IF we get another Mass Effect game....

I have said this quite a few times but I do think the ME:A offers great potential for a second part.

We know almost nothing about Andromeda as a whole. Here are some questions that I'd be interested in:
What is the bigger picture with the Kett? It is highly implied that they control a vastly bigger section of space beyond the Helios cluster, which begs the question: How will we deal with this?
Then there is the obvious question: What's the deal with the remnant and the jardaan? Lot's of stuff to explore there.
What will our future with the angara look like? Will there be a conflict brewing? There is some post-ending dialogue on Aya, which suggests there might be tensions coming up over the Nexus people establishing a greater presence everywhere.
And of course there is the question about the Initiative and the benefactor and all that.
The quarians, I think were really planned for a DLC but if that DLC never materializes, it would also be an important plot point for a sequel.

So there is plenty to do. I think that now that we've gotten over all the horrible lore inconsistencies that were needed to get us to Andromeda it would be a shame to just give up such a fresh and promising setting. Also, Ryder, being a very young protagonist who just started out on their hero's journey feels like a protagonist with still lots to do.

So I say yea, definitely, if and when they do make a new ME, make it an ME:A2. I am certainly not in a hurry to get back to the post ending MW, I feel like we'd only find more plot inconsistencies there and as someone who cherishes the original trilogy, I'd say we had more than enough of those already.

None of which compares to developing ships with effectively unlimited range when the entire galaxy is reliant on the relay network for any travel more distant than neighboring stars.

Good question, given the AI has zilch in the way of warships, and only survived as long sit did by running and hiding (yet another example of terribad planning).




Mild curiosity.  Would not be surprised to discover it's another machine race.  I'm more interested in what created the Scourge.


Probably the same as any race.  Some will be friendly, others not.  MP races demand it be so.

84/154 for PC
107/197 for PS4
39/109 for Xbox

Identical rank percentage wise on PC and PS4 - higher ranking on Xbox, the version with the least reviews, least games released, smallest sample size...

And no, not "significantly better" on the PC list. It's like you didn't even go over any of this and just posted the narrative in your head, fed on by the likes of Andromeda apologists on this forum.

It's a bad game because all of the other games with similar scores are also bad games. You could argue the Xbox version isn't bad based on its placing - but seeing it has the smallest sample size and is the least popular console to play the game on, I'd argue the PC and PS4 statistics trump it.

I think this gets the cause-and-effect confused. Planet scanning isn't there to give out upgrades and resources, it's there to make the map useful. The resources given out from scanning are fairly trivial. I suppose this is an improvement over ME3, where you needed to do the scanning if you want to get to a high-EMS state.(Or play MP, of course.)

First they don't have unlimited range. The drive core is bigger and more sustainable but that's it. They don't have a "hyperdrive" only ftl and had to stay in stasis. I don't see the big issue.

Same rule applies. The existence of the ODSY drive would have had almost no effect on commerce and settlement patterns in the short term. In the medium term things would have been somewhat different, depending on how expensive the drives are relative to standard ones, and in the long term standard drives probably go away. But that's irrelevant because ME3 was set in the short term, and if we ever do go back to the MW they can just incorporate ODSY drives into the setting.

Not quite, the ODSY drive, which no longer requires discharge is a game changer for many reasons.That's one of the big problems. The NX01 was not a game changer (though I'll grant you there, that Archer's role as an important historical figure and other implication on established Trek history included retcons that I also wasn't fond of either). Voyager was not a game changer for DS9. DS9 was not a game changer for the crew of the Enterprise D (though they actually visit the station in season 6 and the Enterprise is part of the DS9 pilot episode, so there even is some interplay there).

A lot of the Andromeda setup should really be a game changer for ME3 though, particularly the new drive and the ability to travel to other galaxies, which makes the reaper's cycle more than just obsolete. In a Milky Way that can no longer be regarded as an isolated system it makes them downright foolish (even more so than it already was before ME:A).

EDIT: Aaaaand ed. That's what I get for jumping into someone else's conversation.

Of course, that would require them to get that procedural-generation thing working again, to give us someplace to land. And that still leaves all the planets without such missions. Unless we just cut everything we have no reason to land on, or make those planets completely useless. I could go either way with that.

Speaking of FTL stuff, I think I remember reading that Kett ships use mass effect fields to create an Alcubierre effect. (Which is actually consistent with GR aside from maybe a couple of issues.)