that don't do anything to build the relationship between the characters and the story.

Remember that you shooting bottles with Garrus is kind of a capstone on a multi-year, multi-game relationship. Garrus in ME1 wasn't instantly your space brother from another mother, even though he became that over the course of three whole games.

The companions in ME:A all have their moments, but I don't think it's fair to expect a single game's structure to include a set of relationships that are as deep and meaningful as the ones you end up with in ME3 after all those years of relationship-building.

Look, for example, at what's probably my single favorite moment in the entire series: at the end of ME3, Liara will share her memories with Shepard. If you've romanced her in ME3, she kisses you, and that's all fine, but if you're not in a romance with her, the scene plays out with much more poignance: she steps to your side and lays her head on your shoulder, in silence, without needing to say anything.

My headcanon Shep romances Liara in ME1 and then Tali in 2-3, so the way this scene played out for me the first time was really powerful: two former lovers and dear friends, with a bond that goes far beyond needing to speak, taking a moment to find comfort in each other just by being there. It was profound, moving, and got me close to tears.

But it did that because while the stuff on screen was playing out, I was thinking back to 2008 and all the play-throughs of the series I'd done since then, all the time spent with Shep and Liara, and how much they'd both come to mean to me. It worked because of the huge long tail of emotion we'd build up.

It's hella hard to hit those same notes in a single game—in fact, without note-perfect writing, trying to portray that level of attachment in a single game (the context of which would necessarily include meeting the characters, too) is super-easy to screw up. Then, instead of profound and moving, it just feels cheesy, maudlin, overwrought, and stupid.

Fortunately, they didn't try. This is a new adventure, and with that comes the recognition that ME3-level feels are going to be difficult to establish.

Fair point on that the bottle-shooting scene (and a lot of other awesome ME:3 scenes) are capstone scenes that required a lot of set up.

But let's take another example (and forgive me for the lack of other details, as it's now been over 10 years that I last played ME:1). Remember the scene on the beach where you have a choice (if done "right") between fighting Wrex and convincing him? Wrex was a companion before, and a brother afterward. That also did take some time to set up, but it took only a single game.

My point is that emotionally important scenes don't require 100+ hours of investment. They require careful writing that provide release for emotional tension that was built up with very specific interactions. To provide another example: there are plenty of theater plays that portray powerful emotions - and they don't take 100 hours to set up. They just require carefully built interactions.

What I'm trying to figure out is whether ME:A has the careful writing of the overall ME series, or whether the ending of ME:3 is a sign of the writing in ME:A. So far... well, I can't quite tell, but things seem off.

 

[KGFish]

Also glad the game doesn't force you to play as a girl

And the problem with that is..?

I thought you'd never ask! I don't like playing as a girl in games that are made for males, which to me are action games with lots of killing. There's a reason you don't see Barbies with ak47's or G.I. Joe's with a hairbrush. Boys and girls play differently, something a lot of video game developers have forgotten

:facepalm: I dread for you the day a girl kicks your ass at... anything, really.

 

[KGFish]

Despite my love of scifi games, I somehow didn't get on with the first Mass Effect and abandoned it after maybe 10hrs of play. Somehow its play mechanics just never 'clicked' with me. Never tried the sequels.

However, looking at some gameplay videos for ME:A I think I may take a chance on this.

Gameplay changed dramatically from ME1 to ME2 (and had modest refinements from ME2 to ME3). Action was far more fluid and natural-feeling, the incredibly-onerous inventory of ME1 was scrapped entirely, and the weapon-overheating system was swapped out for a more traditional ammo setup.

I find it interesting that ME:A seems to include a return to ME1's weapon overheat system (for at least one class of weapons) and ME1's inventory system.

Oh thank god. At least one bit of good news. I loved the overheating system. Especially since it meant an actual trade-off for using super-awesome ammo. I ended up using a sniper rifle where every shot put it into overheat mode, but was also instant kill on almost anything... if I hit. If I didn't, it meant I was a sitting duck for several seconds.

It made sniping feel much closer to actual sniping engagements: there was lots of scouting for a good vantage point, careful target selection, and very long-range shooting. Followed by hurried swaps to the assault rifle when the sniping went south, or when baddies arrived unexpectedly.

 

[KGFish]

Oh thank god. At least one bit of good news. I loved the overheating system.

There is a rare crafting mod (the "Legacy Heat Sink" item) that lets you craft guns of any kind with the ME1 style overheat mechanism, which I also very much prefer.

On the other hand, though—and I didn't mention this in the review—ammo doesn't seem to be a problem. There are crates (from which you can synthesize ammo, and by "synthesize" I mean "walk next to them and magically get ammo") literally everywhere in areas where you're supposed to be shooting. I don't know if they're as widely distributed in higher difficulty levels, but ammo has been beyond plentiful on stupid-baby difficulty where I'm playing.

Probably not. I remember in ME3 ammo was rare enough that I had to carefully switch between weapons so that I could maximize the ammo pick up at the end of fights. It also makes me think that the switch back to ammo magazines was to more easily tune fights. In ME1, there was no way you could lose a fight if you had a well-protected position. On the flip-side, in ME3 it meant that the various powers became super-critical as they were the only thing that was infinite supply.

