Impressions on the game so far

For me it's even a turnoff. On the same lines as an unlimited money or god mod. Where's the fun in that? Where's the replayability if you get everything served on a silver platter first time round? No incentive to try a different class, such as I did in ME2 and 3.

Why don't you answer the question of mine?  Would you give my review of TW3 at 7/10 more credibility than someone who completed the game (and gave that game a 10/10)?  There are a lot of 10/10's for that game... si I sincerely doubt it.

Conversely, I've seen very, very, very few 10/10 scores by people here who like the game, so you've just shot your credibility with me by pulling an exaggeration out of your arse for effect..  Most give it around an 8/10 when they like the game... a few have given it a 9.  I myself (based on a partial playthrough) give it an 8.5 (and was told I was "insane" for doing so.  My reasons for liking the game are that I personally find the story quite deep.  It contains a lot of environmental impact issues that are timely in our reality today and I find Bioware's take on those issues quite intriguing.  I also have found the characters to be quite deep.   I've found, by playing larger sections of the game through multiple times and making different choices, that the NPCs do  change how they respond to Ryder depending on whether or not the "like" what he's doing/saying.  I find the settings both alien and interesting.  I find the variety of flora to be vast and the variety of fauna to be sufficient to be interesting.  I find the CC to be quite workable... that is, on my first try I create a very attractive male Ryder (something that I was never able to do with the CC in the OT).  I'm finding the combat system both fun and reasonably challenging.  The game is running quite smoothly on my system.  The eyes have been corrected and, since I waited to start the game prior to that patch), I've never noticed it to be an issue now.  NPCs movements could be improved (which is one reason why it's not getting a higher score from me).  Some of the quests that people have indicated are "bugged" for them, I have been able to complete and they do not appear to be bugged for me.

This review is based on a partial playthrough (about 50%) of the game... but, as I said, I have actually played large sections of that 50% through multiple times... looking specifically for the degree of change in the NPCs responses.  It's clearly not a 10/10 "ME:A roolz" review... but it does disagree with a lot of the, IMO, exaggerated claims to awfulness that the OP has stated.

I did answer your question. If you can give a good enough reason to not finish the game then great. It's right there at the end of my post.

Did I exaggerate for effect? Yes. Does anybody care? No. Did everybody else understand my meaning? Yes (at least I hope so, but here's an explanation anyway- a well reasoned review, even of an unfinished/abandoned playthrough, has more worth than a fanboy ejaculation that doesn't actually say anything, regardless of the game).

I gave "good enough" reasons for not finishing the TW3 game... equal to what the OP gave for not finishing ME:A.  I also gave "good enough" reasons for liking ME:A and for anticipating that I will finish it. 

Does anyone care about your exaggerating for effect?... I do, for one.  Exaggerations are what make mountains out of molehills.  You've basically admitted to overstating your position and that alone undermines a "well-reasoned" review.  It's an exaggerated review designed to illicit an emotion-based response out of it's readers... to convince them to agree with you.  It makes you a "fanboy" as well... a fan of overstated, dramatic and unwarranted criticism.  I'll certainly consider that when I weight a "validity" of your review.  I'm inclined to put more faith in reviews that don't exaggerate things for effect.

That, combined with the fact that you haven't finished the game, does "count for something."  It increases the odds that your review is inaccurate in several ways and, as a result, I put less faith in it than in the review of someone who has completed the game and who doesn't tend to exaggerate things for effect.

you have no idea how big space is. You think the reapers are coming to the galexy full encircling it? That is impossible . With how big the galexy is it's easy for ships to leave it with out the reapers notice. That is not a plot hole.

Yeah, I felt that way with Skyrim, which is the only other game I played where you could play a Jack of all Trades. I don't like that approach. Apart from games like Fallout, which doesn't have magic or tech powers or however you want to call them. When Skyrim first came out I made the exact same point on the nexus boards. They even removed the requirements for joining a guild. You didn't even need to have cast a single spell to move up in the mage's guild.

