EA "Embarrassed" by How Good Its 2017 Releases Will Be

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

Battlefront sequels when Battlefront itself doesn't even have all its DLC and the stuff that would make it a flushed out game in it. My sides.

Thank God I didn't get suckered in by the Star Wars hype. This is just confirmation for my refusal to give EA money even when properties I adore are on the line. Its just not worth it.

What hype was there? As far as I recall every announcement got people to go "oh hell no" or other exclamations of disbelief and despair.

EDIT: Oh god, was there an update while I was posting this or is my browser throwing a fit? So much white!

The people I've been around outside of the internet don't have my EA cynicism and were caught hook line and sinker despite my best warnings. They never stood a chance.

 

[votemarvel]

Eh, a bit more reasonable start at least, though it raises yet more issues about the whole plot. After their whole "Completely change the galaxy and Reapers are gods" end to ME3 it kinda throws anything they could do for the future out of whack. Had there been a canonic victory over the Reapers, and they had themed it more along the lines of us reverse engineering their technology, and uniting to advance the galaxy into a new era... Sure, I could buy that in a few hundred to a few thousand years we'd make it to Andromeda and start building some Mass Relays there and all that good stuff. We wouldn't have to worry about what happened to the Reapers, we'd have the tech level to do so, and the entire galaxy wouldn't have to be green glowie people... or not, depending on ending.

Unfortunately they tied everything together in the perfect way that any sequel fits rather questionably within the lore they've set up for the universe, though, they haven't really cared about that since 2 so I guess nothing's different there.

I just have the feeling that any future Mass Effect games will be set in the Andromeda Galaxy.

What ever people may think of the endings to Mass Effect 3, they do have quite different repercussions for the Milky Way. By setting all future games in Andromeda (kick started before the end of ME3), they don't have to deal with them.

I just find it odd myself that we have the technology to send a ship to another galaxy but the only way we can beat the Reapers is by building something we don't know what it does.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

The first Mirror's Edge was so shit I got it refunded for that reason in the store. I told the clerk I'm returning it because it's total shit. I have no hope the sequel will be any better.

ME: Andromeda will be one to watch, but presuming it uses Origin, I shan't be buying it.

 

[votemarvel]

The first Mirror's Edge was so shit I got it refunded for that reason in the store. I told the clerk I'm returning it because it's total shit. I have no hope the sequel will be any better.

ME: Andromeda will be one to watch, but presuming it uses Origin, I shan't be buying it.

I just don't understand what people like about Mirror's Edge. The first time I played it I thought something was wrong with my 360 and the textures weren't loading. Nope it really did look that bland. The parkour/free running elements were also poor as your had a very narrow choice of where you could actually go. Heck Assassin's Creed is a better free running game than Mirror's Edge.

Don't know why you'd restrict yourself from Andromeda just because it uses Origin though. I find the client far more pleasant to the eye and EA's customer service is miles better than Valve's.

 

[Joccaren]

Eh, a bit more reasonable start at least, though it raises yet more issues about the whole plot. After their whole "Completely change the galaxy and Reapers are gods" end to ME3 it kinda throws anything they could do for the future out of whack. Had there been a canonic victory over the Reapers, and they had themed it more along the lines of us reverse engineering their technology, and uniting to advance the galaxy into a new era... Sure, I could buy that in a few hundred to a few thousand years we'd make it to Andromeda and start building some Mass Relays there and all that good stuff. We wouldn't have to worry about what happened to the Reapers, we'd have the tech level to do so, and the entire galaxy wouldn't have to be green glowie people... or not, depending on ending.

Unfortunately they tied everything together in the perfect way that any sequel fits rather questionably within the lore they've set up for the universe, though, they haven't really cared about that since 2 so I guess nothing's different there.

I just have the feeling that any future Mass Effect games will be set in the Andromeda Galaxy.

What ever people may think of the endings to Mass Effect 3, they do have quite different repercussions for the Milky Way. By setting all future games in Andromeda (kick started before the end of ME3), they don't have to deal with them.

I just find it odd myself that we have the technology to send a ship to another galaxy but the only way we can beat the Reapers is by building something we don't know what it does.

Yeah, that's one of the new 'plotholes' as such that the ending opens up. The Reapers themselves struggle to or simply can't reach Andromeda. We can. Not a problem.

I also find there isn't really a ton of difference with the endings. One wipes out the Reapers and Geth, though synthetics would naturally be made again in the future so just don't use the Geth.
One gives control of the Reapers to Shepard, whereby Bioware can just do what they want with them and have them be just dialogue pieces similar to every other 'choice' in Mass Effect ever.
One makes everyone glow green, but otherwise isn't all that significant. Oh, and the Reapers live on independently, allowing Bioware to do whatever with them.

There's basically just 3 variables; Are the Geth dead, are the Reapers dead, and do people glow?

Thanks to the extended ending factors like what happens with the Krogan and such become an issue, but again that could all easily be written off as 'far future, more things happened'. I think the main reason they're doing it in Andromeda rather than the Milky Way instead of just pulling a Rachni or Human Reaper or, well, any choice in any Mass Effect, is simply to escape people even thinking about the ME3 endings, since they had such a negative feedback from the community. Referencing them, even to write them off, just opens old wounds for the franchise. Andromeda supposedly lets them skip all that, but they'll have to do some real work to convince me that its actually a decent game to play, and has a decent story. Definitely waiting for reviews, then the GotY edition with all DLC, before buying that one - if I ever do.

 

[Patathatapon]

I'm certain it's been worded like this for this exact purpose. Click bait 101: Be an arrogant ass. Shame it works so well.

I haven't played a new game from EA for the longest time. Most recent one I can think of is dead space, which I got from a humble bundle. I'm surprised they even make these AAA games anymore. They should just shift to mobile games, more money there overall.

 

[Lightknight]

Ok, I've avoided posting here for a few days now to think about how I want to respond to this. EA does have a good line up, they should be embarrassed about how they're going to ruin them. How they're going to use these AAA titles to anger and alienate their faithful consumer base. That's the reason why EA's embarrassment should increase proportionately to the quality of lineup.

 

[FalloutJack]

Ok, I've avoided posting here for a few days now to think about how I want to respond to this. EA does have a good line up, they should be embarrassed about how they're going to ruin them. How they're going to use these AAA titles to anger and alienate their faithful consumer base. That's the reason why EA's embarrassment should increase proportionately to the quality of lineup.

Cut, print, that's a wrap. Good job everybody. Our work here is done.

(Nothing else needs to be said.)