i wish i could tell if i'm being objective with ME:A, or if i'm just punishing it unfairly for not being the old trilogy... i've said it several times, i think. andromeda isn't a bad game, it's actually an ok game. which is the problem, we're just not used to simply ok. ME1-3 was far more than just ok, same with, BG, DA:O, and DA2 (which i actually liked more than most did). i think that's the issue, MEA is just ok.
@CasperTheLich wrote:
i wish i could tell if i'm being objective with ME:A, or if i'm just punishing it unfairly for not being the old trilogy...
It's not unfair. When you have a whole saga of a game of a genre under you belt and you want to sell another one of the same game to your old public (because they sort of targetted old fans, right? If not, why even mention or use references from the trilogy?), people will take their previous experience, what they most liked, the very best assembled and expect things going from there. People were given information about how some things changed in this new setting, but they expect, still, the best features from before to feature again, and not pruned. Unless they were working on a social experimentation on how to irritate and disappoint some people? Alas, lets read their reasons in the ashes! They must hold some answers!
