Why Mass Effect Andromeda is Well written.

If Bioware tear into MEA and give it a major overhaul, that's the junction where the game has earned a 2nd look and some reappraisal. That isn't going to happen obviously, so what we've got is pretty much what we've got, and a 2nd look isn't going to change a lot. You have one chance to make a first impression, and they were already heavy under the microscope after the cloud the OT finished under. That's why I believed going into it, this was going to be an excellent and well crafted game, I didn't think they could be so stupid to risk another negative storm after the last time, boy was I sure proven wrong!

The 18 months put into it and what the output was, I suppose an achievement on some sort of level, but I wouldn't brag too much about it. They made a bad job out of the time and resources they were given. We've read about the reasons why that was, and while that may certainly explain the reasons for the state of the game, that cannot be used to excuse it, else we lower the standards for ourselves as gamers. Likewise for EA who would think they can push out more games in the state like MEA was in. Remember, they thought we were that dumb and blind, they release the game thinking we would just lap it up. That isn't acceptable, and that is one of the big reasons why I think folk give the thumbs down to the game as much as the state of the game itself. A loud and clear message needs to be sent to both EA and Bioware, this kind of thing cannot stand again. Hopefully that message has been received loud and clear, but then I thought that was the case post all the ME3 ending fallout.

As for the story *sigh* I didn't think I'd need to go into this, but in some good faith I'll do it this one time. Let's start straight from the opening text, this is likely sufficient for those coming into the ME universe for the first time in this game. Those of us that played the OT, it’s baffling to the point of major head scratching. How did they develop the tech to travel that far, that quickly, and so soon after the battle of the Citadel? Factoring as well, it took 20 years for the council to just re-consider allowing one human spectre candidate to join up their ranks, so why this sudden and free amount of major tech sharing? It’s apparently no strings attached, and so significant it could render use of the relays redundant. That needs major explanation to hold up, or the narrative collapses under the weight of it.

Then there are all the other sub-questions that leak from it without those explanations. How do they discharge their drives in the great void? If they are able to do so, is it done while “on the go”? Then if it is, how is that achieved? How do they take care of food/water? How did they even get sight of these planets? Why not explore the 99% of the Milky Way that’s yet to be seen? I’m aware some comics, books and promotion material has come out to try and hand-wave some of these away (while still avoiding where this tech came from), but if it’s not in the game it cannot be factored in by the gamer. We paid 60 bucks, its Bioware’s job to put together the narrative that incorporates all the key and required plot/story points, not ours to go out spend more money/time, or play/watch other mediums. As part of narrative cohesion, questions are an expected by-product of any story. There are natural and harmless questions, then there are the wrong and harmful type of questions, of which if there are too many, they blur and eventually block sight of most of your story. What you don't want is your audience/gamer to be asking the wrong type of questions.

Now our hero’s entry to the bridge, we’re told that the ship is “drifting” – question, why didn’t the ship come to a full stop when coming out of FTL? Or at least when they spotted the space cloud? We apparently had sight of this planet 600 years ago which didn’t show this cloud, so stopping to check it out first might have been a good idea Captain Dunsail. Were the scanners working? Then we hear the flight controls aren’t responding, was this before or after contact with the cloud? If they were responding before, why didn’t you reverse engines? This all smacks of it either being contrived or just sloppy, and I’ll side more to the latter so far. Next we’re told main power is out, we’ve lost telemetry and that power reserves won’t “last”, well okay how long is that then? We talking minutes, hours, days? Important information to know not only for the characters, but for the gamer to set some scale to our task, and build some tension to the opening!

Skipping ahead a bit, SAM tells us the cloud is dampening sensors, so the planet can’t be scanned to find out what the deal is with it. So we’ve regained telemetry now? Then Alec goes into the spiel about the power going out and staying out. Err, we’ve been generating power on the FTL drive for over 600 years, why isn’t getting power back up and going to FTL for a while put forward as a solution? We’re not told how long reverses will last, so I guess that means they’ll last a while, right? Then Alec says it’s up to him to find an alternative if this planet is a bust, how will that be done Alec if ark is adrift? Then Captain Dunsail says we need teams to repair the sensors ASAP, that we’re “blind out here” but SAM just said moments ago the energy field was dampening our sensors - huh? So what is it, are the sensors out or not?

