>Andromeda better than 3
not a big mass effect fan but was the ending realy that bad?
3 seemed like a much more competent game than andromeda
IMHO it really was that bad. It's hard to describe just how bad without sounding like I'm descending into hyperbole.
Trouble with Andromeda is largely the lack of polish, I think; that thing with them seemingly giving up on it before it'd even been released. I've assumed their rationale may have been that whatever came after ME3 was probably going to be panned, though it may simply be that they'd already distracted themselves with The Great White Elephant by that point.
Given that there was so little input from the senior people in terms of storytelling and design, I think what was regarded very much as "the B team" came up with a better game than would've been expected. Which is perhaps damning it with faint praise, but the fault was really down to EA/Bioware's leadership or lack thereof.
Perhaps I got on with it okay as I always preferred the original Mass Effect and Andromeda was closest to it.
I suppose I'm whimsically making a mental analogy to the Alien series: ME is like Alien which is that it's new, mysterious and a bit scary; ME2 is like Aliens, which is much more shouty and gung-ho, it's fun but a bit crass; ME3 is like Alien 3/4 where nobody really knows what it's about, least of all the people responsible for writing it, and is ultimately a bit wonky and unsatisfying; and Andromeda is like Prometheus where opinions are very divided amongst those who enjoyed it for what it is and found hidden depths to it and those who thought it was just a bit cheap and missed the point.
