Between my own doubts after the trial (it feels low-budget, very unpolished) and the first reviews saying that even the writing is not up to previous ME standard (which I noticed in the trial too, dialogue has been... not great), I'm seriously considering waiting for a discount before getting this.
Which is weird because I really WANT to love Andromeda, y'know?
Peebee - "OK, we made it in, let's split up, you go check that area out and I'll go over here"
Ryder - "Uh plainly you don't know how horror plots work, when is splitting up ever a good idea?"
Peebee - "Yeah well I work better alone, laters!"
Liam - "...10 credits says she ends up walking into a big pit of spikes"
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
Also I lost my first 2 70% strike team missions, GTFO with that!
Yeah, my krogan strike team now has the "cowardly" negative trait thanks to that, which is pretty hilarious considering they're a: krogan and b: have the "elite" positive trait. Luckily it's only -10 to "scary" missions.
The best part of the Ars review is the whole bit about his Ryder's face. Bioware character creation strikes again! Worst part is the bit at the end where he says, "if you loved ME, just buy it! if you didn't, watch some youtube videos!" Uh, why didn't you just provide that as the opening to your seemingly pointless review then?
Nosf on
+2
Options
Dr. ChaosPost nuclear nuisanceRegistered Userregular
I'm seeing alot of 7/10 and 8/10 which would mean the consensus seems to be the game is good to great and yet I still see people on forums rushing to declare it a garbage dumpster fire.
I'm seeing alot of 7/10 and 8/10 which would mean the consensus seems to be the game is good to great and yet I still see people on forums rushing to declare it a garbage dumpster fire.
Am I missing something?
It isn't perfect, therefore it's awful.
Also ME3's ending was awful, which pre-emptively makes everything Mass Effect awful.
+14
Options
ObiFettUse the ForceAs You WishRegistered Userregular
I'm seeing alot of 7/10 and 8/10 which would mean the consensus seems to be the game is good to great and yet I still see people on forums rushing to declare it a garbage dumpster fire.
Am I missing something?
The Internet Eye of Sauron set its gaze on ME:A and the hordes are set to hate everything about it until the gaze is shifted.
I'm seeing alot of 7/10 and 8/10 which would mean the consensus seems to be the game is good to great and yet I still see people on forums rushing to declare it a garbage dumpster fire.
Am I missing something?
Video game reviews operate on a pretty inflated scoring system, typically. 7/10 is "average" at best.
Coming less than a month after Breath of the Wild, Horizon and Nier is also making Andromeda's reviews look considerably worse in comparison.
I'm seeing alot of 7/10 and 8/10 which would mean the consensus seems to be the game is good to great and yet I still see people on forums rushing to declare it a garbage dumpster fire.
Am I missing something?
7/10 is generally considered a bad score in video games because reviewers are dumb. 6/10 is "playable but total garbage" and anything under 6 is "basically doesn't work".
+1
Options
Dr. ChaosPost nuclear nuisanceRegistered Userregular
edited March 2017
I just yearn for the day 7/10 doesn't mean secretly 0/10.
Part of it is expectations, people have had 5 years to get over the ME3 ending debacle and the fans were more than ready for a new ME game. If something only comes around every 5 years, you really don't want it to be a mediocre offering where the heroes make faces like 2 year olds fed their first lemon. Arguably, you want the studio to look at the problems of past games and put something out that's even better learning from past criticism. Given the budget of a big game like this and the price tag you want to see forward movement from a technical standpoint, and creatively as well.
Wait, the Ryders are 22? That annoys me more than facial animations.
At this rate the next protagonist will be a teenager
PSN: Ubeltanzer Blizzard: Ubel#1258
+1
Options
GnomeTankWhat the what?Portland, OregonRegistered Userregular
edited March 2017
This is precisely why I avoid most games media and even most forums about a game around launch. It's very easy to let the collective taint your experience of something both in the negative and the positive.
I find review scores meaningless in most cases. The number assigned always seems entirely arbitrary. My favourite reviews come from ACG on YouTube, he seems level headed and is the most objective reviewer I've seen. He also leaves scores out of it.
