Code Green: a more positive look at the previews

This sounds like a pretty optimistic view on the game if Arc is thinking it will at worst be mediocre.

Very short GIFs like this can be a bit misleading as they have very little context, similar odd looks can be achieved by real people's expressions if the same thing is done. Ever paused a show or a film and laughed at the hilariously odd expression that a character was making at the time? Yet you don't notice it when the whole scene is taking place. 

I'm not saying that there aren't issues with some expressions in BioWare games - looking at you, Sheploo.

Please keep it civil guys and gals This is supposed to be a positive look thread, not a battle for who is in the right about the game!

There's a Code Red thread, which in my opinion is where you should be venting your possible frustrations (cause i have to admit as in the first post, there are some concerns so far about the game)

This is the green one, where you come to talk about the positive stuff

I'm stoked. But after they knocked it out of the park with Inquisition, I was optimistic about this game. Now that nearly every preview is saying "It feels like Mass Effect" and there are some cool little additions and retreads of all three games best parts? 3/21 needs to get here now.

I like how this attempt to positivity turned again into whining about the facial animation. Never change BSN.

...

That's what I was afraid of. I thought if almost every instance had 4 options available (heart, head, diplomatic, something I forget) it would hopefully make up for the preset personalities and autodialogue. But if that's just sometimes and most times it's like ME3, well... crap.

I guess we'll just have to see after it's out but this doesn't exactly fill me with anticipation. I mean, those moments were very rare in DA:I, but at least it had 3 options otherwise.

How dare I to have a different opinion, right ? I was at old BSN and got several times banned by people like Priestly, had even same nick and picture in avatar, with several thousand posts. I either managed to get unbanned myself when I argued my case, or apologize if I was wrong. I do not watch nor follow most of the gaming press, they are crap, I only enjoy very few of them, in place where I live in, there was like 3 or 4 page long review, in which game journo was at best conflicted. He said that it feels more like DA:I than any of ME. Conversations seems to be too much automated and give you very limited space to manuever, as much as very buggy animations that kept him concerned. 

That is one thing I wish all developers mentioned during events like this is how old the build they are playing is.  I find it funny that official reviews will mention if they are using the "Day 1 Patch" or not, but during these previews I don't see a mention of how old the build really is or if the developer has a patch in development already with changes which to me can mean the preview can be misleading.

I think ME:A is destined to be compared to Horizon and Zelda when reviews come out, which is probably not a good thing. Obviously Horizon is getting great scores across the board, and Zelda's previews have released, and they're absolutely glowing. So for critics to go from those two open world games, to ME:A, it seems like ME:A is at a disadvantage. I'm sure it's good, and even probably a great game. But Horizon and Zelda absolutely wow'd critics.

I don't wish to insult other posters, but it confuses me that people can unironically write an entire paragraph of assumptions, many of which are almost unverifiable, and some of which are just flat out wrong.


Bioware has had exactly one single "open world" game, yes it had a lot of pointless filler, but that in no way proves that andromeda will have more of the same. Don't get me wrong, i'm not saying that andromeda is going to be the messiah of open world games, but your absolute certainty that it will turn out terrible is based on one single data point, and therefore comes off as incredibly reactionary.


If you watch the IGN preview, they specifically talk about an area that reminds the reviewer of hong kong, and is "dense and packed" and has "markets everywhere". That certainly sounds like a "big city" to me, so really you're just blatantly wrong here. Granted the previewer doesn't specifically say that combat will be possibly in areas, but on the other hand there's no reason to believe that, if large urban areas exist, there is no sort of any urban combat.


Have you actually played the game? It seems like english might not be your first language, but maybe the reason that people think you're a troll account is that you love to project entirely subjective (and sometimes misinformed) opinions into absolute truths. The fact is that you don't know what will and will not work with this game if you've never played it.

i'm assuming that you are talking about "backlash" here, which is a sort of mobile, biotic shield. What you may not have noticed however, is that you can neither fire weapons, nor use powers while maintaining the shield, so unless you plan to play Ryder as a full on pacifist, Backlash is hardly going to remove the need for cover. This is like saying that the existence of riot shields entirely invalidates the use of cover in modern military combat.

Now I will say that the most recent gameplay series we've seen had the devs avoiding cover an uncomfortable amount of the time. However, we have good reason to suspect that most, if not all, of the footage we've seen so far has been played on a lower difficulty setting. You could pretty much ignore cover for the entire game in mass effect 1 if you were playing on easy as well, so I don't see how this proves that Andromeda has been "dumbed down" in any way.

www.pcgamer.com/mass-effect-andromeda-lead-designer-ian-frazier-on-fulfilling-the-promise-of-mass-effect-1/?utm_content=bufferd2572&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=buffer-pcgamertw
Pretty good interview with Ian.