Mass Effect: Andromeda (english review)

80 hours of review

Elon Musks exist in future. Five colony ships are send from Milky Way to colonize Helious cluter in Andromeda galaxy. Six hundread years later Ryders family wakes up in another galaxy. Father Alec Ryder is a 'Pathfinder' for the Andromeda Initiative and both Sara and Scott still fledging explorers. The initiative has run to rocks since the whole space is made dangerous because anomaly called 'Scourge' which is indeed runaway dark energy. First contact to the local species called 'Kett' is immediately hostile and their leader shows interest towards the Pathfinder. The problems are not going to end soon because other space arks are missing and initiative leadership is not co-operating. The player can take either male or female Ryder and start deseperate project to find a home for colonists and turn the Helious cluster habitable!

Please note that the pictures in this review are both from earlier version and v.1.05! One can diffrentiate screenshots of with the shader quality.

Game Information

Game name: Mass Effect: Andromeda (v.1.05) Publisher/Developer: EA/Bioware (2017).
Platform: PC, XBox One, PS4 Type: shooter, adventure, multiplayer
Age rating(s): PEGI 16 (ESRB: Mature)
Reviewer: Rami (36)
Links:
Cinematic trailer
Patch 1.05
What Mass Effect Andromeda did Right?
What Mass Effect Andromeda did Wrong?

What players need to know about the game?

I did take quite lot of time and used 80 hours for the game. The first impressions can be seen from the youtube videos, however the first thing to know is that latest patch 1.05 fixes lipsync algorithm and number of small problems.

The most important question is "was the experience positive?" I have to admit that's the case. Most enjoyable parts of the games were at the middle and end, while the first 20 hours were exploring the planets. After the first mission the game gives some free rein and options to look after. Pathfinder can find ancient 'Remnant' machines on the planets that promise to make the planets habitable.The goal is to turn the system and then infiltrate to the central vault to activate it. So, there were lots of interesting tasks but I found driving around dull. Though I did have to admit I did focus on planets rather than following the story.

After the first planet the game hints that player should return back later. After this place there's new first contact situation, which actually restarts the plot quite nicely. Player can continue with the main story or just explore around making side quests. Everything is neatly made but the problem about game is intrinsically the fact that the Andromeda is not a 'movie game' like previous titles were. The ideas are taken from the first Mass Effect exploration (even scanning is reminiscent of that) but there is intent to do different kind of game this time.

What I saw was quite big common with Dragon Age 3: Inquisiton since both games have a bit too big maps. The actual problem is the time used to drive around. Player needs to repeat travelling which is clearly boring. Despite there is 'Fast Travel'-option the exploration and pointless skirmishing actually do misfavour to the tempo of the game.





Despite some bad feedback the actual side missions involving companions are interesting and filled with humor. So even if there is some critcsm against the writing I have to admit I did enjoy the sidequests that had Mass Effect 2 feel on them. 

The Andromeda fits to the fluff of original series. Small irony is that the colony ship collides with dark energy at the first two minutes of the game. Of course why Initiative is in Andromeda has to be explained with techno-babble: Their maps are 600 years old and not 2,5 million years? The actual explanation is that Milky Way Geths repurposed Mass Relay as faster than light observatory giving initiative possibilty to actually see golden worlds in the Helios cluster. Of course this ment some colonists are quite ill equipped for the actual tooth and nail-colonization..

The plot has quite of a deal of mystery. The father Alec Ryder has encrypted his logs and memories. Beside any player can see that colony ships left in 2185, year before Reaper attack. With this neat trick the game avoids to deal with the fallout an ending of the Mass Effect 3. The races with the initiative have their own history and they are just learning to get along.

I did think the Andromedas writing had really good elements. Having siblings as main characters avoids the question of actually thinking which one - male or female - is the canonically correct main character?

The player character is forced to the job of the 'Pathfinder'. This time his or her superpower is Artifical Intelligence called 'SAM'. This AI is explanation why Ryder can control Remnant equipment.

As for the adversity the new race called 'Kett' resembles thematically a lot of Reapers. However it's not known if the race has planned endgame like Reapers have. There's lots of hints but one game isn't enough to answer everything (much like first Mass Effect really didn't tell about Reapers in whole). There's several opponents available but the biggest problem is that normal soldiers have cardboard thin personality. However Ascendant-commander and big guys are different but as whole Kett are not that interesting opponent. Sure the have cool fluff but I'm already waiting for next game and added tricks to their sleeves. 

Mechanics and playability

The Andromeda is similiarly build "light rpg" like earlier Mass Effects. However the core is "cover shooter" but this time with the jumpjets! Jumpjets result gameplay being more fluid with fast dodges and jumps. Behind the cover regenerates health but it is not not going to recover to the full and player needs to find tradional health and ammunition from the pickups. The crates are not infinite and even consumable special ammunition runs out after three clips.