He gave this game a rent or get on sale, and since I imagine his reviews are aimed at the general consumer, I think that's a pretty fair review. From what I've seen of the game myself and from the preview in general, as a Mass Effect fan boy nothing has scared me enough to kill my excitement.
I restarted last night with the default FRyder face, and the animations seem a lot better to me than my customized version. Still not a strength but doesn't take me out of the game anymore.
Also I lost my first 2 70% strike team missions, GTFO with that!
Things like that make me glad my most recent game was Super Robot Wars, because its made me used to failing 70% chances. For the past few weeks I basically assumed anything below 85% will normally go wrong for me, and have mostly been right. Then I get happily surprised when I succeed.
Wait, the Ryders are 22? That annoys me more than facial animations.
To be fair, they're 22 and in the military. They probably enrolled right out of high school and have 3 to 4 years of active military service under their belts. It seems like a fairly solid age to me for how they are projecting the characters.
AspectVoid on
PSN|AspectVoid
0
Options
Iron WeaselDillon!You son of a bitch!Registered Userregular
I restarted last night with the default FRyder face, and the animations seem a lot better to me than my customized version. Still not a strength but doesn't take me out of the game anymore.
Also I lost my first 2 70% strike team missions, GTFO with that!
Things like that make me glad my most recent game was Super Robot Wars, because its made me used to failing 70% chances. For the past few weeks I basically assumed anything below 85% will normally go wrong for me, and have mostly been right. Then I get happily surprised when I succeed.
It's like no one has ever played X-COM.
Currently Playing:
The Division, Warframe (XB1)
GT: Tanith 6227
What's the consensus on the multiplayer? I watched a couple hours of some guy on Twitch playing the single player and nothing really bugged me in terms of the animation. But I also heard some isolated stories of bad network connections making the multi unplayable.
Seeing as how I'm still ankle-deep in Breath of the Wild, I figured I'd wait a couple days after release to see how the servers pan out and if it turns into a DA:I situation.
ACG had a line in his review that made me chuckle.
"Let's talk about romance... What would a Mass Effect game be if it didn't have it? And like rubbing two sticks together to make a fire, you're going to be trotting through Mass Effect, groin-first, with your compass always pointing to ass. You're consistently looking to path-pound your way into the digital DNA cross-streams of an assortment of other monstrosities throughout the game, because the graphics remain the same."
That said, as a married man whose wife doesn't play games, I'm SOOO looking forward to another completely awkward scenario where my wife comes in at the wrong moment.
"Um... Are they on a unicorn ?"
Decoy on
+15
Options
3cl1ps3I will build a labyrinth to house the cheeseRegistered Userregular
edited March 2017
The reviews are about what I expected: good game, has flaws, if you liked DA:I or the other ME games you'll almost assuredly like this one.
For what it's worth, if a reviewer gives a game 10/10 I tend to assume they're either caught up on the hype train or looking at the game through extremely rose colored glasses. I can think of precisely two games ever that I have played that came anywhere near deserving a perfect score (Shadow of the Colossus and The Last of Us). Obviously that's all subjective, but when a game gets thirty seven thousand 10/10s it makes me instantly distrustful of the vast majority of those scores, because in all likelihood that game definitely isn't perfect. Certainly the number of AAA games that get perfect scores is entirely too high for what a perfect score is meant to represent, in theory.
I'm frankly sick to death of numerical scores for games. Everyone uses the numbers to mean different things, people read way too much into what a score does or does not mean, and at the end of the day it's worthless. BotW got almost entirely 10/10s, but I can tell just by watching videos that the stamina and weapon durability wouldn't be enjoyable mechanics for me. ME:A is averaging somewhere around a 7.5 or 8/10, but I've played about 6 hours and am absolutely infatuated with the game. So in neither case were those numerical scores useful for me as a consumer!
If the entire review industry could move to a "should you play this game if you like [type of game, similar games] yes or no" model that'd be greeeeeeeeeeat.
3cl1ps3 on
+10
Options
Dr. ChaosPost nuclear nuisanceRegistered Userregular
Gonna need to a lot of space sex after all these reviews so thats good to hear.
ACG had a line in his review that made me chuckle.
