how do you compare MEA to the other ME games. On multiple things such as graphics,story,characters..

Not finished the game yet but so far:

MEA has better graphics, especially in the environments. I think most of the characters look better at rest, even if their animations might be questionable at times. Default male Ryder looks a lot better then default male Shepard and Sara, despite what people may say, will never reach the heights of godawfulness that default FemShep achieved in ME3.

Combat, movement, vehicle driving all better in MEA.

Voice acting as good as the OT. I wouldn't argue with anyone that said it was even better.

Story and writing, so far, on par with the OT.

Characters I haven't decided on yet. Need to spend more time with them. I do think Cora and Drack have really great back stories, though. Time (and probably more games) will tell if I like them as much as Miranda, Garrus, etc.

ME1 with more polish and unique assets would've been the game that aspired to... itself.

MEA is not that game. The environments do look pretty graphically, and varied, and I definitely get ME1 vibes from Voeld, but the amount of focus-tested, filler crap in a lot of those zones and the whole focus of Quantity-questing is against what ME1 was trying to be.

Digital acting was something particularly Casey wanted to push really hard with ME1 and that's why all conversations are cinematic like that in the game and why it was so popularized for a while. ME1 had those filler quests like the Asari Matriarch collectathons and such, and similarly Witcher 3 and DA2 also had really low-effort side-quests; those are the type of content you put in a game in the last couple of months to compensate for cut content. DA:I and MEA on the other hand have the type of non-cinematic, filler fetch quest stuff by design and something that was meant to be part of the game from its inception. And as I said, ME1 was not trying to be that kind of game.

Shepard did not felt human to you??
He is the soul of the game for god sake

Agreed with the ME1 parallels. It's a slower paced rendition of the first game. The slow pace may hamper it a bit in the eyes of some people, but that's essentially what it is. It's The Force Awakens of Mass Effect, but with less 1:1 retreading.

The bugs and whatnot are there and are a hassle, but as a whole, the game falls in line with the trilogy and doesn't nuke the franchise from orbit.

Mass Effect: Andromeda will end up being the last Mass Effect we get for the next decade, it's that bad.  It will not be looked fondly upon, and when people talk about Mass Effect in the future, they'll be referring to the trilogy, and "oh yeah, wasn't there that offshoot game with no story and bad animations?"

EA won't release sales because it will sell so poorly - and we'll have to infer from VGChartz what it sold.  Expect DA2 type numbers, probably a little bit less, as that game was inexplicably reviewed positively by critics, while this game is being savaged for a AAA triple.  The only reason it's in the 70's is because EA is a big player in ad revenue for gaming websites.

If this game was called Nexus Star Explorers! - it would be getting 4's and 5's across the board.

Any proof of that?