Why do people here act like animations....

Oh, like you're the fucking victim here.  How's about you give me $80 and I'll go away.   Seeing as that's how much I spent on the god damned game.  Until that time, I'll say whatever I damn well please.  You're not the victim, hell, you're not even the injured party.  

You're the person who watched the slow moving train crash and giggled.

The point you seem to be missing is that the player =/= Ryder.

One of the features of recent BioWare games with the cinematics, autodialogue, and all is that sometimes you lose some agency over the character.  Shepard was always besties with Garrus, had Anderson as a mentor, stopped to try to save the kid in the vent, and insisted on painting the Rannoch reaper without input from the player.

During the wreck of the SR-1, Shepard went to the bridge to rescue Joker instead of boarding an escape pod.  You, the player, had to move Shepard to the bridge - and Sheppie got spaced after getting Joker onto a pod.  That's the story they told with precious little input from the player.

In similar fashion, Ryder selects the spot for the outpost and signals the Ai to place it there.

too be fair back then the idiotnet had the troll focus elsewhere. MeA got trolled with the same 5 gifs over and over before launch. People wanted MeA to fail.

We've been through all of this.  The commentary as you approach the area is designed to simulate Ryder selecting that spot.  It's a story point just like every other story point, commentary, cutscene, dialogue that has ever triggered upon the PC's arrival in any location in an ME game.  You're free to headcanon the reason for that choice however you see fit. The map geometry and textures are built with previous failed outposts (and other features) in specific locations, and have scripted events designed to occur in specific locations.

I understand you may have played some strategy or other games designed to allow for dynamic map features and player placements, but games that are fully 3D with physics and scripted story events are an entirely different animal. You also don't get to decide where the Tempest lands or the locations of your forward stations.  I don't remember ever being allowed to change any map or level feature in any ME game (aside from destroying destructible containers) - even the ship models and other assorted bling Shepard collected for display in her quarters were placed in specific locations without my input.

But this whole conversation started with my statement:
which is exactly what happens in the game.

Man, determining the best spot for an outpost out of multiple options would be awful. Like, would there be certain conditions that could cause the outpost to be smaller or larger? Environmental hazards? Suddenly sinkhole?

Some things are probably best left predetermined by the game. Even if we could get full input of where to put what on the map, it'd be so tedious no one would want to do it anyway.

Honestly would it add something to the story if you had to find the best location? 

In my opinion it would make it a different kind of game and send ME:A down a more RPG route than the exploration sim thing they’ve got going on at the moment.

....and bugs were the only things wrong with the game? This has been a theme way before no dlc was confirmed. A number of people here (and I am sure there are many others outside of BSN) acts like if MEA was launched in the v1.10 state, then there would be little criticism of the game.

To me that is just simply being in denial that the overall quality of MEA was NOT on par with what you'd expect from Bioware. Yes, bugs and animations were the most visible and thus the easiest to make videos, gifs, and memes about, but those were NOT the only things wrong with MEA. Myself and many people had a problem with:

- Story

- Story pacing/narrative

- Uninteresting characters (watch part 3 of Boss Attacks video)

- Dull open world

- Bad side quest design

- Cant control squadmates combat abilities

- Ryder not as interesting and couldnt roleplay as Ryder the same way you could with all other Bioware heros. (watch part 3 of Boss Attacks video)

- Villain

- Over use of jokes/humor in serious situations

- The Asari clone army

- Only 2 Andromeda races vs 5 MW races. Andromeda should have felt more alien.

- And much more that I know I am probably forgetting about

Point is, MEA had a lot of problems than just animations and even in 1.10, all of the above problems still exist. But yet some people refuse to see that. They want to believe that:

#1 Nothing wad wrong with the launch outside of Bioware haters yelling and making a big deal about animations.

#2 By 1.10, all of the problems with MEA were fixed and people should give the game another chance.

I accept that for many people MEA was a great experience and not much wad wrong with the game. I can accept that. However, they need to accept that for many others, outside of animations, the game was not fun and not the quality expected from Bioware. No patches could have fixed that.

So I say again, for the people that didnt enjoy MEA, bugs and animations were one thing but there were a slew of other non-patchable problems with the game. Many of the reviews even mentioned this. So why is there still people claiming that 1.10 fixed everything?

No, I said that many of the MEA supporters were acting like animations were the only problem.

Why do people haters here act like their feelings are facts ?

For example : many people had problem with .... the story

I have no problem with the story. Is my feeling irrelevant? Am I an idot fanboy?


I understand that people may dislike MEA. What I don't understand is why these people repeat ad libitum their hating in a forum which is supposed to host people who like the game ? Why don't you go to a forum untitled "Andromeda for haters" ... what ... it will not be funny to be between haters because soon you would be a lesser hater than somebody else and would have to defend your lesser hating ?