AngryJoe's review on MEA

The 6/10 or 7/10 is deserved for the current state. To me the dialouge and script is childish at times, the enemy ai break and make parts too easy. Combat and exploration are good to me, they don't need to be changed all that much.

I do not agree with joe at all for a PVP multiplayer. Horde mode fits for MP well, I hope they add more stuff besides weapons and characters.

I'll agree it should've launched in a better state, and I don't think they were expecting people to let it fly, they wanted it out quick as possible before the business quarter ended to maximize profits. It's nothing new with the gaming industry as a whole, various games get pushed out when they shouldn't have and it indeed does cause issues post launch and reception.

the thing is, I laugh when people say "how'd they let these animations go by?", "this many bugs?" "Did they play test this?" I full well knew they knew the issues, it's why they had a day one patch, people shouldn't be suprised because of that alone and that day one patch was mentioned weeks before launch. I expected issues myself because of that, but I was not expecting this many nor the specific issues it does have.

DAII is irrelevant cuz it's not the same studio or people doing this. Montreal is a brand new studio, this is their first game, they have no prior game experience. 

No. 

I'm stating that it's the 4th game that this studio has released within this franchise. 

At the 4th go of asking, the expectation is quite highly. Fairly. They didn't meet it. 

If this was the first game they released in the franchise, you could cut them some slack. 

But the 4th game? And them making so many fundamental errors? 

It's not good enough. It's not acceptable. 

No testing. And by testing I mean a team that sits and plays the game from start to finish and makes notes on all the janky stuff, on all the buggy types of stuff, on all the things that stand out as annoying. 

Probably no or not many do that but it really needs to be done. I think so many games would be better off if someone actually played the game from start to finish and gave a real critical analysis. Tons of stuff would be better in this game if that happened and out of the gate it would have been more like an 8. 

It always strikes me as odd that so many people care what other people may think about a game.

I understand the value of reviews to inform potential buyers. I also understand discussing the merits of a product, be it positive or negative...but people bothering to ARGUE for or against another person's opinion regarding a product you've already purchased is a bit, well...odd to me.

Considering their own devs said they beat the game before it even launched I'd still stick by my statement they knew of the issues, launched a day one patch +the game anyways. It's hard for them to just get away and say "we didn't know". And blame them not testing it enough. Not to mention they scrapped the MP beta, probably so people wouldn't see how it played right before launch.

People are over exaggerating over the facial animations.

What I like about Angry Joe is that he cares about consumers not getting ripped off by video game companies. Not all reviewers express that. (And not saying he's suggesting this game ripped anyone off, although he clearly finds micotransactions as anti-consumer.)

If I were to question anything, it would be that I hope he didn't downgrade the game because it didn't have "space battles" - judge the game for what it is, not what you want it to be. Also, he made fun of the cheesy dialogue, but I'd wonder if the dialogue was supposed to be cheesy on purpose. So bad it's good, ya know? Like when Liam talks about shooting people in the face. So I'm not sure if he judged that properly, but some definitely see it as Bio's writers sucking.

Overall, I thought his reaction was honest and fair. His accuracy is up for debate, but he had his standards and used them. He also had genuine passion and love for the series. So he shouldn't be dissed or dismissed.

As a fan of Mass Effect and an on the fence purchaser of Andromeda this review is confirming some of my thoughts and concerns from what I've been reading on the forums.

A couple things that stood out to me:
The point about the story having each MW race having their own pathfinder lending itself well to idea of the player being able to chose their own race. It's incredible to believe this idea was overlooked or rejected. It would have set Andromeda apart from trilogy in a connected and good way. No fixing this now. How was this opportunity missed?

Lack of "alien" alien races. Something more alien than Angara and cybernetic would have rocked. A cyborg insect nanobot race would be a good fight. Whatever. This can be fixed.

No PvP. Not even an attempt.

With the announcement yesterday and the patches over the next couple months I'll still probably buy it.

Looking at the entire background story of the Ryder family, it's clear why they didn't bother with race selection at all. You can't have all of those different memories and the entire backstory of SAM and the original pathfinder role in the narrative play out the way it did with multiple races to account for. Regardless of what one may think of the Ryder story, the two things just wouldn't work out in conjunction with one another. 

I myself am not cutting slack, but I am reasonable. This game is pretty good for a studios first try. It has a perfect foundation where it should only get better as well. That's where they now need to show they can improve it. Replace the writers, keep improving the combat as they always do, put better focus on getting the animations right, and keep making the gorgeous worlds they made in this game as well as polishing and kinking out the bugs. I'm optimistic for the next game, but I'm not excusing what they did wrong either. I've already tweeted out to bioware on the various issues I've had, I also know other people are doing the same thing, and I'll be looking deeper into the next game on what it truly improves and regresses on or if it just stays the same.

Angry Joe's reviews are OK. He just takes too long, I don't have time watch his reviews. A 30 minute review might contain 30 seconds of useful insight.