Personal Skepticism Regarding Mass Effect Andromeda.

Hello all,

I have a few things that I would like to share regarding my criticism, skepticism and misgivings on the game so far.

1) The lack of fleshed out introduction. From the First 13 Minutes of Mass Effect Andromeda by IGN, all we see is the Arks setting off to Andromeda and that's it - The game starts. There is no other exposition or introduction. Contrast this to the introduction in Fallout 4. In Fallout 4, the player gets to experience Sole Survivor's live prior to the war and the nukes dropping. This is important because it gives the player some exposition and more importantly, some reason to emotionally care about the fact that their spouse dies and their son gets taken. By contrast, Mass Effect Andromeda starts out so abruptly that I am quite frankly, not surprised that the IGN staff who played the first 13 minutes did not care about Ryder's twin. I mean, why should they ? The game does not give them a emotional reason to care about them. To a new player, its just "Hey there, this is your twin sister" and that's it. No flashbacks or introduction about interacting with your sibling positively. The same goes for the father, Alec Ryder. The game just throws you in and you meet this aloof high standards man who the game tells you is your father. Look at how the Sole Survivor gets to somewhat interact with their spouse and Shaun for a short time - At least an emotional exposition is provided to give a reason to care about them.

2) The lack of coherent reason to visit Andromeda. All we are given is that "Its a new beginning, a new adventure, etc". However, this flies in the face of established Mass Effect lore that states that the vast majority of Milky Way galaxy remains unexplored. I for one find Pelessaria's statement that Milky Way exploration is "so yesterday" to make no sense at all. Of course, we the player know why we are going to Andromeda - Because Bioware's Mass Effect 3's endings. I hope that as the story progresses, we get to learn that the Andromeda Initiative is merely a cover to smuggle people out of Milky Way before the Reapers arrive and that the whole "Exploration and adventure" shtick is just a cover. Otherwise, the entire Andromeda Initiative makes little sense.

3) The role of a Pathfinder.So far in the cinematic trailers, Pathfinders are supposed to find a golden world and fight for their species' gaining a homeworld in Andromeda. So why is it that we, the Human Pathfinder, are going around helping Krogans on a barren land ? How does that help us find a golden world ? Or is the Pathfinder's role to help out with settlement building, like the Sole Survivor in Fallout 4 (inb4 Liam telling us that we have a settlement that needs out help) ? Why are we, the Human Pathfinder, releasing Salarian Scientists out of stasis ? Isn't that the Salarian Pathfinder's job ? With just a few weeks before release, we still don't have a clear idea of what our protagonist is supposed to be doing. Contrast this to the Original Trilogy, where we had very clear directives. In Mass Effect 1, the goal is to stop Saren and the Geth. In Mass Effect 2, the goal is to stop the Collectors and deal with their base of operations. In Mass Effect 3, the goal is to stop the Reapers and retake Earth. Or is this another Dragon Age Inquisition where somehow, all the other Arks are in trouble and all the other Pathfinders are dead, leaving us conveniently there to assume command, just like how we conveniently obtained the Mark ?

4) The Nexus space station. Why is it there ? Why can't we just build bigger Arks and place all the people on the Nexus in the Arks ? Isn't that a better and a safer strategy ? I mean putting that many scientists, traders and military personnel in one location that might get destroyed or in the game's case, low on power, is quite absurd, no ? I know that the Nexus is supposed to be Citadel 2.0 but I fail to see why we need the Citadel if we are only going to explore a single cluster.

5) Exploration. From the information we have received, we are going to many diverse and dangerous places. If so, then why do we need to have the Nomad ? Why not have the M-44 Hammerhead instead ? Is it not better to be able to hover over potentially dangerous terrain instead of driving over them ? Furthermore, based on the recent video on exploration, I cannot for the life of me comprehend why a scout rover / buggy is unable to handle heat hazards. I can understand organics not being able to handle high temperatures, especially in suits with no built in ventilation but buggies and rovers built for interstellar exploration are supposed to be tough, not fail at 50 degree celsius. Additionally, how is a forward base able to protect against radiation and heat when a vehicle that is essentially a futuristic moon buggy can't? Space magic ?

6) The animations. There's no need to beat around the bush - The animation is not up to what is expected from a video game these days. Yes, many point to Mass Effect 2's animation quirks but Mass Effect 2 was released quite a while back. Technology, video game pricing and expectations has likewise increased - It is current year, after all. I for one hope that Ryder does not like the Joker forever.

7) The violence towards Milky Way inhabitants. From my understanding, we only brought around 20000 Humans, 20000 Turians, 20000 Salarians and 20000 Asari each with the rest coming in at hundreds or thousands or none. 20,000 is the size of a small town. That means every one is precious - You can't afford to kill others unless there is a guaranteed way to ensure species propagation and species survival. I don't recall seeing children on the Arks or the Nexus. I also do not recall seeing an Interstellar Plan B-style backup plan in place. For those unfamiliar with what I am talking about, the Plan B in the movie Interstellar was to start off a new mankind colony on whichever planet they find suitable for habitation using the frozen embryos they were carrying and forget about Earth. To date, there are no mention of storing frozen embryos on the Arks or the Nexus. There should be non-lethal options to deal with rogue Milky Way people in Andromeda.

8) Pelessaria. From the information we have, she seems to be Sera 2.0 - Despite that fact that Sera is essentially a marmite character. First off, she mentions that "Kallo won't land" instead of "Kallo can't land". If Kallo will not land (not cannot land), all PeeBee has to do is to ask Ryder, who is the Pathfinder and the commanding officer, to order Kallo to find a place to land. Later, PeeBee commits mutiny by wasting an essential item - An escape pod and by abducting the commanding officer and a colleague against their will. Last time I checked, mutiny is an offence that carries severe punishment - Regardless of where you commit it, be it in the military or a private enterprise. Moreover, we see that it is indeed possible to land on the lava planet because Kalinda does so (here is another instance where the Hammerhead or even the Kodiak is superior to the Nomad). Talk about being reckless, stupid and poor decision making. I hope we have the option of not recruiting her or to court-martial her or to even exile her or throw her out of the airlock from the Tempest for her reckless behavior.

9) Multiplayer. We are a few weeks from release and Bioware has decided to cancel the multiplayer Beta test. We have not been shown any proper multiplayer gameplay footage either. As someone who works in Quality Assurance, when you cancel public beta testing at the last minute, it only means one thing - There is something very wrong with what you plan to sell that you have to take such a drastic measure to fix it. Given that Mass Effect 3's Multiplayer was well received and underwent a public beta test, I do not think we should be optimistic about that.

I will most likely hold off until I get a full spoilery review of this game before I even consider buying it. As it stands, there are too many red flags.

Thanks for reading and have a nice day.