Curious about the complaints surrounding Andromeda.

I concur. But Hope > Logic 

Another issue I forgot about was one with Peebee when it came down to some bits of her dialogue. Granted she's one of my favorite Andromeda characters (I romanced her) and she's not supposed to be a typical asari, but some of what she said felt....out of place. Like, how does she know what a monkey is, what a bear is, what Mardi Gras is, and the whole "yar har har pirates" thing on Kadara? I mean I don't think she's ever been to Earth before so how does she know about some of that stuff?

I could have a more useful reply if your original statement was useful as well. But since your original statement boils down to "Game is flawed but people refuse to see it", I didn't feel it actually deserved a well thought out response. 

Well, you did state "incredibly flawed" as if it was an objective fact rather than a personal judgement. Just plain "flawed" would have worked fine, or even "seriously flawed," but "incredibly" is a bit much.  What sort of response did you expect? 

And what is most striking here is that everything in the world has flaws if you look for them. Nothing is 'perfect' so long as someone can view something about it as being something they do not like. Yet people do still like what they like and often in spite of flaws, even flaws that they themselves may see. 

I wonder if any of these MEA haters have ever been in a serious relationship? I ask because often then you are faced with your partners' 'flaws'. Sooner or later you will see something about them that you aren't fond of or truly do not care for. The way MEA haters are focusing solely on what is wrong with the game leads me to conclude they never have been in a relationship where you learn to focus on the things you love in a person or at least the things you like a lot because if they had learned that skill they wouldn't be hanging out in a forum bitching about a game and all it's flaws. They would have moved on or have focused on what they like realizing that doing so might at least give them their money's worth of an experience they preferred rather than one they disliked.

I could have a more useful reply if your original statement was useful as well. But since your original statement boils down to "Game is flawed but people refuse to see it", I didn't feel it actually deserved a well thought out response. You seem to refuse to see anything good about the game, so the counter statement is true. MEA haterz refuse to see that the game is not a failure or as flawed as some would say. But I can break it down into a more well thought out argument for ya, if movie references aren't your thing.

So let's look at your statement "MEA is incredibly flawed." You have to agree that that is a subjective statement. If you look at things like metacritic reviews from professional reviewers, the majority lie in the 70-80 range. While not stellar, those scores do not denote an incredibly flawed have, merely a game that could be better. Looking at the user review side and... Well now I'm blind. But actually reading those reviews (and cleaning up the ensuing vomit) clearly shows that many of the very low reviews are from people with issues that go beyond the game (SJW's, No Shep, Manveir Heir, EA sux, etc) and while some make reasonable arguments, so many are 0's for reasons that do not fall under the grading guidelines that they can be ignored. Now reviews and their scores are also subjective/opinions, but you can use them as a metric for quantifying the data to try to make sense out of the general point of view of the game. Thus, looking at review scores and opinions in those reviews from professional reviewers, MEA is not an objectively "incredibly flawed" game. Thus your opinion that it is is, as I said before, just that. Your Opinion, Man.

Secondly we can look at why you think the game is deeply flawed. Things like animations, graphics, glitches, etc, are fairly objective. They exist or they don't. In MEA's case, while at launch there were issues with these, many/most have been sorted out by the continued patches. Thus those reasons for being "incredibly flawed" can be taken out. So then you are left with gameplay, story, dialogue, etc. Gameplay I think was pretty universally agreed to be very good in Andromeda. You might not think so, but that would be going against what many reviewers and people here have said, so again, your opinion. Story is harder. Very much a personal opinion, but there can be some objectivity. Full Metal Jacket is fairly objectively better than a Disney channel original movie. But in this case, comparing the story of MEA to something in it's same genre/level, the OT or TW3, it can't be agreed that MEA's is significantly worse. Again, your opinion.

So what we learned is that my original statement of your opinion that the game is "incredibly flawed" is, in fact, true, and is totally "Just, like, your opinion, man."

Thanks for playing.

What's wrong with my MEA avatar eh.

Outside of Drack and maybe Vetra i didn't gave a shit about the characters. They're just a bunch of idiots.

i know bioware has said each Ryder has a distinct personality but honestly i have had a hard time divining them through my third pt. Aside from both of them having a kind of sarcastic cheesy sense of humour at times. But both my Ryders had distinct personalities that i forced on them.

Though i suppose it's possible that the personalities i gave my Ryders match them so precisely i never noticed.

It was not a new Bioware game as in a new IP that has never been done before like Anthem. When ME1 came out, there was no other Mass Effect to compare it to. When Dragon Age: Origins came out, there was no other Dragon Age game to compare it to (even though some compared it to BG). With MEA, it is the 4th entry in the Mass Effect franchise. It was not a new game because there were already 3 ME games that came before it, 3 games that got great review scores and 3 games that were all GOTY contenders with ME2 being the most popular.

Stop trying to dig a way out of this and manipulate things to make it seem like MEA was some new IP that Bioware had no background on or had never done before. SWTOR was Bioware's first MMO, DAI was their first attempt with a semi open-world. ME1 was their first action-shooter/RPG. ME3 was their first multiplayer. What was the "first" with MEA?

What was with the complaints?

It wasn't a remastered ME1.

Or a revamped ME3 where now Shepard can kill the reaper armada with one punch while whistling a jaunty tune and eating a meatpie and then live happily ever after with his/her space waifu.

Basically it was a new Bioware game, and every new Bioware game is the worst game ever made, and not up to the previously released games' standards (the previously released games which were, when THEY were the new Bioware game, the worst game ever made, of course).

Mass Effect comes out... "rabble rabble, it's not KOTOR, it sucks!" Mass Effect 2 comes out... "rabble rabble they changed everything from Mass Effect, it sucks!" Mass Effect 3 comes out... "rabble rabble I can't punch the reapers with my dick and Diana Allers is lame and it's not ME2, it sucks!" (to be fair, the Diana Allers complaint was a valid one).

Dragon Age comes out... "rabble rabble it's not Baldur's Gate, it sucks!" Dragon Age 2 comes out... "rabble rabble they changed everything from Dragon Age, it sucks!" Dragon Age Inquisition comes out... "rabble rabble DAE think that Dragon Age 2 was an underrated gem? Inquisition sucks in comparison!" (Dragon Age 2 was an underrated gem though).

It's the Cycle of Bioware.

It more like Voyager.

It more like Voyager.