Wow...where to start? 1. You are greatly downplaying how buggy this game was at launch. No seriously, it wasn't just the sheer number of bugs, but the types of bugs. 2. Which brings me to the real issue: it's not that the game had bugs, but rather that the bugs were so glaringly obvious and indicated that no significant play-testing had been done. 3. Despite this, the game isn't nearly as bad as people make it seem. 4. But still, condemnation is warranted; both at Bioware upper management (who made the decisions that led to actual people not making large parts of the game), and EA, who apparently are fine with publishing whatever so long as it prints money. I'm getting side tracked. The main point is that the game (and Bioware) belong in the toilet. Not because the game itself was bad, but because of the piss poor decisions made - wherein they prioritized business so highly over quality. Good luck to the poor bastards that work there and can't control the shit.

Well, I'm just a fat guy but. . . If I had to point a finger at what soured people to it. . . I would start with the whole Manveer debacle whether or not he had a big impact on the game he was tied to it. Then there was the fact that if you wanted to create a Caucasian character in the character creator you had to wait for a patch which kind of fed back into the whole race thing with that Manveer dude. So basically, it came out the gates with some pretty serious negative attention, and then it was buggy on top of that, any positive things in the game were overshadowed by all the negative stuff. Or that's how I think it went down anyways Edited for grammar

Sooo... What you’re saying is that Vetra is best romance in ME:A? Am I reading that correctly?

Had a few hour free trial through EA access, didnt even use all that. Just couldn't get past the god awful combat and I wasn't drawn in by the characters or story.

Nah. After all the fun adventures with Garrus, Tali, Wrex, and Liara in the original ME games... ME:A just didn't really feel like a memorable or satisfying successor. The rampant glitches and bugs didn't help. Plus, the combat somehow managed to feel more rigid than ME:2. I know Andromeda was not going to top the original trilogy, but we could've gotten something so much more awesome. It's painfully obvious that ME:A was marred by development woes, and that's ALWAYS wroth criticism. It's not a bad game, but it's not a great game, and Mass Effect is deserving of so much more. The flak is justified.

Mass Effect Andromeda was an embarrassment for a AAA title released (beyond just the horrendous graphic issues) and deserved the poor sales it got.

During its first 3 weeks after release it was by far the most glitchy waste of time in the history of gaming. The amount of times the game crashed on PS4 during MP games was astounding to say the least.

As a true fan of Mass Effect I can clearly say that Andromeda was not only the worst of the franchise, it was one of the worst games ever put out period. It was a complete and total cash grab. An exploitation of the fans of the series because they knew before release that the game was inferior and not ready for public consumption. The writing was clique' and terrible, the characters were lifeless and dull, the story made no sense, the graphics were laughable for a current triple A title, it was filled with glitches, and the rp mechanics were made overly complicated for no reason. And I could go on but I won't. Glad you didn't feel ripped off, but just because two people enjoy that game for whatever reason, doesn't mean that everyone else was not

I really enjoyed MEA I have 729 hours of play time in it. On PC the game was beautiful, the first vault was stunning. I rarely experienced any of the glitches and didn't mind the change in pace, but was hoping the story would become deeper as the series progressed. I didn't love any of the characters, but I didn't love them the first time I play Mass Effect 1 either. It wasn't what I was expecting it to be but it didn't deserve the flak that immature wannabe youtube stars gave it. I'd give it an 8/10 rating and would buy more ME DLCs and games if they continue the series.

This is just my opinion but. ME:A was a disappointment for me. The game deserves a rent and nothing more. And I take no pleasure in saying that because I'm sure that was the end of that series. Which makes me sad, I really enjoyed the first 3, other then the ending of 3. Here's my reasons. [spoiler] nothing you do matters at all. This is the horrible revelation you face at the end of 3. None of your decisions in ME:A effect the end at all. At least in ME: 1 you made choices that effected the life of your crew. The bomb level was a fatal choice that made me extremely cautious about my choices after that. I remember getting to the decision with Rex. I didn't have enough points allocated correctly to save him. I was so mad I restarted my play through. my point is your conversations and decisions had consequences. In ME: A there are no ultimate decisions that make any lasting consequences. Regardless if your a good pathfinder or a bad one the game follows the exact same course. Your team might be mad at you for a certain decision but it only last for 2 sentences of dialogue. And yes I know there were some big decisions in ME:A but non of them effect your team substantially or your play through. Due a play through and piss everyone off. Nothing happens. Don't save the other path finders when given the option. Don't explore all the tech sites. Don't do anything advancing your crews story or relationships......... nothing happens. Try this, don't develop the planets at all, see what happens........ the same thing that happens if you 100% then. Fun. It also didn't help that the developers admitted before launch that non of your team mates would die, so there went that suspense.[/spoiler] ME:A had more then just a few bugs. The facial animation was so freaking bad I laughed during parts that were supposed to be serious. Also was it just me or did almost every character that you could possibly make look horrendous? I've seen better character creation models on free to play games. The class system you praised is actually the worst part of the game. See in previous ME, you had to make a firm choice and stick with it. What this forced you to do is master your class and depend on your team mates to fill in the holes. I had to have a bionic with me at all times because I ran a soldier. I remember in one spot my best bionic was not available, I suffered greatly. I depended on my team and I learned to break shields with bionics and drill a bullet through there head with a soldier class. But with the new system your team mates don't matter at all. It didn't matter at all who I took with me. I could clear a room with a shot gun way before they ever got one shot off. Even on hard, I told my team to just stay put and I cleared the enemies myself. If I needed a bionic I just switched. If I needed something else I just switched. I could do it better and faster then my team mates anyway. The system made my team mates irrelevant. I was a freaking power house, the ultimate soldier. Even on hard difficulty the game is very easy. Now, all that to say I didn't hate the game. But I was disappointed. Perhaps I set my expectations to high. But if I did, so did a lot of other people.

