Aaryn Flynn talks to Gameinformer about Andromeda and "New-IP" for 31 minutes

It has also be said on the twitter thread that there are no quests that involve collecting 20 of this and that.  A lot of quests do not necessarily mean that they won't be great quests... it just means that the game is going to be quite large... which is the general trend with most of the games.  Since the newer consoles can handle much more capacity than the old ones, developers are feeling "freed up" to produce larger games.  The quality of that content can ONLY be logically judged after that content is released.  Flynn's statements are not "evidence" of anything really.

I really don't get people objecting to their being "a lot of planets to land on."  I thought that's one thing they wanted more of in the ME Trilogy... i.e. that the complaint was that you could not land on most of the planets described by the Codex.  I thought that was one reason some people are so against leaving the Milky Way... i.e. that it is still 99% unexplored.  I'm really looking forward to the large number of planets that I can land on combined with the expectation that they will be quite a bit more varied than in ME1 (that is, no planets with just different colored mountains).  People wanted to be able to explore more in ME1... and I think that's exactly what we're going to be able to do in ME:A... all with much better graphics than ME1 as well.

Put me on the same boat as Iakus. I had invested a lot of time and money into ME1 and ME2 compared to the rest of my gaming library from the 1990s (triple digit hours spent on at least 14 Commander Shepards), and it had more replay value than KOTOR during its relevant days (Male Revan, light side, always romance Bastila).  I had been binge-consuming whatever news article there was on the Mass Effect franchise, and the fact remains that Hudson and Gamble did make false promises about the ME3. ME3 didn't really respect any sense of player agency, and the quality really suffered as a result (the problems associated with ME3 deserves a thread of its own, and there's enough google search results showing what those problems entail)The endings being crappy genuinely killed off my interest in importing all of my Shepards (only 3 made it to ME3)Hell, I didn't even buy the ME3 DLC until this summer because of it.

No thanks to Hudson and Gamble lying their asses off about ME3 pre-release, I have very little reason to believe a single word the latter is saying (i.e. Multiplayer not being required for the "Shepard lives" ending, and the "you won't get a bespoken ending" being the chief offenders). The fact that Flynn actually brought up the word "false promises" in this interview speaks volumes here. I'm only on this board to see if Bioware learned their lessons or not. Right now, my trust rating is only 5% with this interview.

It would indeed be nice if they could have left an optional toggle for it in the game... or even if they had left it in on just the easier settings.  I can't help but think that someday (probably sooner than I'd like) my arthritis in my hands is going to impede me from playing these games entirely.

I don't think the differences were that great between the two modes in ME3 though. There was some adjustment to do but it wasn't that difficult.
I do hope that they'll decide it to bring it back in later games.

I second that.
Each game has pros and cons. When I first finished DAI shortly after relase (I preordered, still no regrets), I considered it maybe the best in the franchise. Then I replayed DA2 and I changed my mind. But that doesn't mean DAI is a bad game. It looks bad in certain repects compared to other games, but in turn it does some things better than the competition.

And ultimately it all comes down to personal preference. A game can be objectively poorly designed and yet be a lot of fun and vice versa. I've enjoyed the hell out of Kingdom of Amalur even though I totally agree on all the criticism. I KNOW it's not a particularly amazing game but I played it for 70 hours and had a lot of fun with it.
I consider ME1 the best game in the trilogy even though ME3 was a lot more fun to play. If gameplay sucks, does it make sense to hold ME1 in such high regard? Depends on how you look at it, what is most important to you. Nobody can answer that but yourself.

I myself can usually tell from in-game footage and fairly neutral reviews if I'm going to enjoy a game. I've regretted maybe 2-3 game purchases in my life. However, always take everything salty fans say with... well, a grain (bucket) of salt. Things get more and more blown out of proportions online these days. It's a trend that annoys me immensely. No game is ever as amazing or as bad as people claim.

And if there are more people out there who decide not to try a game they could have loved because of a very vocal very resentful minority, that's a real shame. Unless there are serious money or time constraints to consider, always form your own opnion based on your own experiences.

I am just looking forward to playing a decently fun game. I have no grand illusions that this will be a masterpiece (but great if it is!!). I have absolutely loved the DA series and the ME series to date - warts and all. I am much more of a DA series fan... still playing Inquisition.

Would love it if both series were available as reboots for PS4.

Was ME3 too easy for most players?


I kind of sucked at ME2, but I managed to beat ME3 on Insanity difficulty and I felt extremely accomplished and proud. I didn't think it was too easy at all. If anything, I felt the difficulty was "just right" or a little difficult.



I hope ME: A will be about as difficult as that, a sweet spot.

So whats the point of pausing then? Not that I'm complaining, I like my gameplay fast and furious (notice my avatar), but I have to wonder why even pause if you can't queue powers during this?