Interesting excerpt from Mac interview regarding Andromeda as a series and where it's going next

Article is interesting and based off the things that Mac Walters said about the series and it's future, I think I'm done with Mass Effect.

It's clear that Walters is going with a completely different vision with the series than I originally thought. I thought that the team was just simply expanding the exploration, but it seems like Mac Walters really wants to focus on exploration more than anything and that's just not what I come to Bioware for. Given with the way they gave us "exploration" in ME:A with fetch quests and planets with lack luster story lines that are as basic as "The sun is too hot to live here, run over to these 3 monoliths that you do on every other planet and fix it pls, thx..." It just doesn't work for me. However, I do know there are some people out there who did enjoy the planet exploration and thought it was good. But the praise on combat and the visuals were far more superior than anything else which is a bit sad when the focus was exploring.

Mac Walters even says that his approach with his writing was not "story based." Instead, he focused more on the characters. And even when he said this in the article, it came across as if he's really only focusing on the characters because he knows it's what did well in Mass Effect 2 and that's what he knows the fanbase wants. It didn't come across as if he was passionate about these characters and their stories at all imo. I don't think he realizes that yes, the characters were a huge aspect that made Mass Effect 2 the success that it was, but the story in ME2 was concrete and added to the characters. The story was intriguing and made you want to continue the game to see what was going to happen, it made you want to survive for your LI, It made you want to pick certain decisions to see not only how it'll play out in the world but also on the characters. You just cant expect this game to succeed based off the merit of the characters with a weak story, and even the characters in MEA are not written as good as ME1-3's. I don't care enough for the story, the characters are fine but even they can be a little more in depth, but they wont be given that chance if we don't continue with them. 

I'll stick to Dragon Age, I guess. I already feel dirty for buying this game at full price as it is. Such a disappointment.

The sales figures so far haven't been too bad.

Then why do you worry? MEA feels a lot like ME1. Without tough moral choices or dangerous decisions, so, everyone is safe (for many gamers it's a relief), but the rest is pure ME1. No surprise here since Walters said the team consisted of the fans of ME who wanted to imrove the experience they had (never ever listen to your fans! Ever!). And if you are right, and Walters with that team of fans are "playing it safe" - we have all the reasons to believe the next game will be ME2.
Btw, Ark with Drells and Quarians is on it's way, you have all the chances to get your wish

We all want that. But you gave Thane as an example of an awesome character - someone, developers came up with only in ME2. All I am saying, we might see the same pattern with MEA (and Walter practically confirmed that) - establishing the lore and the world in the first game, and then beginning to build the real story and characters. MEA2 to MEA1 can be what ME2 was to ME1. There is a hope.

DA:I has an ending. Saying that it doesn't because there was sequel DLC is like saying that A New Hope didn't have an ending because Empire came out next.

Doom Upon All the World was Inquisition's ending. Trespasser was just a bridge.

DAI had an ending. A rather "safe" one, but it is an ending.

Trespasser is epilogue and sets up the next game. It tells us what the companions did afterwards, gives us the Inquisition's role post-Corypheus, gives the Inquisitor and Solas some closure (though not, perhaps, as much as some people wanted), and sets up the Qunari as teh next antagonist. It is arguably a better conclusion than DAI gave us, but that doesn't mean DAI didn't have an ending of its own.

it's not even that certain. He has a co-lead writer role in Andromeda from the time after Schlerf left but it has since then been passed on to Cathleen I think. The problem is that BioWare don't promote via skillful achievement. They promote by time spent at the company and nepotism according to various sources at glassdoor. They value that the artists critique each other but when you become Creative Director you ultimately call the shots. There are stories of Mike saying "this is what we do" for DA2 and DAI. Mac has the same position on Andromeda so while discussion is valued there is such a thing as higher-paids who get more say and that is damaging due to how friendly it seems BioWare is.

He talked about it as if it was bad because "Shepard had to die". Then he emphasized " organics vs synthetics" as being the most forthcoming theme of MET and recently he's talked about how Andromeda is "a story about humanity". How is that not a sign that he has no clue what it is people loathed about the endings?

Are we bashing Mac again? Sure thing, guy sucks at world-building and main themes, but the problem is that he's the captain now. If he sinks, he does it together with ME franchise. If MEA is a success, it's his success.

I have a lot of problems with him. But who could judge his writing competence now? EA management? Writing quality is probably the last of their concerns.