 

[KGFish]

Toy makers know this, which is why they don't sell Barbies with mini guns

They should. Kids of both sexes would love them. Probably quite a few adults as well. In fact all you're really saying here is that lots of toy makers are assholes, and that you identify with them.

. No what I am saying is that despite the opinions of the very vocal minorities, most normal people acknowledge that boys and girls are different. Understanding this principle is what has kept toy companies in business for many decades. I'm glad bioware realizes this as well. Also who gave you the power to decide what others should like?

'vocal minorities'.
'normal people'.

You are a sexist idiot.

And, for the record, boys and girls aren't different except in fairly trivial physical ways.

Some parents might be inclined to brainwash their kids that boys and girls are not different, but it doesn't change the fact that they are. Give any random boy and girl the exact same toy and watch how differently they play.

Some girls play differently than some boys with the same toys. That's a far cry from all girls play differently.

Here, since it looks like you're new to the world and still believe everything your elders told you (which, as far as I can tell, are your parents, your pastor, and your bible study leaders), I'm gonna let you in on a secret.

Promise not to tell anyone, ok? It's a secret, after all.

Here it is.

Equality is about giving everyone the same opportunity.

Like I said, don't tell anyone, ok?

And once you've thought about it for a little while, here's the long version:

Gender equality means that girls get to choose whether they play with trucks or with dolls, that girls get to choose whether they stay at home and raise children or go out and make money, that girls get to choose whether they want to be Sleeping Beauty, harem girl, or Mad Max and that boys have the exact same choices.

That means that society has to give them the opportunity to follow those dreams - to boys as well as girls.

At that point, you'll find out that all of that gender == sex stuff doesn't really matter. All that matters is that people are free to be. Including you.

Toodles! And remember, don't tell anyone - it's a secret.

 

[KGFish]

There's a time and a place for debating sex and gender roles in entertainment, and this thread ain't it. If you want to continue the discussion, the ars Soap Box is exactly what you folks are looking for.

Wait wait wait - an article about sex and gender in a videogame is not the place to debate sex and gender roles in entertainment?

Well I'll be.

Edit: And now I feel like a jack-ass for smugly thinking I was posting this in a different article thread. Keeping derp around as reminder of derpiness.

 

[KGFish]

There's a time and a place for debating sex and gender roles in entertainment, and this thread ain't it. If you want to continue the discussion, the ars Soap Box is exactly what you folks are looking for.

Wait wait wait - an article about sex and gender in a videogame is not the place to debate sex and gender roles in entertainment?

Well I'll be.

Um...

This article is about the game Mass Effect: Andromeda and only a certain commenter brought up the gender bullshit.

Umm. Apologies, I got my Mass Effect threads mixed up. Will stop talking about gender issues in this one.

 

[KGFish]

Just my point of view after about 90 minutes, and having just landed on the planet an put about 15 minutes into running around, and only killing two aliens. (So much for the Prime Directive.) So take my first impression with a grain of salt. And realize I really was looking forward to this game.

It looks great. But as usual, they screw up the controls like every other game so up is down and down is up. And the labels as so small I mixed it up and the left became right and right became left. Doh!

Worst of all, you have to go all the way out and restart the game to get to the settings. That's just nuts that you can't get to your controls at all unless you quit the game to the launch screen.

Having put about six months of my life into Destiny, to the exclusion of all other games, my view is going to be skewed.

I have to say I think Bungie's game not only looks better, if not nearly as crisp, but the movement, and fighting mechanics in Destiny are way smoother. The mechanics of Destiny, with all their problems such as collisions with objects, probably the biggest asset of the game would that be the mechanics.

Would that be because of the fundamental differences between the two game types? Is one of Bungie's strengths with all those years of these kinds of games with more emphasis on fighting and movement and less on RPG that makes me think that? I don't mind the difference. But I guess having my gaming always along the times of UT, Quake, Doom, Call of Duty, and ETQW–and I hate to admit it, Duke Nukem–that my bias makes me see things this way?

Anyway, it does look like a great game, and I'll probably play it for quite some time, in between getting things done in Destiny, work, family duties, etc. This is the first game with this play style for me, and I guess I'll have to adjust my expectations.

My biggest gripe so far is I spent a good 40 minutes customizing my character and his sister, and it didn't stick. So I'm paying with the stock character. Or did I miss some choice getting started?

RE: Destiny vs ME shooting mechanics, I'd say that that's actually pretty high praise if ME can get close to it. In my book, Destiny has by far the best mechanics of any shooter. The guns are all meaningfully different, the powers fun with very different playstyles, the gear well built to support various playstyles, and all topped off with almost perfect enemy distributions. That ME doesn't reach that lofty is not a bad thing. Furthermore, I'd say that the root of the combat mechanics are so different that it's fascinating that they converge to some extent.

In the first ME, you could almost see the stat checks happening in the background, and the pause-to-select action was a requirement to get through fights. Over the next two games, the FPS mechanics were put into the foreground, but at the core, it was still Baldur's Gate: position your troops, select action, let effects play out, repeat. Contrast that with Destiny, which was clearly a shooter first.

That said, I don't consider either approach bad. It just makes for different game styles.