Mass Effect: Andromeda didn't deserve the amount of criticism that it was subjected to when it launched earlier in the year. That's according to EA executive vice president Patrick Soderlund, who recently spoke to GameReactor.
"I usually don't do this, but this is one of those places where I feel like the game got criticised a little bit more than it deserved," Soderlund said. "I think the game is actually a great game. Yes, we have to acknowledge the fact that there were some things that maybe we could have done better, absolutely, but as a whole, if you go in and you buy the game today with everything that's in it today, I believe that that's a game worth buying, personally."
Unlike the games of the original Mass Effect trilogy, Andromeda was met with a largely lukewarm critical reception, and it was torn to bits by people across the internet for its various bugs, glitches, and its infamously wonky facial animations.
So, did Andromeda deserve the level of hate that it got? In our opinion, not quite. There's a good Mass Effect game at Andromeda's core, but it's an undeniably flawed experience, and one that simply doesn't measure up to BioWare's previous efforts. We don't think that means it should be burned at the stake, however.
Anyway, Soderlund goes on to say that the series may not be dead just yet: "For Mass Effect as a franchise, that has such a big fanbase, and you know I've seen people saying 'Oh, EA's not making another Mass Effect'. I see no reason why we shouldn't come back to Mass Effect." Soderlund's comments follow on from a recent tweet by trilogy director Casey Hudson, who said he'd love to work on the franchise again.
Do you think Andromeda deserved all of the criticism that it got? Dare to post your honest opinion in the comments section below.
[source gamereactor.eu]
Comments 35
Patrick Soderlund is a sociopath, therefore has no problems lying.
"I think the game is actually a great game."
Wrong.
Patrick Soderlund is also the dullest robot ive ever seen. @Bad-MuthaAdebisi
Yet, I feel he is true. You just don't drop Mass Effect like that, but at the same time it's a blatant refusal to admit anything was wrong in the first place, that makes me think maaaaybe they shouldn't revisit it, if they aren't willing to look at mistakes.
"if you go in and you buy the game today with everything that's in it today, I believe that that's a game worth buying, personally"
If that's what they're aiming for, then why could people pre-order the game and why were people able to play the game when it was released? Next time they should polish it first and then release it.
I'm still thinking about getting the game nontheless, played the demo and really liked it. Maybe when it's on sale again, I'll grab it.
"I think the game is actually a great game..." ahahahahahahaha....
Story was boring at best and quests were sooo repetitive...
Also, you got a whole new galaxy with what, 1 new alien race only? Same wild animals on every planet no matter the weather and the kind of Biome? are you kidding? Laziest release ever for a Mass effect game
I played the demo and was bored after 2 hours, just like a book or TV show it's to be interesting from the start, it just wasn't.
I have certainly played worse games, but on the heels of some truly remarkable games including Horizon and Breath of the Wild, Andromeda was just OK. My issues with it are primarily concerned with the common issues across most open world games. Uninteresting side quests, and the need to fill the map by working my way from A to B to do some uninteresting task. In the case of Andromeda, this included the mindless task of driving across barren landscapes to markers so probes can launch. At least filling the map in Horizon was fun.
I finished the game before all of the patches, so I experienced the poor animations. Again, coming off of Horizon (and a replay of Uncharted 4 just before), it was hard to ignore. Voice acting was OK, but nothing to write home about. The characters themselves were less memorable than anything from BioWare.
Having said that, the combat was at it's best for the series. Enemy encounters felt a bit challenging at times, and required one to maximize swapping abilities on the fly.
In the end, I think I could have spent my time with a worse game. I replayed the original trilogy multiple times, but I doubt I would ever be interested in playing this again. I expect more, much more, from something with the BioWare name, regardless of the team behind the name.
Have you ever tried Rola Cola? Yeah, it looks like Coca Cola. And yeah, it kinda smells like Coca Cola. And yeah, it's way cheaper than Coca Cola. But woe betide my mum if she came home from doing a big shop and she had Rola Cola in the boot. It's just a rubbish imitation.
Mass Effect Andromeda is the Rola Cola of video games.
I've only played the demo which started off promising but my enthusiasm for it was curbed after a few hours. Hopefully it'll become super cheap like Inquisition or better yet, a PS+ game.
It's hard to stop the tweeter/youtube hate train when it gets rolling.
It's far from a perfect game. There is a list of things wrong with it but the internet as always overreacted.
It's a 6 or 7 out of 10 kinda game.
Yeah, it probably is a great game, for anyone that skipped the trilogy, and hasn't played an open world RPG in the last 5 years.
Andromeda probably isn't that bad, but I don't tend to pay full price for mediocrity.
""Anyway, Soderlund goes on to say that the series may not be dead just yet: "For Mass Effect as a franchise, that has such a big fanbase, and you know I've seen people saying 'Oh, EA's not making another Mass Effect'. I see no reason why we shouldn't come back to Mass Effect.""
Then why did the internet flood with all those articles about EA putting the franchise on ice?
@Nickolaidas To be fair I think most websites described it as a "hiatus", insinuating that it's definitely been pushed to one side, but it's not strictly dead.
I think that's fair. Clearly we won't be seeing any Mass Effect games for a while but I can see it make a return down the line.
Suck it up buttercup. There is a deluge of great games on the market today. Here is what you did... as EA does often... you rode the coattails of an IP, put as little effort into writing, programming, animation, creativity, and imagination as you could, and you shipped that hot mess out to earn a buck. "didn't deserve the criticism it got" puh-lease - You are a grown man, in a corporation in a first world country, selling first world products - take your lumps and make a better product.