Guess what? I also don't care if you like it or not. I created this topic to voice my opinion, not to convince others that this game sucks, anyone with a brain can already see it. I'm not trying to diminish your enjoyment because I couldn't give two shits about it, I created a topic to voice my opinion, period. 

And you're just being an idiot. All game has glitches, the problem is ME:A has much more and more frequent. And wtf do you mean "gameplay rules". The Witcher 3 is amazing in every aspect. Haven't played HZD yet, hope I'll do it soon, seems much more interesting than this shit. 

I didn't say you were an idiot, I said you were being an idiot, that's a big difference. And you really were, you just ranted to try to feel superior, and you LIED about my thread's objective, saying it's to "kill people's enjoyment of the game", which is just stupid. I could have created a thread where I say "OMG THIS GAME SUCKS WORTHLESS PIECE OF SHIT", but I didn't, I created a topic with constructive criticism and you came to rant to try to feel superior just because you like the game. You should be the one to have more respect before accusing people like that. 

...People don't like that you can't customize Geralt's face. That's it's main flaw. It'd also be nice to be able to plough a hot nilfgarian.

The underlying point was that it sounded like you were against the way RPGs are going as opposed to MEA specifically.

I can sort of get what you're saying about the general loss of classes in RPGs but tbh I'd rather a move to allowing the player to use the skills they wish over locking them into rigid classes - not only does this encourage experimentation (Which you appeared to be saying was the basic reasoning behind wanting classes back, correct me if I'm wrong) but it also takes the pressure off the devs to design classes that all allow lots of flexibility with few powers. Obviously I'd prefer a return to a class structure where the class broadly dictated the type of your abilities but still left the choice of powers up to you, but if I had to take one of the above, I'd favour the choice that doesn't layer restrictions on the player just for the lolz. ME2 went way too far down the restriction route and created a situation where your class effectively dictated your difficulty level, which as far as I'm concerned is the mark of a failed class system.

I don't know what it is but I've played so many of these RPG types now that I self-police my ability set. My current favourite MEA build is Adept Profile with Throw/Pull/Charge and with a ton of guns, asari sword and Hyperguardian armour - it's the Vanguard I wished I could have played for virtually the whole series.

Which does go back to my point... incomplete playthroughs increase the odds of you being in error.  From my partial playthrough of TW3 without DLC, I went into the barber in Oxenfurt and had exactly 3 choices for beard and haircut styles for which I had to pay 20 crowns to see on Geralt.  You say there are more, so my review is in error.  Your review of ME:A cannot carry the same weight as one from a person who has played the complete game because, as you even say so yourself, you could be wrong about the parts of the game you haven't yet played.  The more you haven't played, the higher the odds that what you have played is not completely representative of the entire game.

Bottom line though is my subjective opinion of TW3 is still negative and yours of ME:A is still negative... I don't trust your review of ME:A because my experience with the game has been much better and I have more hours into it than you.  I'm finding the story quite intriguing and the character multi-dimensional.

Seriously, the environments in the TW3 are very repetitive... you've seen one boreal forest in that game and you've seen them all.  All the caves of Elven Ruins look very similar to me.  One battlefield looks like all the rest.  Oxenfurt and Novigrad don't even look all that different from each other.  Many of the little houses in them have the same layouts... need I go on.  Skellige looks a little more rugged... but to say that represents such great diversity in TW3 while claiming that ME:A's Eos, Voeld, and Havarl look anything alike seems to me to be pretty bizarre.

Let's compare fauna (wildlife):  TW3:  wolf, hare, bear, and deer. and we'll add in the domestic animals:  pig, sheep, goat, cow, chicken, goose, raven, and bees (total = 12).
ME:A - Manta, Kaerkyn, Shemrys, Challyrion, Eiroch, Taurg, Drall, Galorn, Ryikor, Wild Adhi, and Remnant Creeper (total = 12); Wiki also lists Ancient Eiroch (total 13).

Seems pretty even to me.