Andromeda biggest weakness

My stance is that they don't build the main plot through the side-quests which is why I refuse to call it sub-plots but instead "side-stories". The Loyalty missions are not part of a larger theme in this game unlike ME2 which was about Shepard being a leader and that theme was strengthened through the Loyalty quests and the larger premise of the Reapers imposing doom on all species got more depth by the added world-building of each Loyalty mission that represented some part of the universe. I liked Cora's and Jaal's Loyalty missions but that's about it. Some normal side-missions still tie into something regarding the initiative, but again, it's all just one-off episodes and they're not building the larger narrative with any of it. The reason I don't think so is because in the final mission it felt tacked on.

They took a different approach than ME2, no doubt. ME2, as good a game as it is, basically consists only of recruiting and loyalty missions. They took up an entire game, at the cost of advancing the Reaper War plot. They weren't optional, if you wanted a crew member to survive. While I enjoy them a great deal, most of them add little to nothing to the Collector plot.

I can see why they tried to take the good of the loyalty missions, and bring them into MEA in a different form. I think these missions, despite being optional, were still tied more strongly to the game's main themes (settlement, strengthening the AI, defeating the kett) than ME2's were to the Collector or Reaper themes.

PeeBee is chasing Remnant Tech; Liam is scrambling to protect Nexus secrets; Drack is protecting his people; and so on. Those are all tied to the main themes, and I didn't even mention Cora's efforts to find an Ark. Even Vetra's mission, the one most like ME2's, is about family bonds and protecting colonists. I can't agree that they failed to support the plot, or to tie into it, with these missions.

I will say that I prefer when ME takes itself more seriously. There was too much humor and light-hearted goofiness in this game, in my opinion. I hate Liam's mission, despite the cool level design. The tone of the missions would be more a gripe I have; rather than suggesting that they don't connect with the main plot.

I agree that most side quests/stories are one-off ventures. They might be directly tied to the narrative, but they end upon completion and we often don't hear about it, again. This is what separates "Tasks" and planetary missions from the more important content, though, I believe. The lengthier quest lines were typically tied to a character or directly drove the plot.

I don't really view these one-offs as a failure or big miss. Each game in the OT was full of them, as well. Where MEA set itself apart was in actually tying them to the story, and linking many of them to actual people with whom we can converse. I think this is major progress, compared to the OT and DAI. I tend to see this as, "They did a great job at A, B and C; and they even added D. Maybe next time D can be developed a bit further." I would like to see more of the lengthy, long-developing quest lines; but those present did keep me plenty busy. That being the case, I think they did well, and created a great starting point for future games.


Tighten up a few things next time, cut back on others-- it's the same with every game in the series. I don't see how this game can be considered weaker than any other ME game. Technical issues aside (it clearly wasn't ready for release), this game has better production values by far than the OT. It stepped backward in only a couple small areas, and those for clear reasons, trading X for Y.

I always thought the Loyalty or Death mechanic was kind of cheap, whereas the upgrades and actually deciding roles were far more meaningful and really satisfying to see in action. And then ME3 took it further by making some go out like chumps if disloyal, like Zaeed on the Citadel. This guy should not die with Citadel music playing in the background. 

To be fair to the Archon...

They just need more diversity.

At the moment i'am in the middle of the "big" final, just before going back to Nexus for a final round. It's not good. Story is very average, all those "reveleations", well, they just are; c'mom BioWare 5 years and this is all you got ???

Or imagine your own squadmate who is secretly the villain. Dun, dun, dun.

Another weakness.. really bad ending. This whole finale with Archon - seriously ? Hope in Andromeda 2 there will be no Optimus Prime at the very end.

I agree with that. 

Bioware. A name synonymous with excellent characters, great storytelling and creating some of the best games of all time. However with the last two releases in their library with Dragon Age: Inquisition and Mass Effect: Andromeda, I feel Bioware is ignoring their core audience and trying to cater to a new one.

The biggest piece of evidence to this, is their new focus on creating open world games. For Inquisition a developer stated that Skyrim was a big influence, and for Andromeda, Witcher 3 was that influence. Considering these are arguably Bioware's two worst games to date, that should be telling. Dialogue, meaningful choices, and interesting outcomes were sacrificed for the sake of "bigger is better." The problem with bigger open world games is you run the risk of being bland and boring most of the time. Bioware has always excelled at a more linear approach to their RPG's.

Take Bioware's previous games for example. KoToR and Dragon Age: Origins were around 25-30 hours of gametime, The Mass Effect Trilogy, each game sitting at around 40 hours of gametime, and most of that was focused on characters and story. This is the Bioware I fell in love with. Inqusition and Andromeda? You're looking at around 100 hours, and 70% of that is exploring empty open worlds with boring side quests and lifeless characters filling them.

With Inquisition and Andromeda, I shudder to think of playing through them again; there's too much trekking towards menial tasks with little payback, and hardly any meaningful or rewarding choices to be made. I don't play Bioware games for 100 hours of bland MMO-esque chores in big zones, but rather for engaging conversations with unique characters and a plethora of meaningful decisions that impact my experience on each play through.

While I did enjoy Mass Effect: Andromeda more than Dragon Age: Inquisition, I still hope that someday Bioware will go back to making games with a more linear RPG gameplay style then what they've done as of late.

But I'm afraid that Bioware will continually chase towards this "Bigger" path and thus ruin what made them great to begin with.

Well that was my personal play time on like my 10th playthrough, so I had the game down to a T at that point. It was also on normal, Nightmare would obviously take longer. That's also just the base game, no DLC or the Awakening expansion. Adding those and your pushing 60+.

In ME 2, Mordin already explains that the Korgan is adapting to the Genophage and birthrate is increasing, just like what happened in ME:A. It has nothing to do with them spending 600 years in sleep. They are adapting before even leaving the galaxy.