Thankfully, this isn't Bioware Montreal that fucked up ME:A really damn badly.  I'll admit I'm curious to see more.  I've got high odds that I'll be testing it at some point, but likely won't be able to say a word without losing my ass in a court case.  EA takes their NDA paperwork very seriously.  

Looks very similar to the division and destiny e3 "gameplay" reveals. I hope it's awesome because this checks a lot of boxes for me but I'm beyond skeptical at this point. EA and Ubisoft have pulled so many e3 bait and switches that it's hard to get excited for their games anymore.

After the clusterfuck that is ME:A I think I'll wait a month for some real reviews to come out and not buy it day one....

I'm dubious on EA and am (for now) giving Bioware benefit of the doubt as it isn't the same studio that made ME:A.  But I'm tempering my expectations.  Could be awesome, could not be.

I'm cautiously optimistic due to it at least being the frostbite engine, so it should at least be pretty and technically sound(ish). What I'm concerned about is the gameplay. I'm not sure how many of you remember when the division "gameplay" was first shown at e3 but just remember that they delivered a completely different game. I knew it wasn't going to look as good and I didn't care, what got me was that the gameplay itself was in no way, shape, or form anything like what they showed at e3 prior. That said, this game could look like ass but if the gameplay is essentially armored core on a smaller scale with destiny questing/fireteam elements but with content to back it up, I'll be sold.

Yup.  It's still a year off.  I hope it doesn't turn into the Division though.  At least Bioware got experience with huge areas with ME:A.  I see a lot of their backend tech rolled into it honestly.  Not sure how they're going to implement drop in/out parties smoothly like that in frostbite, but I could be impressed.  

But yeah, it looks like a person sized AC now that you mention it

I is interested

Got yourself a pretty sweet gig as a tester Polar. I'd kill for that job haha

I never have liked campaign multiplayer in my story based games.

It's unpaid stuff.  Hell, I usually don't even get listed in the credits.  Just get to play early, although I got a free copy of games on occasion back in the early 2000's lol.  About it really.  Mostly I do it so I can decide if I want to buy a game or not, based on how it plays and dev response.   If they fix issues fast, you can tell they'll usually try to push patches and make the game better.  

Lots of bug reports and trying to recreate an issue.  Try running into the same corner for 2 hours to try to get outside the map because you did it once by accident.  But you have to be able to explain exactly what you were doing to cause the bug.  Open betas are a lot easier and bug free lol.  Closed alphas and betas can be... iffy but you can't talk about them without potentially getting sued or blacklisted. 

Btw, it is kind of fun to get outside map geometry though.  There are a few spots in Destiny that I love to poke around in.  Can warp to all new places by forcing the game to load you in.  Think the SNES Mario warp whistle pipes in a more fucked up and breaking the game way.  

Eh... I dunno. Not really blowing my skirt up based on that video. Probably got being burned with Destiny and ME:A to blame for that. Maybe once it's been out a while and everybody loves it, I'll think about it.

Year one Destiny was rough, largely at the feet of Activision for that one.  Year two was good, but year three (Taken King and Rise of Iron) are really solid.  Then again, I've got probably over 2100 hours playing it 

Oddly enough Year 1 is what I enjoyed the most. The game was great before Bungie got schizophrenic with the sandbox. They had the game balance in a fantastic spot right before year 2. They just needed to dial in a handful of ridiculously overpowered things (Thorn, TLW, high impact shotguns, and give ARs a buff) and it would've been fine. The longer it's gone on, the more apparent it's become that they don't know WTF they're doing. That and adding SBMM with Taken King really ruined the PvP. Destiny's netcode is horrible. It was amazingly fun when it was 100% connection-based and the shit netcode didn't rear its head that much. It got bad with Taken King, then TERRIBLE as the playerbase dwindled. The game needed a networking overhaul if they were going to do SBMM.

ROI was fun for a while, but my interest petered out after about a month and I haven't gone back. Never finished the new raid.

I like loot shooters and this seemed more up my alley than Destiny, and Destiny was pretty fun for me. 

It was the only game at the Xbox conference I was interested in, though.

I have to count myself among the "zero interest" folks.

When I kept hearing them refer to it as "the Bob Dylan of Video Games" it kind of perked up my ears, but now upon reveal it looks more like the "Me Too of Video Games" and my interest level sunk back down to bleh.

The only big triple A game I'm interested in right now is RDR2.

Game looks pretty cool

This really got me excited.  Then again, so did ME:A.  The upside here, is it's a studio known for pushing out quality, with a lot of experience under their belt.  While i like ME:A, and am actually starting my second play through, i readily admit it has a lot of short comings.  The interesting thing is, after you do some research on youtube, most of those shortcomings can be pointed at one thing.  Inexperience.  Montreal should NOT have been given something as important as ME:A as their first title, ever.  And they certainly should have had much better leadership in place, as the inexperience showed through with all the WTF decisions that were made which clearly handicapped the title.

