IF Mass Effect truly is dead, will/should EA/Bioware even announce this?

Low 80's average, lotta 90's, some game of the years. If that gets a face palm, then Andromeda gets a Cleveland steamer.

How could a secret benefactor ever explain the stupidity of over 80.000 (100.000 if you count the quairan ark) people to sign up for this crap?
How could they explain the nonsensical nature of the magical ODSY drive, that somehow was built in broad daylight but was never mentioned by anyone else somehow?

Sorry friend, the saying "DLC will make everything great again" reminds me too much of the ME3 ending debates. Maybe the benefactor knows more, however, I doubt BioWare does (or cares).

Solid argument. Well thought out. I can see why you like Andromeda.

Well this is the wrong thread but let's just say that when humanity has interstellar travel for just about 20 years, made first contact with aliens just about 15 ago, has a dozen barely colonized garden worlds at their doorstep and when less than 1% of the Milky Way is explored at all, "following a dream" should mean anything else but certainly not going into cryosleep for over 600 years to fly to another galaxy. It's like asking the first explorers of the Americas to fly to Mars in 1520.
And that's just one point.

But as I said, it's kinda off topic here.

Just because the authors made a few NPCs say it doesn't mean it makes sense.

I posted this in another thread but I will mention it again here:

First off, DA2 didnt have low 70s review score average.

Second, the DA franchise at the time only consisted of 1 game prior to DA2 releasing. At the time MEA released, the ME franchise consisted of 3 games. This means that the popularity and install base of the ME brand was WAY larger than that of the DA brand when DA2 released. So if MEA failed to live up to the hype critically, especially when standing on the shoulders of 3 past successful games, then this could give EA enough alarm to not go forward.

Third, ME3 in many ways left a sour taste in many people's mouth. Overall it was a grear game that got good review scores and sold a lot, but the ending really hurt the brand. MEA was supposed to turn the page and start fresh. It was supposed to be in 2017 what ME1 was in 2007. It was supposed to make people forget about the ME3 ending and show that the ME brand still is a powerhouse but it only reinforced the idea that ME3 was the last good ME game and MEA was a lousy attempt at a cash grab by EA using the Bioware B-team.

And fourth, the DA2 development while rushed, didnt have the same amount of in-studio drama as the MEA development had during it's 5 years.

So yeah, fans hates DA2 and it still got SP DLC, but the core circumstances and expectations surrounding both games are drastically different.

Nah... not an argument. I just don't care about facts when I play a game unless it's based on a real life situation. For me games are an escape from reality. The more real they are the less I feel that escape.

The problem is, for the trilogy... most people had the same taste. "Hmmm, this tastes good! I'll have another!"

For Andromeda, a huge portion of fans were like "Ewww, this tastes reaaaaallll bad"

EA kinda doesn't want that to be the case and would prefer the majority to think that it tastes good.

Anthem is being written by the same guy who writes massive exposition dumps instead of characters and a generic game world that looks so bland and samey that it makes Destiny look like Overwatch and it's in genre that EA has constantly failed in if Titanfall, Titanfall 2, and Star Wars: Battlefront are any indicators of their success.

Maybe EA will get it right with Anthem but I doubt it.

Tali, Liara, Ash, Kaiden, and Wrex (until you get his loyalty quest) are just talking exposition dumps with about there respective races, classes, and politics. Garrus is only one when you talk to him he actually tells you about his life and he doesn't go on and on about turian government, society, religion, history, and etc.

Or that we never learn much about Saren IN GAME and that he less screen time and his motivations make less sense than the Archon does in ME:A (the Archon wants to make all life in the cluster into kett and those that don't he will destroy) and is the end little more than glorified henchman that the only thing that makes him remarkable is that Shepard can talk into blowing his brains out and that is the ONLY memorable thing about him, and without the fact that Shepard can talk him into committing suicide he's just a standard 2D villain henchman with vague reasoning and does very little to drive the plot along. 

Most of his personality and backstory comes from the first novel and Mass Effect: Evolution comic mini-series and IMHO Drew Karpyshen's best work for Mass Effect was his novels.