See how it all this comes across in such an unadulterated mess, and that it makes people ask the wrong type of questions? That is one of the biggest faults of Andromeda, on top of the quest mechanics and interfaces that are almost identical to Dragon Age Inquisition, no advancement in nearly 3 years of the release to that game, that’s another beef I know folk have, you still spend ages going from point a to point b, to drop something off, then point c to speak to someone and then start a new task somewhere else. It gives the illusion the game is big with a lot to do, but the reality is far from the case. Measure how much time you burn just on travel form one quest giver to another, it adds up! Maybe they didn’t have time to come up with a lot of new stuff, indeed as I’ve said before, the lack of time may explain it, but can never be used to excuse it. (Let's not even get into how "samey" the planets all are, and how next to nothing on them changes.)

There are some elements and starting points of a potentially very good game in there, bits come to the surface every now and then as well. Overall though it fails, fails to innovate, inspire, excite or even move onwards in the ME universe. If you turn most of your brain off and stick most of your ME knowledge out the airlock beforehand, yeah you can get some deal of enjoyment out of it. That isn’t why I buy ME games though, save that for the likes of Call of Duty when we want some brainless shooter fun, Mass Effect needs to be more cerebral, the overall bad writing in this title ruins that aspect.

As already been mentioned, the player would have the choice to choose A/K or liara to save.

Another thing is that the Citadel coup was suppose to happen after Thessia.
https://www.reddit.com/r/masseffect/comments/1wyz7e/some_interesting_facts_about_me3s_development/

If you consider ME:A as a lighthearted adventure about a bunch of young explorers, then the writing fits. If you want a drama, then there are other games.

Though, the Archon somehow reminds me about an old children's TV show, Teletubbies. Probably, it's the halo.

As for the plot is was a case of been there, done that. I hoped for better tbh.

This very old thread sums up most of the terrible writing
bsn.boards.net/thread/6958/retcons-contradictions-noticed

There are many more but in order to not repeat (thank Link for his insights):
-How the story is a rehash of MET
bsn.boards.net/thread/7814/plot-total-homerun
-How BW make it up as they go
bsn.boards.net/thread/11462/forget-scourge-all-nonsense

If you like MEA so much to suspend your disbelief and enjoy it, fine, but if you come here an argue that the plot is well written, you will be called out on it.

Well, you'd probably disagree with my analysis then. Several of the But moments you mention felt forced or convenient, like having to choose between the Salarian and the Krogan (when you have plenty more people aboard the Tempest you could use) or how the Archon (somehow) manages to capture Ark Hyperion but wastes the opportunity to destroy the Nexus (and thus the Initiative's leadership). It reminded me of when Cerberus decided to attack the Citadel in ME3 because reasons. The Archon never was, to my mind, a compelling enough villain for me to feel invested in that particular storyline (he wants to destroy everything because... that's what villains do I guess).

Funny thing about the outposts. I thought I'd be able to shape different outposts according to different needs. Instead I was tied to that one choice I made at the beginning. Why?

Plus if the writing was actually "good" there wouldn't be any need for threads like this (which I haven't seen the likes of since the ME3 ending) to tell us that is it good.

You can see the clumsiness of it literately in the first few minutes. The whole stuff about the scourge and the scanners working/not working changes/contradicts so much line to line it's almost bi-polar. That isn't good writing, it smacks of a first draft and then nobody looking at it again to check it out. (Much like how the rest of the game ended up, due to how much time they wasted in making it/deciding how to make it.)

Yeah, it showed. But not where it really mattered. The companions throughout the whole trilogy were up to scratch and there were interesting moments in all of the games. In the trilogy I spent more time interacting with my crew than I spent fighting. In MEA it was the other way round to escape the boredom.

It's blatantly obvious since I played other Bioware games after I played MEA. I touched DA2 for the first time and was astonished that story, characters and dialogues were so much better than what MEA delivered. MEA is a bland shooter with some character interactions. It offers next to nothing in terms of character development, cringeworthy dialogue at times and a forgettable cast.

As for suspending disbelief, this game makes it so much harder. You're supposed to be the only hope for humanity and yet you stumble over humans and other Milky Way species already being well established on three planets. That can only be described as WTF. The Nexus doesn't really need me, they just have to follow their insurgents to keep alive. If you want to believe that they actually braved radiation, poisoned water and heat. Which is another big WTF moment.

No, this isn't well written. This just is. It's mildly amusing to shoot your way through but in terms of story, this is one of the weakest plots of any so called RPGs.

And? Does that invalidate the argument in the quote?

It's blatantly obvious since I played other Bioware games after I played MEA. I touched DA2 for the first time and was astonished that story, characters and dialogues were so much better than what MEA delivered. MEA is a bland shooter with some character interactions. It offers next to nothing in terms of character development, cringeworthy dialogue at times and a forgettable cast.