That logic is backwards. If you want to get someone to like a series, you don't introduce them to the worst game in the series. they're better off being introduced to what got people to like the series in the first place.  Andromeda is not a competent TPS/RPG space epic by any means. What happens if this is the first game out of the series they play but get turned off by it and don't want nothing to do with the series at all? They're better off waiting til this game is patched as much as can be and playing the earlier games first. 

You collecting them or something? Heleus Armour, make one set, sell the old. My inventory sits around 45 most the time, no idea what is taking up most of it mind you. Do consumables count? Hardly use them. Didn't even realise that was where the med kits were for most the game, I haven't died in ages though (should have put it on a harder difficulty).

I wouldn't bother with the original trilogy. It's not a cohesive experience anyway. Andromeda is more more like a sequel to ME1 than 2 and 3 were from a design perspective. 

My inventory slots are at 80, because I used some of the Viability Points I built up to expand them.

If you want to collect every piece of armour in the game, I guess I see your point. But to me, inventory management, prioritising resources - they are part of an RPG. Theres a reason in old school games you needed to put in a cheat code for unlimited guns and unlimited games! A guy can't carry the world around on his back!

Im just glad they are fixing the male/male relationship issue soon. But idk how they will.

As much as I bash this game for fun, I do hope it improves. If the updates make a substantial difference, I may pick the game up

I dunno about you, but to me a 70+ game is a competent game for its genre. People are only shitting on it as being a terribly horrible, no good, very bad game because it compares unfavourably to the trilogy. But in isolation the game is by all accounts a competent TPS/RPG space epic. So the best order of play for a Mass Effect noob is to experience a ME:A and then move on to the superior ME trilogy.

I think a 70+ score for this game is the result of some people being lenient on it because it's mass effect. If you look at the scores from some reviews... It's ridiculous. If any other game had those kind of problems, it would have a score around the 60s.  A game that could have been been an easy 90+ plus game if it weren't for its issues. So to alot of people, a 90+ game was reduced to 70+. The good things about the game can't make up for the bad parts. It deserves all of the shit it catches over it where it failed at. How many memes were created just from the facial animations from this game? You don't introduce a person the worse game out of a series before the rest of it.

Have you actually played Andromeda? I've finished it and every game in the franchise. It's NOT the worse game in the series in my opinion. There isn't a universal worst game in the series. My least favorite is ME3. Some people hate ME1, others ME2. 

So have you played Andromeda or not? If you haven't then you aren't really in place to have a debate on it's place in the series. Andromeda certainly has issues when it comes to polish and presentation. The tutorial phase of the game was big turn off to me. Once past that point the game picks and gets much better. It delivers on the promise of the original game. It's an RPG. It's not a stripped down TPS with RPG elements like ME2. It's not a complete cluster fuck like ME3 was. The way the l the concluding story mission plays out is how the conclusion to ME3 should have played out. Not going to say what happens to avoid spoilers but those of you that have played mission knowns exactly what I'm talking about.