Could an amazingly done DLC redeem the game of Andromeda on the whole?

Andromeda is not trash, but I voted no.

It's definitely not redemption in the vein of "BioWare's reputation is forever changed for the better". It's like Trespasser if it turns out well, meaning it makes the game more replayable and it pays off more at the end of a long playthrough with more drama and closure and more time for characters to shine.

Hmmm...i haven't finished the game yet and i haven't touched it in a couple of days....i feel no real rush to complete it. Maybe they can patch the story and characters to make them more interesting? Aside from that, does this game need DLC?...the side missions alone should be considered DLC since there are a ton of them! I'm not sure if DLC would improve the game because even tho i feel alot of the side missions are a bit uninspired, Andromeda is a very big game in terms of it's exploration and each of their planets feel fully realized. 

If the side missions somehow was related to to the story overall or impacted SOMETHING with some sort of impactful reward, then no DLC would be needed...even with DLC, the issue remains that the DLC itself would have to crafted on the level on how well it was done with ME3....if it's more filler like most side missions in the game, it will be a complete waste of time....

if they release a Cerberus pack dlc it would. and a radio dlc for the car so my Ryder can listen to some Ozzy. Pink Floyd, Metallica and others

The problem with your poll is that it is based on your opinion that the game is bad which goes against what a lot of people feel about the game as the overall consensus is that it is a good game which has a few issues holding it back from being a great game.  The choices you give in the poll don't allow for people who see the game more positively then you do.

What they need to do to "fix" the game is get rid of the bugs, polish the animations and tweak certain game elements. Doesn't matter if they add 100 DLC for it unless they also do THIS.

The overall consensus is that the game is not good, it's meh. Good would mean a lot more people including myself would have bought or would have enjoyed the game.

I'm still baffled that people in this thread don't think the game needs redemption? Regardless if you think the game is great as many of you do, the general consensus is the game isn't good it's meh and and I'm sure EA and Bioware would love to bring out a DLC where everyone said, wow, I'm actually enjoying the game now or the game is better. 

Once again, yes you love the game but don't be blinkered in thinking it doesn't need redemption because outside of your bubble it needs some big wins. 

EA and Bioware are not happy with the way the game is viewed by the wider gaming community and this does mean a lot to them even though money is still what they want. 

I don't think A DLC would change my opinion on the game unless it was complete separate and you could start from level one and the reviews were gushing. They could call it ME2?

For a game to need "redemption," it would first have needed to "fail."  In my opinion, it just didn't do that.  It shipped with a large number of bugs.  There were some major animation issues.  There were a slew of technical things that needed fixed.  Most (if not all) Asari use the same face model.  None of this is in debate, on my side at least.  I did, however, play Skyrim and Fallout 4 shortly after launch.  I've read many comments about The Witcher 3 shortly after it launched.  Fallout New Vegas was a mess on release.   Every AAA "open world" type of game released in the last 10 years or longer has had MAJOR issues on release.

Do the ones in ME:A need to be fixed?  Absolutely.  But I won't detract points from ME:A compared to other AAA open world RPGS's based on the bugs alone.  All of 'em were as bad or worse than ME:A, either from personal experience, or from first hand accounts.

The rest is completely subjective.  I feel that ME:A is the true spiritual successor to ME1.  Better exploration elements.  Better combat.  Squadmates that are the equal or better than the ME1 squadmates.  Most of the ME1 squad were fairly forgettable, until they grew on me throughout the trilogy.  The main story in ME:A is pretty decent, nothing special, but nothing terrible...and most Bioware games have been the same.  ME2 and ME3's main stories were absolute shit shows compared to ME:A's main story.  There IS a bit too much story segregation between the various threads.  Setting up colonies and making the Initiative viable is a part of the main story, but feels too separated from the Archon/Meridian story line.  The side quests were quite nicely integrated into the world we were exploring and settling.  Many of the tasks, on their own without context, could be seen as "boring make-work," but from the perspective of "We have no idea what these worlds have to offer, let's figure out how to live here" even the "Hitting rocks for science" quest makes sense.

That being said, I think reducing the level of "tasks" by around 30%, and making the maps slightly smaller, to make room for a few more fleshed out side missions, better flow to the critical path, and more companion/crew content would go a long way in any sequel.

The technical issues alone drop the score *I* would give to ME:A to around an 8/10.  Bioware has addressed a few of these issues in the 1.05 patch, and I'm looking forward to more fixes in upcoming promised patches.  If the game is fully patched, with all of the more egregious technical issues fixed, and at least most of the "minor" stuff remedied, I would easily bump this to around an 8.8 or 9.0/10.  If the side content/main story segregation/companion content stuff I mentioned were changed in a sequel, but kept the main formula of ME:A, I would say it would be easily a 9.5 or better.

Of course, this is all my opinion.  I just don't think ME:A "failed" in a way that requires "redemption."

Well, it depends really. If they drop the open world and do a more linear story with focus on characters.

Agreed. I can't vote, since the question is loaded. My gripes are purely technical, in connection with the unfinished ished state of the game. I have the usual, "Maybe try this next time" type of feedback to give; but those aren't complaints.

I agree that a quality DLC can only enhance the game. I look forward to further patches and "quality control" type improvements, and then DLC, in that order. I was really disappointed with DAI at launch; but the patches and DLC greatly improved it. Honestly, these extras save the IP for me. I hope the coming months' changes can do the same for others in connection with the ME IP.

"Open world" in this case would probably mean an entirely new zone to explore, so there's that. But, if the DLC is about what we think it will be, I don't think they could do the open zone thing anyway. I sure wish they'd open up more of the Nexus though, or maybe even let us see Meridian expand.