@gaminsincepong: I dont know why people are praising this game without playing it. Im 13 hours in and it sucks.
I did not played the game, just explaining what other gamers are saying. It is stupid to assume that people who dislikes the game did not played the game. It´s all I´m saying.
@commander: "scott butterworth shouldn't let his high standards play a role in this review"
On the contrary, if the high standard (and this was an example not to be taken literally) is the norm, he must used it and not change it for any game.
"The technical issues are not gamebreaking."
Maybe not for you. For some people the opposite may happen.
"Skyrim suffered from similar issues yet that hasn't stopped it from getting a 9."
It was the same reviewer? Also, do you think that Andromeda is as good as TES? Or almost as good?
"fact that it plays different shouldn't be a reason a to give this game such a low score."
A ME game has some characteristics that should be considered. Same goes for AC, Uncharted, The Last of Us, Super Mario, Resident Evil... and so on. The logo has a story and a legacy, that used to be respected a lot by the ME comunity. Until ME3 of course.
"Like I said, anyone that know a thing or two about games knows that this review is either a lack of professionalism or just plain incompetence."
Did you thought the same in the ME3 review? Personally i did not played the game, so you may be right about this one. But there are a lot of gamers who truly believe the score is the right one. It is hard for me to believe that someone would give a low score to an EA game if the game is not as bad as it is. Normally we get high scores to shity games. So, even not knowing if the review is perfect, I respect at least the courage to give a low score to a ME game. Their reputation would be a lot better if ME3 had the same, or even a low score.
@Wraith3: "It's an assumption, not what is ordained to happen."
Well... it is and it isn't. At my eyes it isn't, that's why I choose to reject everything the kid says. If I reject his logic I can´t choose none of his choices. Destroy could be synthesis, synthesis could be a deadly virus, etc. If I assume he is lying I would not shoot a tube as a way to activate a weapon.You need to go with the logic (if that is possible) behind the choices. If you trust him you need to truly trust him, if you don´t you can´t choose none of his choices because it would be the most stupid thing you could ever made. Why in the world would he give you the choice to kill them? Especially in a way that at his eyes is not a solution?
"Bioware has always had one canon version (Destruction ending, male Shepard, etc.)..."
Maybe in the beginning, but the canon version they want is synthesis, Supermac view of utopian world.
"There's nothing to prevent a post ME3 game."
I said: "A post ME3 game as a sequel is almost impossible..." Obviously you can do a post ME3. When I said it was impossible I was thinking in the story and the logic behind such story. Andromeda makes no sense also, but it was made so... they can do whatever they want, the fans are not the problem anymore, the ones that are still following bioware have lowered their bar of exigency.
@Wraith3: Red: Future will result in organic extinction.
Blue: Reapers all around... Totalitarian empire.
Green: Massive rape... everyone is braiwashed, no conflict...
A continuation would be impossible. You have three endings who went in three parallel ways. The three are bad, but bad in a different way. To go further would meant to choose one, and live with the consequences.
@Caduceus89: "It seems like the developers tossed or neglected all the things fans wanted to see..."
I really need to understand this... After ME3 what do you people expected? Respect for the fans? A great story? A game with a huge heart? Thats´over...Andromeda is exactly what the new ME fans deserve. More pew pew, lots of shooting, a tasteless story, and no heart. But the new fanbase can be happy, at least they got a new artistic game.
@commander: "the review is bias because anyone that knows a thing or two about gaming knows a 6 out of 10 is horseshit."
So far nothing is indicating a good game so...
"Who are you to say that gameplay is not important"
Next time pay more attention:: "I´am 35, I agree that gameplay is important..."
But when it comes to ME I sincerely doubt that gameplay is what come to mind. Before ME3 obviously.
After ME3 you can only count gameplay so, obviously, story becomes irrelevant.
Andromeda has many problems, at a technical level without any doubt but also at a story level. (which is not a surprise with Supermac as lead writer). I could be a 7? Probably, but maybe the standards of Scott Butterworth are higher than yours. I mean this in no negative prespective.Other reviewer could be more sympathetic with Andromeda. Hell, the guy who made the review of ME3 certainly would give this game a 15 in a scale of 1/10.
@altairdarius: The review of a game needs to have in mind a lot of things. You can't compare directly Watch Dogs and ME. Dark Souls and The last of Us... And so on.
I don´t understand why it is so hard to accept that this game is not as good as many people thought it would be.
blindbsnake's comments