Compared to the trilogy it's pretty poor especially when it got released with terrible animations and it's very repetitive. So some of the hate is justified. Lesson to learn from this in releasing broken games
@Juvenlast If it was a corporation in France, would it be different?
@Nickolaidas I am actually in the process of editing that.
@Nickolaidas @Juvenlast How is my edit?
@Juvenlast Take your time, my man.
EDIT: Perfect. thumbs up
Haven't played it, and yes, the internet does tend to blow things out of proportion, but whether the game is worth playing or not is a decision that's ultimately up the consumer. Either way, the game wouldn't have gotten hammered so hard if the level of polish wasn't so shoddy.
Blame yourselves for shipping a mediocre product, EA.
@Ralizah Can't wait to see the explosions when Shenmue III's faces will look just like the Gamescom trailer.
Blood and glory.
I agree with what he says. People hated on this game from the start many of whom never played the game just jumped on the bandwagon. Thats the interent for you. Many people are sheep.
Or "Is it me who is out of touch? NO! It's the customers who are wrong!!! >"
The more things change, the more this company remains one of the worst in the industry.
What annoys me is the comment that if you play the game today it is a good game. That is after a ton of patching. The game got tore apart because it launched with more bugs then Starship Troopers. That is not unfair, that is a story to push a game if it ain't ready.
Yes, the new team that never made a full game, then horrifically mismanaged the first game they made is not at fault here, it's actually garrus_lover_420's fault for saying mean things on twitter.
If EA execs feels this way why did they cancel all dlc plans and shift all staff to anthem? If you believe in your product you don't do this.
I really tried to love the game buti found it really weak and after all the patches it's still mediocre. Yes the game got burned hard but it was not a new ip. If you treat an ip with such a huge fan base not with the love it deserves and instead rush out a game that clearly wasn't finished on release, you can expect the Internet to burn you and sadly that also brings extra haters who just love to hate. If mr soderlund thinks it's a great game he should play witcher 1, witcher 2 and then 3 to see how you can make a game series grow with the right love and time.
@Splat But its still a massive step down from the original games. And there where some really big issues not worthy to such a big IP.
@dryrain The game is mediocre and the IP was a step from what it was. Put in the bugs and terrible faces.
@Flaming_Kaiser - I agree but you had people calling it the worst game ever and stuff like that was just ridiculous.
People that never played or plan to play it hating on it just because it was "the thing to do" at the time.
I'm not defending the game I just think the hate got out of hand.
I've never played the game, but from what I've heard it's simply a bad game that was not what fans of the trilogy was expecting gameplay, story and animation wise.
@Splat you enjoyed it and fair play.
Im a huge ME fan, its my favourite trilogy of games last gen easily. I got Andromeda on preorder and absolutelt hated it. The drop in quality was staggering. It may qualify just as a 6 out of 10 when alls said and done but thats not good enough for the series.
Taking the game upon its own merits (As I only enjoyed ME 1 in the trilogy) Andromeda is still ok. It does a great deal of things in an average or mildly enjoyable manner. Some games are better than the sum of their parts...Andromeda is just the sum of its parts. It isn't terrible...and if you have nothing else to play its a decent way to pass your time. Too bad gaming is pretty congested with lots of releases. Even if you only own one system it would be rare to be backed in a corner to only play this game when there are better games to play out there.
I spent around 100hrs completing the campaign and all 'available' side quests that I opened up. I am not sure if 'some' decisions led to 'different' quests or not, but I still spent 100hrs playing through the game.
As someone who also completed 1-3, I think I am in a reasonably good position to share my opinion. I do think it was overly criticised but I do think some criticism was justifiable. Considering the games that preceded Andromeda, this game was better in some areas, weaker in others and definitely needed 6months or so to polish up the game. I appreciate that all the turbulence within the Studio may have impacted on finishing the game by deadline BUT I do think EA needs to shoulder a portion of blame by publishing the game before it really was ready.
That being said, the game isn't 'fundamentally' Bad. If it was 'polished' at release, it would probably of deserved an 8 score - better than average, upgraded and more varied combat - less 'linearity' overall, with some great 'sandboxes' too. The story wasn't 'overly' bad either. It was a bit predictable and in some ways, quite safe (in otherwords, didn't push the series forward - more a side-step). In fact a lot of it was 'safe'.
There wasn't a lot 'new' with only a couple of new races in the new system. The change from Military to Pioneer I think worked OK and whilst I do prefer the change in communication options - no longer picking all blue or all red - depending on what path you are playing through, this also affected the ability to see if or even when a decision made any difference. Some conversations seemed pointless - like picking between the 4 different 'emotional' responses - did it matter if you took a 'professional' response over a light hearted one? Difficult to tell - at least on a single playthrough.
Part of the issue though with this is the fact we had games like the Witcher 3 as the 'pinnacle' of the RPG and, along with Horizon:ZD, what can be achieved from a 'visual' perspective. The weight of expectation after the excellent trilogy and the power the current gen hardware offers, we really expected more. All this, combined with the poor execution by developers (like I said - maybe with more time to polish, things maybe different), the disappointment contributed to the overall opinion. If it was 'assessed' purely as a game without the history of the franchise, it would have scored higher and even more if the devs had been given more time. There are worse games than this that scored higher so I do think the critical response has been a bit too harsh. As I said, the state it was released in, the state I played the game in its entirety, it was 'average' for what it offered but with a bit more polish and the weight of expectation, would have scored better.
Would I recommend it - probably not at 'full' price or if you are a 'mega fan' of 1-3 (although you, like me, did buy it at launch), but for £15-20, its worth picking up. On Pro with a 4k HDR TV, some of the planets look stunning and the combat is a step up from the predecessors too...
Tap here to load 35 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...