| Nautilus said: I dont see how Mass Effect Andromeda can be bad by your reasoning.People like, myself included, to try new things and new storys in the same established franchise(By that I mean using the estabilished lore and/or the same tone that the overall franchise has).I mean, if thats true, then Square should stop making Final Fantasy titles, since they all are pretty different from each other.I see nothing bad with it. |
The problem with Mass Effect, unlike your example of Final Fantasy or any franchise which has unrelated entries aside from few mythos here and there is that the trilogy, Mass Effect 1, 2 and 3, told the story of a particular character. Commander Shepard. There's no Mass Effect without Shepard, to put it bluntly. The grand scheme of things always worked around Shepard. Mass Effect 1 was the tale of a single soldier - Shepard - undercovering the imminent threat to the galaxy. Mass Effect 2 was the collective effort of bringing back Shepard because no one else could stop what was going in motion. And Mass Effect 3 was the finale, where Shepard chose the destiny of the galaxy and the species that lived within it.
There's a reason why you can't import a ME2 file into ME3 with a dead Shepard. Because ME3 wouldn't make any slick of sense otherwise. Bioware themselves said it so, if Shepard dies in ME2, the story is concluded there. Mass Effect is Commander Shepard and Commander Shepard is Mass Effect.
Now here comes Andromeda...which will be a totally unrelated game to the franchise, lore and mythos aside. See the problem here?
