About all these " reviews "

It's quite amusing how people tend to dismiss a negative review (not even a review in this case) instead of accepting and understading it. "Oh, the guy played 4 hours on Andromeda and said something I didn't want to hear? It can't be that he had a valid opinion about the game, he just don't get it!"

Anyway, previews are previews. There are only so much they can tell.

There's a difference when the "preview" is actually well-reasoned, articulate, and provides knowledge to the reader. PC Gamer, as an example, did an amazing write-up for MEA.

Whereas a lesser review site, such as IGN, Gamestop, Kotaku, or Game Informer, uses click bait suggesting the game "feels like DAI" or "the faces look like The Sims 3" without actually providing any evidence or logic for their outlandish statements.

I don't mind previews at all, if they are actually credible, professional, and not just dribble some hack journalist came up with because he's an "insider."

On the DA:I thing, some have said it feels like DA:I, some have say it feels like an improved DA:I, and some have said it doesn't feel like DA:I at all. It's all over the place.


This guy here says there's a lot more narrative to the side quests, kinda like TW3. So I'm getting the feeling that those who said it feels like DA:I, meant that it felt the same in the sense where you do a lot of exploring.

"Despite all of that, I couldn’t shake the feeling that the Ryders, and some of the supporting human characters, look a whole lot more like they walked out of The Sims 3, rather than walking out of a game releasing in 2017. Their eyes, eyelashes, and mouths specifically look particularly cartoony, with some awkward dialogue animations."

There is abolutely nothing wrong here. The guy says he is disappointed with how the characters look, that they don't feel up to date and give the reasons why. And characters in Andromeda looking nothing special at all. If the guy thinks they are closer to The Sims 3's characters than they are of what he expected from a 2017 release then he is entitled to that. 

He never said MEA character animation are equal to The Sims 3. Read again and understand why the author is saying before running to dismiss his view. He is only saying that the looks of MEA character reminded him of The Sims 3 and is not what he expected from a 2017 release.

She sounds reasonable and is just sharing her impression. She says the looks of Scott and Sara faces reminded her more of The Sims 3 than what she expects from a 2017 game, not the animations as a whole, but their vibe. Exactly what the article said. The comparison you're saying she makes doesn't exist. 

Anyway, she played the game. I believe she is giving her honest impression from her time with the game, which might or might not be the same one other people have or will have. If you want to dismiss her and believe she has no idea what she is saying then ok. You won't be the first nor the last person to do something like this. 

Yikes. I believe I just found a brick wall, ladies and gentlemen. All rhyme and reason apparently doesn't apply. I'll move on.

It's click bait and nothing more. She said the most ridiculous thing that could come to mind purely because she does not like the animations. There is no "truth" to her claims in the slightest. Thankfully, the faces look miles ahead of the original Mass Effect trilogy.

*shrug* They'll enjoy MEA as much as the rest of us despite how much they're complaining so don't worry about it too much.

She seemed to have a positive impression of the world design/landscape though, so that's encouraging.
Calling it a "Bro shooter" is something I take with a grain of salt, but at the same time, it does make me wary. To me, saying it's a "bro shooter" compared to ME1 could just mean the combat mechanics are better and more focused. I enjoyed the combat mechanics of ME2 and ME3, but I hated the ME3 campaign because it railroaded you into a poorly thought out storyline with cut-scenes long enough to make dinner/take a crap/walk the dog like a crappy JRPG.
In the end, I play games for the stories. And after ME3 I don't trust anything Mac Walters does, so I'll just be waiting until after it comes out to read what people have to say about it after they've actually played it. Some crappy set of armor and a paint job for the Nomad aren't nearly important enough for me to potentially risk actually paying for a JRPG again.

I think her actual preview, overall, was largely positive. She was just nitpicking on personal issues she has as a gamer. She flat out stated she has never liked Mass Effect combat in any of the games. She at least admitted that it's far more fast-paced and action-oriented, which is what I think she meant by "bro shooter." Not her cup of tea, but there were quite a few comparisons to Gears of War, which is honestly what the previous games played like.

I enjoy the cutscenes, myself, so I never felt any of them were too long. It certainly didn't compare to MGS4, where literally 60% of the game was never ending cutscenes. With regard to Mac Walters, he's not doing any writing for MEA. He did, however, take over Casey Hudson's job. Whether he has a negative impact on the game is yet to be determined. I'm excited enough about the game that I'm just going to go ahead and make the jump. If it turns out to be a dud, well I think I'll at least enjoy it for a while and then move on.

Hopefully I'll have a Nintendo Switch at that point so I can invest plenty of time into the new Zelda game.

Of course it is.

EDIT: And by this I mean that you need to accept all reviews equally. Cherry-picking is the death of any objective analysis.

What reviews?

I saw only a few previews so far, most of it positive minus the typical bugs and stuff.

Well see come next month.