The player is free to explore around the Helios-cluster, scan planets with the mouse clicks and driving on them. Some players might remember first Mass Effect Mako-buggy - indeed the game has been example and players can find much better Nomand-buggy. The colonization is the main goal of the game and some of the areas are locked (behind the radioactivity, cold or heat) waiting terraforming to proceed. Every earth like planet has Remnant vaults that can be activated to make the colony more habitable.

The multiplayer missions can be played by the player himself or they can be given to the AI groups. The Apex-groups can fetch resources and weapons from the missions so there's no arbituary "war points" like in Mass Effect 3. The game is co-op with four Apex soldiers fighting against waves of enemies, trying to complete missions at the same time. The successfull missions merit random boxes of loot but the player who has many previous games in Origin is gifted with the multiple boxes at start.

Interesting?

I have to admit it took some time to actually fell in love with the game. After driving around 20 hours the plot started to advance. Mass Effect: Andromeda seems as fresh and competes in the line of both exploration and action. For us who liked the exploration aspect of the first game the probing of solar systems was fun and there's clear indications that Bioware has learned some of it's lessons. The scanning isn't 'I want to kill myself' level fun like in Mass Effect 2. Even if fans complain about not being listened there's several features in the game that prove that's not the case. When compared to other games the scanning of footprints seemed bit like certain third part of Polish game series but Ryder's scanner does do many other things as well.

There's quite many fun hints about previous games, familiar writing and hooks. I was suprised to see 'old fashioned Bioware' jokes: a finn! The science officer of the Tempest is Suvi! (Old Bioware RPGs had always finns that could be found from somewhere in the game). There's great deal of in depth thinking and humor in followers mission. For example Liams mission the the big baddie doesn't get to say much because Ryders group is arguing. Even the opressive music seem to be part of the bad guys transmission. Other features include space hamster v2, banter between group members and in depth discussion of LGBT topics. Naturally there is hard choices like is it right to keep family members in the cryostasis while we could make room for them?

“Day one” version had lots of bugs, like enemies spawning underground. After version 1.05 there's still things that should be fixed but like I pointed out in the early access test: "These are problems that can be fixed and will be fixed"

The biggest test however was the question that do I want to play more after the end texts? The answer is clearly 'yes'. With the Dragon Age: Inquisition, I think I was tired to the grinding despite some really beatiful scenes.

Few comments about rant

The less interesting aspect was to follow up doomsayers and angry fan boys proclaming how the Andromeda is poor game and Bioware will fall! This kind of chronical dissapointment seems almost like purposeful revenge on Bioware. Well, the fact that lipsync is broken with the day one release is embarissing but doesn't actually affect to the gameplay, which is the thing I think matters the most because I'm playing computer game and not watching a movie. Likewise there were some comments that implied that game developer is actually publishing broken games in purpose which is more like conspiracy theory, illogical and childish. However this illustrates the point that opinions were expressed with the feeling and not with the sense.

Then, tell me why AAA-games are broken when released?

To this question there's may answers. The amount of work is huge and the bones of the indians point in the wrong direction in the cemetery. Seriously computer games this size (actually this was LARGEST project that the Bioware had) mean that no one can actually take the lead of everything that happens. The projects are large, they use subcontractors and licensed tools. The previous problems that Bioware made were largely because too short developement period (Dragon Age 2), working against the agile methods (Mass Effect 3). Even so the firm has experience on Frostbite but that doesn't mean the another developement team has good scope of it. Peoples change, they switch jobs, places meaning extra question marks to development. People who look just at the 40 million dollars of the actual developement cost are just kidding themselves thinking that alone will buy working system. And it might be so that there were inexperienced people on the graphics team, just saying.

One fanboy told that 'faces should be rigged again'. Too bad none of the faces were actually rigged if you mean attaching vertexies to the bones. Andromeda uses some kind of new algorithm that deals with lipsync and expressions. Sometimes this algorithm is shining, for example I felt like Krogans and Turans had natural looking expressions, but sometimes the human expressions are lacking. The problem is on the code side, which means that some update might break the system - in the last weeks when our company was developing Switch&Glitch that happened quite often. Still, the day one version had too much bouncy animations (seen in older youtube videos) that have been softened up in later versions.  Engines like Unity do soften up transfers between animations, so coding has much to do with the actual animations and how they look.

The main question stands: "Should the games industry not take new tools and algorithms to use then?" The answer is no, because games industry would be doing just opposite what's natural. The games industry has always taken new technology to use. To underline this I can tell example from GDC 2017 8 Bit Graphics-lecture. Mark Ferrari told that in the old days he could use Deluxe Paint 2 for ten years in his work. Today it's impossible because tools change so fast that developers don't have time to mature to the master level.

