Things working against a possible Ryder series sequel as of right now

Of course, it's not so much that you actually have to do those side missions on the ME:A worlds. You can just drive right past them.

I think they need to work out a better way to do open world. Maybe fewer quests but the ones they do add should have more depth to them.
I have been thinking for a while that perhaps a television-like model might work. You have an overall arc for the season but in that, there can be a few subplots, the main story is always present though it's not always the sole focus of an episode.

I just hope this doesn't result in Peebee becoming a mary sue. 

Yeah, both games are completionist hell.

I would be interested in knowing how many people want a Ryder sequel specifically, or would it be ok to just continue in the Andromeda Galaxy with another protagonist? I can't say I'm attached to Ryder since she doesn't feel like _my_ character and I can't role-play her the way I could play Shepard (at least until ME3).

As long as they continue the bigger storylines about the Scourge, Remnant and Kett, I'll be happy with the sequel/next ME game. I can live with it if I never see any of the characters again. Just like I wouldn't have missed any of the ME1 characters if ME2 had never happened.

Edit: I mean, a sequel in another cluster of Andromeda or maybe even several clusters, maybe well into the future with developed societies and infrastructures... I would really like to see that! And I would consider that 'fresh, exciting place' in the same way the MW galaxy was exciting because you had both settled worlds with culture to visit  and unsettled worlds to explore.

Control of the character isn't always good in an RPG. Given Shepard's situation in ME2, the player had as much control as he should have had.

Also nerfed completely skills and made us gun everything inside tight corridors with a very bland main story, mostly had nothing to do with ME1 and ME3 at all..
For me ME1 & MEA style, but more focused yes, would be the dream

They aren't up to create stuff like that. It's simply not their forte. If it were, the bases you create would evolve over time, making it rewarding to go back to them to see what's happening. If they were, the NPCs there would assume the semblance of life instead of acting as road blocks and telegraph poles.

Hell, with FO4, a single modder created evolving settlements where people go about their daily business to retire at night. But Bioware couldn't do it with DAI and they couldn't do it with MEA. Maybe it's the engine not allowing for that, since it's an FPS engine. But if that doesn't work, they should leave well enough alone. It doesn't really add to their games.

This...Ryder was boring as a character and can't hold a candle to Sheperd. Now that is not to say that Ryder should be Sheperd 2.0, but he needed to be at least compelling or interesting...dude had a personality and style that teammates just did not respect...even when Ryder tried to sound like a leader and demand attention, it fell flat.


The only way to improve his character is maybe take the story yet another maybe 10-15 years where he's grown as a pathfinder and is a bit more experienced and weathered and then maybe have him look back on some and the Sheperd files and say..."Sheperd..i truly understand the weight you had on your shoulders" and from there craft him into a soldier/pathfinder that is all about business and others around see a distinct change from the soft rookie and pushover he was in the first game.

Another problem is marketing....you can't say "from the Studio that brought you Andromeda" and you also can't say "From the studio that brought you the greatest sci-fi trilogy comes....drumroll.... Andromeda 2".....it's hard to get fans excited for a game that left a bad taste in their mouth.....don't get me wrong, it can be possible to create a good Andromeda 2 game with writers that are able to put together an interesting set of characters and a compelling story....

There's a reason why the DLC for ME3 enjoys solid sales even today...because ME3..even with it's endings is still a fun game to enjoy from beginning to end.....

Hmm. I felt I had less control of Ryder than Shepard. In ME1, I felt like I could play her any way I wanted with genuinely different results. In ME2, they took away some of that by removing the 'neutral' options but it was still ok. In ME3, I really didn't like how I had to choose either Paragon or Renegade and watch plenty of cutscenes where I had no control of the dialogue. In ME:A, there are four different options in theory, but often you have only two of them available and they aren't that different in terms of how people react to you. And there are plenty of cutscenes where Ryder is an idiot and didn't feel like my character at all.

At least Alec Ryder's dialogue in cutscenes and options would have to be mature. I hate the cowboy aspect in Andromeda. I am a responsible person irl and take serious things seriously and I want to be that in games as well. But it's of course a turnoff to people who are the opposite.

I completely disagree. Though the main villains of ME3 should have been the Reapers, it was actually Cerberus who were the main threat in ME3 as you fight them more than any other faction. Without ME2 they wouldn't have made any sense as the villains, and ME2 also introduced The Illusive Man who was the most visible of Reaper agents (though he didn't know it). Although ME2 put a 'nice' front on Cerberus, it was obvious that they were devious bastards because you kept coming across their scummy schemes in the game, it was obvious they would be a threat.

Not only that, but ME2 is the story of the Reapers attempt to reopen the Citadel after Sovereign failed, the whole point of the Collector plot is that they are making a Reaper to take his place in opening the Citadel, when that fails, then Harbinger wakes the other Reapers and they take the long route to the Milky Way. The Reapers lack of control of the Citadel (first because Sovereign failed, then the Human Reaper was defeated) which is partly what makes a galaxy wide war possible for the third game, as they normally shut the relays down which wouldn't have been much fun to play through. Without ME2 we wouldn't have seen the Reapers coming to the galaxy, as far as ME1 was concerned we had prevented them from waking up. And this is ignoring other points I could make about how ME2 sets up the Tuchanka and Rannoch plots.

People keep coming out with these claims that ME2 has nothing to do with ME3, but they're wrong. It's some weird viewpoint that people keep parroting. The main issue between ME2 and 3 is that Bioware didn't do nearly enough with the Collector Base decision and never gave the Reapers some kind of weakness or penalty because they took the long route to invade.

Mostly had nothing to do...

The main story didnt make me feel that, so its mainly me, not parroting anything else. Collector path felt so detached. I enjoyed the side missions (and some of the "my daddy issue" missions of crew) which made me feel like ME1 again more than main mission.

Bolded the second part which I agree with.