Hard for me to say.
I feel like one of the few people that actually enjoyed Andromeda, but I also judge games independently from their previous installments (to an extent).
Bioware has always been a studio that changes their formula in proceeding games, often for better (or, at worse, just different) and Andromeda was no different.
The question you need to ask yourself is this: would you have preferred a stagnant Mass Effect series? One that did not evolve?
The answer for me is "no". I replay old games fairly often and, having replayed the original Mass Effect less than a year ago, I can tell you it has not aged well. So if you're asking me to choose between the Bioware of yesteryear and being given stale and outdated gameplay, or a Bioware that tries new things but comes up short, I will take the latter.
I already know I won't like a new Mass Effect that plays identical to the first one, so I will take a gamble on the new stuff.
Studios come and go as it is, while I have fond memories of Bioware, something else will take its place. The talent will go to other studios or leave the industry.
@uninspiredcup said:
@NathanDrakeSwag said:
Bioware ain't the same studio they used to be. I don't believe the current team is capable of making a great game anymore.
...
It's either go down the same retreaded road on what is, a very, very basic and in reality, fairly common generic sci-fi adventure premise, or flip the table and subvert expectations - which is a very difficult thing to do well, easily alienating audiences.
Yeah, it's a very damned if you do, damned if you don't, sort of deal.
There were some other innate problems with development described in other posts (namely Bioware's "DLC team" making Andromeda while their main team made Anthem, poor leadership, EA calling the shots, and so on), but ultimately they just should have called it "Andromeda", redesigned the aliens, and not even include it in Mass Effect lore.
Log in to comment