Mike Gamble is now Project Director at BioWare - What could he be in charge of?

I'd spoil myself on the ending first.

"Fool me once, shame on you" and all that.

"We misstepped there,"

Understatement of the year there.  And it only took four and a half years to admit that much...

"Pride before the fall..."

I think with Andromeda it was more that they didn't want to take the same route as the Shepard Trilogy while not having a firm conclusion until the third game.  There was an interview where if I recall correctly it was that they weren't going to leave the game on a cliffhanger, but were going to leave some threads open if they were to make a sequel.  There is still other things they can do with Ryder its not that they all packed up went home and there was never any conflict ever again while removing the entire Kett race from the Galaxy past, present and future.

Oh, you're certainly not wrong, the same nuance does of course apply towards fans of a game too.

"I like the game because of reasons x, y, z" is a perfectly fine statement that should never, ever, get you labeled as a "shill" or "biodrone". But just as the "this game is garbage" haters do definitely exist, there are also people who state things along the lines of "this game is great and anyone who says otherwise is a hater with an agenda".

And no one gets to tell anyone which games they should like or dislike. I like some games that are pretty darn terrible in some aspects. I'm aware of that, and I still like them, and I make no apologies for that. Neither should anyone else.

Yes, people should listen to each other more. On this site, on the internet, on the entire effing planet. But unfortunately there are some people who argue in bad faith, some who completely ignore the other's points and just repeat their own and so on. It gets frustrating after a while, and that's a shame. In the end, we all just want to play good games and talk about them.

You're free to interpret it as you want, but I think it is clear they aren't touching it again. Casey had said something back then about "closure in books and related media" or something to that extent. That's the end of the Andromeda Initiative.

Who knows until the next game, but at the same time I have seen plenty of people proclaim that Mass Effect is dead as well.  I will try and find the article I remember, but its highly unlikely since the internet moves fast and this was years ago.

Edit:

Going back I just want to clarify one thing.  I am not saying they will be going back to Andromeda and making the sequel there, but what I am saying is that there are still places they can go for not everything in Andromeda was all tied up in the game.  I did see plenty of people upset about certain plot threads not being fully closed off and there are plenty of times what is written in a book doesn't mean that they are even going to be using that direction in the future games.  Now I don't read the books, but I remember that happening with Mass Effect 3 where there were complaints about the game not following one plot of the novels.

As long as Sarhesen exists in one piece, there's no closure.

The problem as I see it is that a good game is what will lure fans back, it has nothing to do with setting or characters for there isn't a way to point out what flaws they must fix that won't alienate some people.  Its the same thing with character design there was all kind of complaining about Miranda and her look in Mass Effect 2 and 3 and how Ashley looked in Mass Effect 3.  Now I remember just as many complaints about how "unattractive" female characters looked in Andromeda.  There is no way they are going to be able to please all the complaints people have with the games and make a game that still appeals to everyone that liked the game before.  That is the one thing I really wish BioWare would learn is that you cannot please everyone all the time and just make the best game you can. Its the same with the budget argument.  They can make a good game with a lower budget, they just need to know where to draw the line with development and where to spend their money wisely instead of aiming for the fences with the best tech while trying to do everything. 

Plan out a game, stick to their budget and don't chase trends is probably what I would suggest if BioWare execs would listen to a nobody like me.  Look to make a good solid game and the other things will follow.  Its the same type of idea with Fallen Order, they made a good game with faults, but it was a competent game that spread by word of mouth and now it has a projected sales of over ten million copies which is really good considering all the negativity around EA and their Star Wars games.

The gameplay level strengths of ME:A were missions like Habitat 7, the vaults, the Salarian Ark, Meridian, etc.  You have a tighter mission structure with these with a clearly defined objective, have ways you can use the versatility of the JetPacks, and have sub-objectives littered throughout without having huge areas to traverse.  Do I save the two squadmates in need of assistance or let hem fend for themselves?  Do I jet straight for the rendezvous point or do explore the ancient alien structure I just found? 

I think the pacing (like DA:I) was detrimentally impacted by the huge maps on Eos, Eladaan, Voeld, and Kadara and really should have mimicked the approach on Havarl's exploration on foot while leaving the Nomad to potentially explore planets with anomalies like in the original "Mass Effect".

I think there is definitely some things that worked in ME:A that can be used as blueprint for the next game.  

That is how I felt as well.  I think the entire really big maps dampened how much I enjoy BioWare games because they require the story to move forward and for me on those maps it takes a backseat when you are trying to explore.  H-047c or the Remnant Temples are probably as big as something I would want to wonder around in.  I really liked how they handled the Krogan homeworld in Mass Effect 3 where you took a shuttle to larger places to have some exploration while having direction.