"Let's talk about romance... What would a Mass Effect game be if it didn't have it? And like rubbing two sticks together to make a fire, you're going to be trotting through Mass Effect, groin-first, with your compass always pointing to ass. You're consistently looking to path-pound your way into the digital DNA cross-streams of an assortment of other monstrosities throughout the game, because the graphics remain the same."
That said, as a married man whose wife doesn't play games, I'm SOOO looking forward to another completely awkward scenario where my wife comes in at the wrong moment.
"Um... Are they on a unicorn ?"
My wife walked in during a romance scene with Cassandra in DA:I. Her only comment was "why are her nipples so shiny?"
The MP is fun. If you enjoyed ME3 MP, it's more or less the same thing. I've only had one terribad lag experience in 8 or so hours and that was easily fixed by leaving the game.
My only real issues are that the directional sound is very bad and makes it difficult to tell where anything is, and the maps themselves feel tiny compared to ME3 due to having more vertical space and less horizontal.
I loved my time in the 10 hour preview. Janky animations aside, it's a Mass Effect game. Should we hold them to a higher standard given some of their contemporaries at this point? Yes we should. Does it ruin the game? I personally don't think so.
Throw down a patch or two, clean up the netcode, and it'll go from solid to great. I got sucked in real hard once I got to Eos and had a bit more freedom to explore and investigate this new galaxy.
I restarted last night with the default FRyder face, and the animations seem a lot better to me than my customized version. Still not a strength but doesn't take me out of the game anymore.
Also I lost my first 2 70% strike team missions, GTFO with that!
Things like that make me glad my most recent game was Super Robot Wars, because its made me used to failing 70% chances. For the past few weeks I basically assumed anything below 85% will normally go wrong for me, and have mostly been right. Then I get happily surprised when I succeed.
It's like no one has ever played X-COM.
Fire Emblem 4, known for having a somewhat harsh RNG on top of a tough game to begin with, made me accept that you need to find a way to make it so your strategies can't rely on something with a chance to fail because you're losing units if you don't.
I've lost a fight to the death where the enemy had to hit twice to kill me with a two percent chance. I forget what my unit's numbers were, I had to wail on them for a long time for pitiful damage (lol thieves) but...fuck.
The romances in the Bioware games feel awkward because eventually, you wind up with two plastic dolls with their underwear on smacking into each other like a 6 year playing with Barbie and Ken. The lead up in some cases is ok, Liara was fun and by far the only memorable one to me. The rest seem forgettable, other than Miranda's ass. The only notable part of Garrus' romance was provided by Mordin who commented on the dangers of interspecies sexual contact.
To be honest, they haven't (personally) topped the ones with Viconia / Aerie etc back in BG/BG2. Nothing really compares to Shani puking off the side of the rowboat in Witcher 3 though. Way to go Shani, ruining this magical moment on a moon dappled lake.
Nosf on
0
Options
DemonStaceyTTODewback's DaughterIn love with the TaySwayRegistered Userregular
I'm seeing alot of 7/10 and 8/10 which would mean the consensus seems to be the game is good to great and yet I still see people on forums rushing to declare it a garbage dumpster fire.
Am I missing something?
7/10 is generally considered a bad score in video games because reviewers are dumb. 6/10 is "playable but total garbage" and anything under 6 is "basically doesn't work".
7/10 is definitely not considered bad even on the inflated game scale. It's as others said average to good but not great. Which for a big game leads to people being disappointed or declaring anything outside of amazing as bad but that's just not how those words work. Amplified by the Bioware hate and internet hate machine effect.
I mean you can look at plenty of games with 7's and see that it's not considered bad.
What's the consensus on the multiplayer? I watched a couple hours of some guy on Twitch playing the single player and nothing really bugged me in terms of the animation. But I also heard some isolated stories of bad network connections making the multi unplayable.
Seeing as how I'm still ankle-deep in Breath of the Wild, I figured I'd wait a couple days after release to see how the servers pan out and if it turns into a DA:I situation.
It's very good
Sometimes there's terrible lag, but that's on the host, so just leave the game and find another
The reviews are about what I expected: good game, has flaws, if you liked DA:I or the other ME games you'll almost assuredly like this one.