What I think is the most important:

1. Game is getting updated after release (this is most expensive part of software developement)
2. The source code is optimized and doesn't require newest and best hardware to run.
3. The game has had it's full developement cycle so it's 'mature' enough
4. The game engine has been correct for the game
5. The game developement has enough resources with either time or manpower. 

Of course the game developement might have too large goals (this is the rookie mistake everyone will make when in fist game project). The 80 hours of the game is classed as 'megalomanical' project that will have too much, if not developed correctly. The publisher can spoil the game publishing it too early. For example I recall Elder Scrolls Online generating lots of hate 2014 because there were huge layoffs prior the lauch. Every changes made during the developement progress, WILL be seen in end product.

Some choices might be made far away from game developers control, for example Unity seems like first choice for game engine today, although it doesn't fit well to all kinds of games (example freshly reviewed P.A.M.E.L.A.). Of course there's games who don't really work and I am still bitter about XCom 2 which would have needed serious refactoring of the code and some sense to the actual gameplay. The goal of the game is not to frustrate players - this is unforgiven, not the fact that some animations don't really work.

Ethical message of the game

(Back to game) Andromeda is following on the footsteps of earlier games. There's no ‘Paragon’ or ‘Renegade’points but players decisions do affect what will happen. For example end battle is shining example of how player sees everyone that Ryder has helped come to his or her aid. The ending is and was emotionally satisfying. During normal discussions it's possible to make interrupts like shoot someone, hug or kiss.

If there's one theme that was predominant in the Mass Effect 1-3 it was co-operation between humans and aliens. Andromeda doesn't change the theme but emphasis it: in the Nexus headquarters the leaders don't really know how to work together and freshly encountered species doesn't have good impression of other aliens. Theres outlaws and Andromeda's version of lawless Omega in the planet of Kadara.

Although 'Pathfinder' is culturally clearly american view of hero the actual message of the game is that everyone can try and solve things. The writers actually went and had in depth view on real astronaut psychological profile. The player has freedom to choose what kind of Patfinder Ryder is and the emphasis can be on the group effort and not just one hero. There's usually quite many choices in the discussions and not one sarcasm button like in Dragon Age 2.

Scary or Distressing elements

The game content is similiar to earlier Mass Effect games, although the romances are more mature. Some romances can have nudity in erotic scenes but the depictions are quite tasteful and more implicated than shown. For example it's plausable that people crash to the wall when having intimate moments in zero gravity.

Horror and distressing effects are used with taste. Some scenes with the Kett are gloomy but not many scenes are that horryfying that you couldn't play with your kids around (well, you need to be ready to answer hard questions then...) The violence is the level of twinkle beams and light balls so the blood is there but not overly emphasized. The enemy heads can be blown off with big gun but this doesn't have emphasis either. Overall it's understandable the game has PEGI 16 age rating.

DLCs?

Accordingly press the post launch DLCs will be thought over with no plans of“Season Bundle”-type of solutions. Still the game would actually need some additional DLC content like earlier episodes.

From Gamestop the early order recieved  Deep Space Explorer Armor-set. Diffrerent types of bundles add hoodies and space monkeys with the pathfinder weapons being quite effective in the start of the game. 

Age rating

The game age rating is PEGI 16 - this is suprising since we see in first misson Kett kicking the wounded on the ground and executing unarmed pilot. My guess is that the rationale is that characters that are not part of gameplay don't rise the age rating. Meaning 'cutscene'-kills should not do that (unless part of the actual gameplay... ok this is actually a bit odd way to rationale something). The PEGI has traditionally been rabid about violence over 'innocents'. However executing POWs doesn't up the age rating (I would think that 17 year old might get traumatic experiences over civilians killed but not breaking of Geneve conventions?)! However it would seem that Andromeda has been though over and aimed for the age rating of 16.


PEGI-system  API gives the actual rationale of the age rating:

“This game features frequent depictions of realistic looking violence towards human-like characters. Human characters are often shot multiple times, with their health and shield bar shown lowering before they are defeated. When injured they often make small pained noises and blood is shown around the edge of the screen. When a human character is killed they fall to the floor and their body remains there for some time. One cutscene shows a man being shot in the head with a small spatter of blood shown. The game also features sustained depictions of death. Alien characters are killed in a similar fashion to the human characters, however, some weapons can cause the aliens head to explode with blood spraying from the wound. When alien characters are defeated their bodies fall to the floor and remain there for some time. This game also features scenes containing sexual nudity. The player has the ability to have sex with various characters throughout the game. During the sex scenes the couple are shown to be naked. Buttocks and female breasts and nipples are visible, although genitals are covered up or not shown. This game also contains the use of sexual expletives, with the word “fuck” found throughout.”

Discussion ideas about the game?

• What do we know about the Remnant?
• Why Ryder can use Remnant systems?
• Who are Kett and what do we know about them?
• What are the secrets Alec Ryder was hiding?
• What do we know about real Andromeda galaxy?