That said, i agree, it very much feels like Destiny with a bit of Division.  I prefer to solo play Destiny, so i'm hoping this will actually allow that.  The visuals are stunning, and i really like the armor suit concept.  Destiny, while the classes can be interesting, doesn't really get the armor and weapons concept quite right.  It's decent, but as with ME:A, you end up finding a few things that work really well, and everything else is second rate not worth using.  So most often, everyone just uses the same stuff.  This looks like your armor suit is your "class" and you can have multiples, so you can switch your "class" at will just by running a different suite of armor.  And some of those special weapons looked bad ass.

We'll see where this goes.  After watching that, i can easily see why they put an Andromeda 2 on hold.  They would very much compete against each other, so you'd want to make sure they're well separate in your release cycle.  Add in the disappointment that was ME:A and it was an easy decision.

I wish they weren't using Frostbite. It's just not a great engine for these types of games.

I don't believe anything I see at E3...  The clip that was shown will probably look nothing like the retail product.  

Look at the E3 footage from The Division, Wildlands, or Rainbow Six Seige for recent examples.


I will wait for the post release reviews before I get excited about anything.

My main issue with comparing it to Destiny is that Destiny had great gameplay and shooting mechanics, because it came from a studio with that pedigree.  The "story" was barely existent garbage.

Bioware, in comparison, has never been that good at the actual moment-to-moment gameplay.  It's always been just passable.  Andromeda probably had the best gameplay to date but still not top tier, and that studio isn't involved with this.

Bioware has always shined in the story category, which was what made people overlook the pedestrian gameplay mechanics.  But you can't convince me that making a large open world game with mutiple real human players fucking around won't hurt the story and pacing.  Both of Biowares's recent open world attempts (Inquisition and Andromeda) have both had some major issues traceable to the open world, and those campaigns were single player only.

I guess what I'm getting at is that Bioware doing a multiplayer looter shooter seems like it would have them relying on the part that is their biggest weakness (gameplay), and not utilizing their biggest strength (story).

I'll have to wait and see whether you can play this by yourself.  If so, I might still check it out.

I turned off the video after about a min. Lost me at the part where he seems to stick his feet through the leg holes of the suit.  


Visuals look amazing though.

Looks pretty good.  I'll definitely give it a shot but will probably have to upgrade hardware to do so.  Will watch to see what happens with it.

Sure it looks pretty, but Bioware is on the shitlist these days....and EA

I don't know what you have now, but it's still the frostbite engine which is pretty well optimized. If you can run BF1 you should be gtg

The fact that the company allowed an idiotic racist piece of shit with verbal diarrhea helm the project speaks volumes about the incompetency surrounding that project.

Absolutely. The entire studio was probably one giant clusterfuck of everybody constantly filing EEO complaints. They seem to have pulled all their resources and dumped them into Anthem. I'm almost wondering if they were like "fuck it, we'll give them ME:A, that way when they fuck up astronomically we can shit can all of them without getting paper cut on us". Sure enough, idiotic racist piece of shit jumped ship. EA really didn't lose anything, they still pulled a profit off of ME:A, granted, they can't put out another ME for a long time because of it but I'm thinking they're planning on recouping all loses from sales of anthem.

Honestly, the "gameplay" part of Andromeda is shit tier for 2017. It's Mass Effect 3, but with slight updates, and that was just tolerable for 2012 and only because it had a whopper of an amazing action RPG (shitty ending aside) behind it. It would be forgivable if they knocked it out of the part on story like they usually do, but they fucked that up too.

The Division is a light-year ahead of ME: Andromeda on the fluidity of movement and cover mechanics front for a third person shooter, and Ghost Recon: Wildlands is a whole parsec ahead by taking the Division's system and smoothing out all the rough edges. ME:A's movement and cover system feels atrociously clunky in comparison. And those are UbiSoft games of all things. I don't trust BioWare to deliver on the movement and shooting end of gameplay any more than I trusted Obama to deliver on lowering my health insurance premiums.

I absolutely agree.  This game probably isn't going to be a gameplay tour de force.  So I guess I'll play it for the story like all the previous bioware games...except that this is a MP looter-shooter, and those never can get the same level of tight pacing and storytelling that a dedicated SP experience can.  With this game, Bioware seems to be playing to all its weaknesses, not its strengths.  I really don't understand it.

Maybe they'll be the first game company to ever make a deep, compelling story and characters in an open world multiplayer co-op game.  But somehow I doubt it.