I don't get why this game got fire while trash games like PUBG get high praise

AAA games get their reviews and grades on release. When Andromeda got released it was an unfinished mess, which is made worse because Bioware is a developer which has set a certain standard of quality RPG’s in the past. So the fact that the game was practically unfinished got amplified because people had certain expectations from Bioware when it came to quality, which resulted in low scores and negative reviews. It is true that Bioware fixed a lot of the more jarring bugs later, but that is simply too late for an AAA singleplayer RPG. It has to be a success at launch, otherwise the public opinion will mostly remain negative.

PUBG was made by a new developer and explored a fairly new ‘genre’ of battle royale shooters. It followed an entirely different development cycle where the game could already be played during its development, completely altering the review process when compared with an AAA game like Andromeda. Most of the ‘praise’ has to do with this new genre and the fact that it is an accessible multiplayer game instead of a heavy singleplayer RPG. What people expect and demand is entirely different. That being said, PUBG has all the makings of a hype. If they fail to provide a certain level of quality in the future, the novelty will wear off and people will probably leave. PUBG is not impervious to criticism and needs to evolve to survive. The high praise is mostly centered around the initial execution of a new genre, which is, even though I personally do not like the game, well done. There are a lot of flaws however, as illustrated by Crowbcat his video. They need to fix these flaws, or they go down just like everyone else.

Of course, these are all personal predictions, but I think that it is difficult/problematic to compare both games, and I also believe that PUBG had an excellent start but is already subject to significant criticism. It is in no way a perfect or excellent game, but it is refreshing in certain ways.