For what it's worth, if a reviewer gives a game 10/10 I tend to assume they're either caught up on the hype train or looking at the game through extremely rose colored glasses. I can think of precisely two games ever that I have played that came anywhere near deserving a perfect score (Shadow of the Colossus and The Last of Us). Obviously that's all subjective, but when a game gets thirty seven thousand 10/10s it makes me instantly distrustful of the vast majority of those scores, because in all likelihood that game definitely isn't perfect. Certainly the number of AAA games that get perfect scores is entirely too high for what a perfect score is meant to represent, in theory.
I'm frankly sick to death of numerical scores for games. Everyone uses the numbers to mean different things, people read way too much into what a score does or does not mean, and at the end of the day it's worthless. BotW got almost entirely 10/10s, but I can tell just by watching videos that the stamina and weapon durability wouldn't be enjoyable mechanics for me. ME:A is averaging somewhere around a 7.5 or 8/10, but I've played about 6 hours and am absolutely infatuated with the game. So in neither case were those numerical scores useful for me as a consumer!
If the entire review industry could move to a "should you play this game if you like [type of game, similar games] yes or no" model that'd be greeeeeeeeeeat.
10/10 isn't perfect. If a gradation scale has 11 relevant points, then it's in the best of 11 tiers. If you save a tier for exactly two games you're probably not doing it right.
The reviews are about what I expected: good game, has flaws, if you liked DA:I or the other ME games you'll almost assuredly like this one.
For what it's worth, if a reviewer gives a game 10/10 I tend to assume they're either caught up on the hype train or looking at the game through extremely rose colored glasses. I can think of precisely two games ever that I have played that came anywhere near deserving a perfect score (Shadow of the Colossus and The Last of Us). Obviously that's all subjective, but when a game gets thirty seven thousand 10/10s it makes me instantly distrustful of the vast majority of those scores, because in all likelihood that game definitely isn't perfect. Certainly the number of AAA games that get perfect scores is entirely too high for what a perfect score is meant to represent, in theory.
I'm frankly sick to death of numerical scores for games. Everyone uses the numbers to mean different things, people read way too much into what a score does or does not mean, and at the end of the day it's worthless. BotW got almost entirely 10/10s, but I can tell just by watching videos that the stamina and weapon durability wouldn't be enjoyable mechanics for me. ME:A is averaging somewhere around a 7.5 or 8/10, but I've played about 6 hours and am absolutely infatuated with the game. So in neither case were those numerical scores useful for me as a consumer!
If the entire review industry could move to a "should you play this game if you like [type of game, similar games] yes or no" model that'd be greeeeeeeeeeat.
10/10 isn't perfect. If a gradation scale has 11 relevant points, then it's in the best of 11 tiers. If you save a tier for exactly two games you're probably not doing it right.
But it has become that way though. Like the majority of reviews fall between 7 and 9, and any 10 is something I immediately suspect.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
I joke but I genuinely like the idea of playing somebody who doesn't have their shit together and is kind of fucking up a fair bit and making inappropriate jokes and occasionally owning themselves
I've done hyper competent too many times. give me college aged idiot out of their depth who learns and pulls through with nothing more than the help of the most advanced ai, the backing of an entire galaxy and a team of experts
The reviews are about what I expected: good game, has flaws, if you liked DA:I or the other ME games you'll almost assuredly like this one.
For what it's worth, if a reviewer gives a game 10/10 I tend to assume they're either caught up on the hype train or looking at the game through extremely rose colored glasses. I can think of precisely two games ever that I have played that came anywhere near deserving a perfect score (Shadow of the Colossus and The Last of Us). Obviously that's all subjective, but when a game gets thirty seven thousand 10/10s it makes me instantly distrustful of the vast majority of those scores, because in all likelihood that game definitely isn't perfect. Certainly the number of AAA games that get perfect scores is entirely too high for what a perfect score is meant to represent, in theory.
I'm frankly sick to death of numerical scores for games. Everyone uses the numbers to mean different things, people read way too much into what a score does or does not mean, and at the end of the day it's worthless. BotW got almost entirely 10/10s, but I can tell just by watching videos that the stamina and weapon durability wouldn't be enjoyable mechanics for me. ME:A is averaging somewhere around a 7.5 or 8/10, but I've played about 6 hours and am absolutely infatuated with the game. So in neither case were those numerical scores useful for me as a consumer!
