My Review - Disappointing, but good.

10: for the realy nice and good graphics, thanks to the courtesy of frostbite
-1: because frostbite is capabale of so much much much more
-1: when compared to another AAA titles
-1: for reusing the same model for everything (bodytype)
-1: for reusing the same face/head model for everything (except humans)

and so we end up with 6/10 for gfx

and we can go a little bit further
like

-1: for the facial expressions
-1: for animations

or

for the lack of artistic imagination...
-1: planet diversity
-1: race design diversity


Graphics are, what a luck, pretty measurable. One can not just say "oooh thats beautiful, and this textures, finaly hi-res" (remember how we got low res textures because of consoles all the time..... hmmmmm, nice)... we also have to reduce points for "not so good parts".

Even if we account for aesthetic preferences and "poor animations" (more on that later), this game still looks great.

Earlier today I admired the slight sparkle of the sand particles on Eos, and then the powdery texture of the red dust. Then, on Havarl, I admired the wind-whipped rain and the tiny bioluminescent algae/fungi that floated atop the water in a realistic fashion. I'm using a near photo-realistic custom character to explore stunning worlds. The character moves in a very realistic fashion, based upon terrain, velocity and the like. Even the facial animations are solid. Patch 1.06 removed the egregious scenes from the game.

I think some are allowing their distaste for early animations to cloud the present reality. This is a very good-looking game. It features a ton of details that show just how much care was put into it. The reflective marble walls on Aya, the textured walls of Hyperion, the stunning lighting effects (I'm playing with HDR10)... all of this makes the world come to life. Any game to which it could be unfavorably compared, visually, would be a game of a far different type. It looks as good or better than any other massive RPG.

Seriously, try to look at it objectively again, minus the poor impressions from March 21. It's a very good-looking game.

That's the thing with first impressions.  You only get one.

I know logically the patches have gone a long way to fix up the problems (not all but they are getting there) but every time I see a crooked smile or a lazy eye it can't help but bring back the feeling of those initial reactions.  Maybe once folks have put the game down for a long period of time and come back to it their impressions will change, but right now no amount of fixing is really going to change anyone's minds.  Or stop the memes.

Damn skippy. No matter what happens from here and on towards winter, the BioWare failed campaign will be drummed so the other guys can swoop in and take some more disenchanted fans away. I'm hoping whatever comes out for Andromeda is good enough to sate fans tastes for a while until Dylan or DA4 are released. Maybe those titles will bring back the fans to the counters once again.

If you approach DA2 as a DLC to Origins, you'll be mildly surprised. It's the same engine, just upgraded and forgotten. It's got one of the best written characters in the series: Varric. Hawke's narrative gives you voice in Dragon Age for the the first time. His narration is really good. They brought along Anders and Nathaniel from Awakenings (Nathaniel is done to a much smaller extent) to Kirkwall. You get to see the very rigid side of the Qunari culture and the suffocating control of the Templars. You develop friendships with Isabela ("We'll bang, okay?"). Merrill and Fenris. You'll meet Zevran post-Hero status. Sandal. The Hawke family. You're missing out. Just know it's like a big DLC. It's in the same few areas, but the storytelling is pretty good. It has some freakout moments in Chapter 3, but it didn't ruin the game. It just made it a little weird. That's all. Cullen is there, too. A bunch of stuff. And Felicia Day in Mark of the Assassin. There is also the whole Corypheous thing. It's all there. DAI, I can't help you there. You have to start fresh and play all the DLC and then you'll have a different experience. That's what happened to me. Trespasser ended the storyline and left me wanting DA4. 

I agree with OP - I had fun playing MEA but it wasn't the same level of enjoyment I had with ME 1/2/3. My first experience with ME was ME2 - I had really enjoyed Baldur's Gate series and DAO, but never thought I would enjoy a sci-fi shooter. Boy, was I wrong! When I finally gave ME2 a try, I was immediately hooked - just starting out in ME2, I was killed and then resurrected! How's that for an exciting start?

After that recruitment missions for Mordin and Garrus, followed by Jack and Grunt! The missions and the battles were fun, memorable and distinctly different from each other. Follow that up with Horizon - wow! Then we have other recruitment and loyalty missions, followed by Reaper IFF and the Collector Base. I think my first PT was about 40-50 hours and I LOVED every minute of it. After I finished it, I couldn't wait to play it again, but I had to first buy ME1 and play through it first. I loved playing through with different characters (each with its own distinct abilities) and making different choices to see how the game (both ME1 and ME2) changed. Overall, I think I have about 7 completed ME1 PT and total of about 20 different ME2 PT with 15 completed ME2 PT, including 10 with all DLCs.

When ME3 was released, I pre-ordered and loved every minute of it too. Even the ending! I know that this isn't a popular view but I love that my Shepherd made the ultimate sacrifice for the good of the many. Sure, ME3 could have been better, and ME1 and ME2 too. But I truly enjoyed all of the MET, especially ME2 and ME3. I have about 15 completed PT with ME3 - over 1100 hours, including MP.

I don't think I will be playing MEA that many times. I'm not even sure I will be able to complete a 2nd PT - maybe by skipping all of the side Tasks?

What was the difference with MEA compared to MET? I'm not sure why but maybe some of these reasons :

1. The crew - I loved most of the MET crew members (Liara, Garrus, Tali, Wrex, Miranda, Mordin, Jack, Kasumi, Legion, Zaeed) from ME1/2/3. Comparatively, crew members from MEA? Not so much. They were OK, but they just didn't have it. Where's the passion and fire of Miranda and Jack? Where's the awesomeness of Zaeed and Legion? Where's the youth and innocence of Liara and Tali? The MEA crew was competent but bland. All of them had the personalities of Jacob or Kaiden, except maybe Drack.
2. Classes and abilities - I'm probably in the minority but I liked classes. I liked that each class was distinctly different from others. I also liked having more than 3 abilities. Sure, you can use more than 3 by using profiles but it required me to pause and interrupt the game.
3. Open world - I don't know so many people wanted an open world game for ME. Especially (mostly) empty open worlds. I think it's very difficult, if not impossible, for open world games to have strong stories or character development (e.g. Fallout, Skyrim).
4. Side quests - MEA had way too many side quests that were boring and forced me to visit many worlds to find this or that, talk to this person or that person. Boring!
5. Music - from my perspective, the difference between music in MET and MEA was like night and day. I can't recall one tune from MEA - all forgettable. But from MET? Where do I start? The ME theme, Vigil, Normandy Reborn, Suicide Mission, Leaving Earth, An End Once and for All, every world seemed to have its own unique soundtrack. And the feels from the MET music!

In conclusion, I think MEA was a good game. Just good, not great. ME1/2/3 were great - all in the top 10 of my video game favorites. MEA? I don't think it will make the top 10 list. And that is disappointing.

I agree somewhat with that.  While DA2 was disappointing on several fronts, I thoroughly enjoyed it.  Probably as much as DA:O.  To be honest, if I had to rate all three Dragon Age games, they'd probably rate about the same, despite being significantly different games!