Mass Effect Andromeda was a good game, but inferior when compared to the previous ME games. Based on what is being said by video game critics: EA has different plans as to how they want players to invest in their games. Single player campaign isn't in their long-term strategy and they seem to be aiming multiplayer experience and capitalize on micro transactions. EA pulling the plug on Visceral games is an example and revamping the Star Wars game they were working on is something to worry about.

It was boring as -blam!-

I liked the game but it was a HUGE disappointment and a failure of a mass effect game. 5 years to make that? Giving arguably their #1 franchise that made them popular to Montreal, a studio green to the teeth. 1.you said the "hate" came before its release and you're absolutely correct but there's a justified reason. Track record and what was shown pre launch. You can't have the animation issues the game showcased months before launch, furthermore they let us play a 10 hour trial a week before launch. That's asking for people to criticize you before it's even officially out and people took advantage of it, I did too. That trial gave me warning signs before I got to try the full thing. 2. The game was a technical mess yea, but the prime culprit? Not even close. You ask how other games can get away with this yes? Such as Bethesda? Reason being is a buggy game can get by if the base game itself is good enough to cover that. Andromedas base was trash to start off with so it wasn't going to get a pass. You can't patch streamlining the game, cringeworthy dialogue the characters and the story. 3. The issue with the profile system from an actual RPG stand point is to much freedom. It makes classes completely irrelevant which I'm vs. furthermore the profile system was half assed to begin with. 3 abilities at a time? Quite the downgrade from previous games, especially ME1. Furthermore when you switched profiles you had a cool down once using so as a consequence it becomes to much of a hassle for people to actually use. I simply stick to 3 abilities and that's was it. Guns and 3 abilities. Speaking of abilities though, they were really poor in terms of damage that you rely on your guns far more than you needed to in previous iterations. 4. The content was tedious on the open world lifeless environments. "Go place 6 beacons", "kill x amount of crap", "collect x amount if stuff", "destroy kett camp after Jett camp", "go find ^insert random npc name* to rescue. These kind of quests are far to common and not much "content" unless you're a completionist. But here's the thing, as a completionist myself I also want side quests to have depth too, I don't want to fetch crap or travel to the other side of the map for a 10 second dialogue interaction. Furthermore the main story itself takes 30-40 hours at a normal pace. So the extra 50 hours is just extended playtime that lacks any real depth to them. You'll get a few good side missions here and there but I don't want that, I want ALL of it to be good. There in lies the issues with an open world esq game as most can't make that happen. Inquisition, TW3, Skyrim, oblivion, horizon zero dawn, they're all victims of this. Some do it better, but there has yet to be the perfect open world game for me. 5. The story is my biggest issue with the game. It's playing "safe" by rehashing what's already been done......in its own franchise. The tempest is the Normandy handicapped with no guns, the nomad is the mako handicapped with no guns, peebee is liars, drack is wrex, the kett exalt people, equivalent to the reapers indoctrination. I can go on and on. Furthermore it's so light in tone that it kills the appeal for me. How do you go from the OT where it was more serious in tone and definitely dark in 3 to this. Furthermore the jokes in this game are terrible. "Scan him back!" When Shepard would say to fire the main cannons. The protagonists are just 🤢. The characters are not to different either lol "I think I pissed him off, maybe it's cause I shot him in the face" how do you take that seriously?! 6. The multiplayer was bland and just a rehash of ME3. You aren't getting by with just adding new weapons and enemies, you need mechanics to change and or blast added to expand the experience and Andromedas multiplayer doesn't do that. It's why the game is dead (as in so few play it). Furthermore they completely changed how to unlock characters. Who wants to let RNG unlock the other 20 characters? I won't comment on the microTs as they don't bother me, but then again it helps that I don't primarily play the multiplayer in mass effect or dragon age. --------------------------------------------------

Lol where does this belief that some games get a free pass come from? Taking Skyrim as an example people still complain about the bugs, I read something last month what was essentially telling Bethesda to improve their engine before they even consider doing ES6. With that said there is a point where players just give up and accept a game in the state it's in. As for MEA it had bugs but it was the drama with the character faces that caused a lot of the problems.

Its biggest problem was the sheer number of day one glitches. You had NPC’s heads literally rolling, appearing out of nowhere (sometimes trapping you), and many others that on occasion resulted in the game breaking. These weren’t even from players doing anything abnormal in the game. They were just there. Sure many of them were patched fairly quickly but the point is they shouldn’t have been there on day one. The game should have been delayed so we could have gotten a good Mass Effect game rather than an okay at best third person shooter with mass effect elements, and that is discounting all of the horrible facial expressions (that are white funny) and other glitches. “A delayed game is eventually good; a bad game is forever.” The latter applies in this situation, which is a sad thing for me to say as a huge fan of the mass effect series. [spoiler]If you name that quote you either A: Read game informer or B: Follow all things Nintendo. Miyamoto makes a very valid point there.[/spoiler]