If the entire review industry could move to a "should you play this game if you like [type of game, similar games] yes or no" model that'd be greeeeeeeeeeat.
10/10 isn't perfect. If a gradation scale has 11 relevant points, then it's in the best of 11 tiers. If you save a tier for exactly two games you're probably not doing it right.
But it has become that way though. Like the majority of reviews fall between 7 and 9, and any 10 is something I immediately suspect.
I agree that the low tiers are not used in practice, but that only means the 10 bucket should be bigger. I personally haven't found 10s to be more often misaligned with my own opinions more often than the others, but YMMV. The important point is that a "perfect score" is not indicative of a perfect game.
The reviews are about what I expected: good game, has flaws, if you liked DA:I or the other ME games you'll almost assuredly like this one.
For what it's worth, if a reviewer gives a game 10/10 I tend to assume they're either caught up on the hype train or looking at the game through extremely rose colored glasses. I can think of precisely two games ever that I have played that came anywhere near deserving a perfect score (Shadow of the Colossus and The Last of Us). Obviously that's all subjective, but when a game gets thirty seven thousand 10/10s it makes me instantly distrustful of the vast majority of those scores, because in all likelihood that game definitely isn't perfect. Certainly the number of AAA games that get perfect scores is entirely too high for what a perfect score is meant to represent, in theory.
I'm frankly sick to death of numerical scores for games. Everyone uses the numbers to mean different things, people read way too much into what a score does or does not mean, and at the end of the day it's worthless. BotW got almost entirely 10/10s, but I can tell just by watching videos that the stamina and weapon durability wouldn't be enjoyable mechanics for me. ME:A is averaging somewhere around a 7.5 or 8/10, but I've played about 6 hours and am absolutely infatuated with the game. So in neither case were those numerical scores useful for me as a consumer!
If the entire review industry could move to a "should you play this game if you like [type of game, similar games] yes or no" model that'd be greeeeeeeeeeat.
a 10/10 does not mean a perfect game and never has.
Posts
Which is weird because I really WANT to love Andromeda, y'know?
Ryder - "Uh plainly you don't know how horror plots work, when is splitting up ever a good idea?"
Peebee - "Yeah well I work better alone, laters!"
Liam - "...10 credits says she ends up walking into a big pit of spikes"
Yeah, my krogan strike team now has the "cowardly" negative trait thanks to that, which is pretty hilarious considering they're a: krogan and b: have the "elite" positive trait. Luckily it's only -10 to "scary" missions.
Am I missing something?
It isn't perfect, therefore it's awful.
Also ME3's ending was awful, which pre-emptively makes everything Mass Effect awful.
The Internet Eye of Sauron set its gaze on ME:A and the hordes are set to hate everything about it until the gaze is shifted.
Video game reviews operate on a pretty inflated scoring system, typically. 7/10 is "average" at best.
Coming less than a month after Breath of the Wild, Horizon and Nier is also making Andromeda's reviews look considerably worse in comparison.
7/10 is generally considered a bad score in video games because reviewers are dumb. 6/10 is "playable but total garbage" and anything under 6 is "basically doesn't work".
fyi
At this rate the next protagonist will be a teenager
*pushes up glasses, inhales loudly through mouth*
The Division, Warframe (XB1)
GT: Tanith 6227
He gave this game a rent or get on sale, and since I imagine his reviews are aimed at the general consumer, I think that's a pretty fair review. From what I've seen of the game myself and from the preview in general, as a Mass Effect fan boy nothing has scared me enough to kill my excitement.
Origin: theRealElMucho
Things like that make me glad my most recent game was Super Robot Wars, because its made me used to failing 70% chances. For the past few weeks I basically assumed anything below 85% will normally go wrong for me, and have mostly been right. Then I get happily surprised when I succeed.
To be fair, they're 22 and in the military. They probably enrolled right out of high school and have 3 to 4 years of active military service under their belts. It seems like a fairly solid age to me for how they are projecting the characters.
The Division, Warframe (XB1)
GT: Tanith 6227
Do i drop big bills getting everything for a game i know I'll like, but maybe not love?
