So I started a new playthrough after taking a break

The game is good enough that I sure wish it could be given a 'do over' and more people give it a second chance. I haven't replayed since patch 1.05 release, but I have read about the wonderful changes in patches up to now and am looking forward to replaying.

Thinking of the reaction against Ryder, the tone of the story, etc. Regardless of whether or not we all like the writing, or think it's bad, maybe it's just not the game for this day and age? Maybe 5 years ago, if 1.08 version could have come out then, we would see better scores, more people loving it.

It could be that some of the audience just wasn't interested in this type of game anymore, and want something darker, edgier like Evil Within or Dark Souls. The tastes of modern gamers is way different from 2d side scrolling days of the 1990's, and this continues into the shared experience of online games (apparently) at the expense of story driven rpgs, so Anthem instead of say, KOTOR 3 for example.

Basically, it may be that many of us are outgrowing the genre.

Heh back then one mention of the ending and the whole forum kinda got a evil laugh/grin just waiting to cause WW3.

Well, let's say A LOT people will disagree about this "MEA equal writing level"...
I never really critisise MEA for those animations, tired face and other bugs - in my personal opinion the reason why MEA "fail" is really simple - very average writing - in the terms of main story and companions. That's it.
It's bit odd to read all those topics where people are blaming yt compilations for MEA "lack of success". That't not truth. ME1 got a lot of weak points - really bad combat, very limited exploration - but two things made this game so successful - amazing, interesting and compelling story + really well written companions. MEA fail there where ME1 succeed - and vice versa. It seems that story will always be more important than combat and beautiful views.
You know what one of my mates said after he stop playing MEA just after 2 planets ? That he was bored with the story. Of course open world change the way of storytelling, but he said about MEA being a copy of ME1 - something about running after Archon like after Saren before. Oh well, it's his opinion. In my opinion it wasn't so bad, but after finishing main story i didn't really feel nothing.

I'm actually quite certain of it. This is literally what bothers me the most when discussing ME:A. Bioware and EA practically asked for it by releasing the game like they did. Especially when you compare it to how far it has come after just a few months of extra development time. I believe that if they just delayed the release the backlash would have never been as big as it is now. Like Griffonclaw said in a thread a while ago, I feel pity for all the normal developers. The directors really screwed them over with the way they handled things.

It's the tonal bias presented in those YouTube compilations made by companies and groups to report on gaming news.  Their numerous guffaws, memes, and such.  They were often more about making fun of the game than on reporting on it.  They also implied a lot of "universals" before they ever discovered that they were options... complain ad nauseum about the Sudoku's when one could always just use a decryption key (for example).  I posted a direct example of this tone in two "hilarious bug" videos produced by Gameranx... one for TW3 and one for MEA.  TW3 one is all about how hilarious and fun the bugs are... the ME:A one is all about how much of a mess the game is and how stupid the bugs are... even when many of the bugs shown are essentially the same... heads spinning, sinking into terrain and the like.  The gaming media was quick to make the"bug eyes" stand out even more by "enhancing" the video with googly eyes and such.  The panels were all about ridiculing the guy who had anything positive to say about the game.

As I said, we disagree that ME1's story is so amazing and compelling.  I find it pretty much run of the mill sci-fi.  I believe strongly that the failure to actually use the Citadel as a Mass Relay when it was foreshadowed as such, as major flaw in the plot... using instead a mini-me version that merely brings the PC back to a public area of the Citadel... accessible at any time by Saren.  I also find Saren a very bland villain.  Still, I though ME1 was a good enough game to play ME2... which I tout as having a much more compelling game plot than ME1.  It has it's flaws as well and does not advance the Trilogy story; but the SM is, IMO, pure genius for a game.  The story I find most compelling in the Trilogy is ME3.  I enjoy then endings and enjoy expanding on them using my own interpretations of the images presented in them.

ME:A is a good game. It's fun. There are parts that remind me of the old ISO games of yesteryear. Its problem is that it's not a great game and it wasn't finished.

Absolutely...I was waiting for that moment of "so, THAT'S why you're on the team".  Ever since my first PT, I never use him except to get the movie night quest, his loyalty mission, and his soccer game on Predromos which sucks because he's got some decent companion skills in battle.  They really needed that moment with him where his supposed crisis management skills came into play. 

That was all I did with Liam, too. My Ryder yelled at him after the LM. And also refused to play the soccer game. 

The internet prefers dark and gritty, but that doesn't mean it is the preferred style. And the backlash is growing against that style as the overall entertainment market is flooded with such stories.

Anecdotally, I have talked to no one outside of the net that wanted the game to be darker. I've actually run into very little dissapointment overall. Most have enjoyed the game... and then facepalmed when I've shown them the "discussions" on the game. That is when you realise how bad the internet culture has gotten.

You should try BOTW - much more lighthearted, but not cringeworthy like Andromeda. I think you'd like it.

Cute. You know I played it and detested it.