Andromeda was an unknown quantity, so ended up getting an omniblade to display.
I'm happy with my choice.
Registered just for the Mass Effect threads | Steam: click ^^^ | Origin: curlyhairedboy
...I may have a slight addiction problem going on here.
Seeing as how I'm still ankle-deep in Breath of the Wild, I figured I'd wait a couple days after release to see how the servers pan out and if it turns into a DA:I situation.
That said, as a married man whose wife doesn't play games, I'm SOOO looking forward to another completely awkward scenario where my wife comes in at the wrong moment.
"Um... Are they on a unicorn ?"
For what it's worth, if a reviewer gives a game 10/10 I tend to assume they're either caught up on the hype train or looking at the game through extremely rose colored glasses. I can think of precisely two games ever that I have played that came anywhere near deserving a perfect score (Shadow of the Colossus and The Last of Us). Obviously that's all subjective, but when a game gets thirty seven thousand 10/10s it makes me instantly distrustful of the vast majority of those scores, because in all likelihood that game definitely isn't perfect. Certainly the number of AAA games that get perfect scores is entirely too high for what a perfect score is meant to represent, in theory.
I'm frankly sick to death of numerical scores for games. Everyone uses the numbers to mean different things, people read way too much into what a score does or does not mean, and at the end of the day it's worthless. BotW got almost entirely 10/10s, but I can tell just by watching videos that the stamina and weapon durability wouldn't be enjoyable mechanics for me. ME:A is averaging somewhere around a 7.5 or 8/10, but I've played about 6 hours and am absolutely infatuated with the game. So in neither case were those numerical scores useful for me as a consumer!
If the entire review industry could move to a "should you play this game if you like [type of game, similar games] yes or no" model that'd be greeeeeeeeeeat.
My wife walked in during a romance scene with Cassandra in DA:I. Her only comment was "why are her nipples so shiny?"
I didn't have a good answer.
My only real issues are that the directional sound is very bad and makes it difficult to tell where anything is, and the maps themselves feel tiny compared to ME3 due to having more vertical space and less horizontal.
Throw down a patch or two, clean up the netcode, and it'll go from solid to great. I got sucked in real hard once I got to Eos and had a bit more freedom to explore and investigate this new galaxy.
Fire Emblem 4, known for having a somewhat harsh RNG on top of a tough game to begin with, made me accept that you need to find a way to make it so your strategies can't rely on something with a chance to fail because you're losing units if you don't.
I've lost a fight to the death where the enemy had to hit twice to kill me with a two percent chance. I forget what my unit's numbers were, I had to wail on them for a long time for pitiful damage (lol thieves) but...fuck.
To be honest, they haven't (personally) topped the ones with Viconia / Aerie etc back in BG/BG2. Nothing really compares to Shani puking off the side of the rowboat in Witcher 3 though. Way to go Shani, ruining this magical moment on a moon dappled lake.
7/10 is definitely not considered bad even on the inflated game scale. It's as others said average to good but not great. Which for a big game leads to people being disappointed or declaring anything outside of amazing as bad but that's just not how those words work. Amplified by the Bioware hate and internet hate machine effect.
I mean you can look at plenty of games with 7's and see that it's not considered bad.
Cause I want to run around with an Asari huntress katana like a Warframe dude.
It's very good
Sometimes there's terrible lag, but that's on the host, so just leave the game and find another
10/10 isn't perfect. If a gradation scale has 11 relevant points, then it's in the best of 11 tiers. If you save a tier for exactly two games you're probably not doing it right.
Probably some punk moisture farmer kid.
But it has become that way though. Like the majority of reviews fall between 7 and 9, and any 10 is something I immediately suspect.
pleasepaypreacher.net
I've done hyper competent too many times. give me college aged idiot out of their depth who learns and pulls through with nothing more than the help of the most advanced ai, the backing of an entire galaxy and a team of experts
I agree that the low tiers are not used in practice, but that only means the 10 bucket should be bigger. I personally haven't found 10s to be more often misaligned with my own opinions more often than the others, but YMMV. The important point is that a "perfect score" is not indicative of a perfect game.
a 10/10 does not mean a perfect game and never has.