Mass Effect: Andromeda gets pushed back to early 2017

Greetings, fans of interstellar space operas. It's been a while since you had your last Mass Effect fix, and now Bioware has put out the official word: Mass Effect: Andromeda will arrive in "early 2017." The game was originally expected to ship sometime this year. In the official statement, Bioware's Aaryn Flynn noted that this will be the first Mass Effect title built using DICE's Frostbite game engine. Players ought to have more freedom to explore than before—something which should go hand in hand with the fact that humanity will be flying out of the Milky Way and into Andromeda.

Bioware didn't offer an exact reason for the delay, but the developers hinted at one, saying "[they] need the right amount of time to make sure [they] deliver everything the game can and should be." The new official release date corroborates an earlier rumor about an impending delay. Back in early March, EA's CFO let out that the company was now expecting to release Andromeda in its fiscal fourth quarter of 2016, which translates into early 2017. Mass Effect fans should tune in to the upcoming EA Play press conference on June 12, where the publisher should be providing more information about the game.

Comments closed
    • DrMichael
    • 4 years ago

    That’s both good and bad. Good that they’re taking their time, bad, because I am jonesing for more Mass Effect!

    Yes, the initial ending for Mass Effect 3 was not everything to be desired, although that was fixed via DLC Kama which is much more than most video game companies would have done.. That said, even before the fix, Mass Effect was still the best video game ever created to the knowledge of mankind.

    On the plus side, I am on my 14th play-through of the series, and I just found something new in Mass Effect 1 that I never realized I’d missed. pretty cool. Still hard to wait for early 2017…

    I just hope they focus on single player, and leave the multi player aspect out of it completely. That was a waste of time direction, and energy!!

    • DataMeister
    • 4 years ago

    I would be interested to know what the developers think (candidly) of using the Frostbite engine vs Unreal Engine which they used in the previous trilogy. I’m wondering if they were forced into using Frostbite because EA has a stake in it (therefore probably cheaper to use), or if they really thought it was better all around. Are there a lot of “this would have been so much easier in Unreal Engine” moments behind the scenes?

      • Krogoth
      • 4 years ago

      Frostbite engine wasn’t ready back in 2007 when Mass Effect 1 was being developed. UE3 was matured and support on every platform back in the day. It was the engine of choice at the time.

      Bioware/EA had to stick with it in order retain compatibility with ME1’s assets.

    • the
    • 4 years ago

    I’m less interested in Andromeda but would rather see a ME Trilogy re-release as one large coherent game. Take the game play of ME3 and apply it to ME1/ME2. Then have the original writers do a once over of ME3’s script to fix a few things, including the horrible ending. As a bonus, include all the DLC for these games and integrate it as part of the trilogy story.

    Then I’d tinker with a few new ideas. The second game needed another major mission to set things up for the final act (IE right before you play as Joker). Story wise there would need to be a few things for the player to do between ME2 and ME3 (the DLC of ME1 can cover part of the ME1/ME2 gap). And then I’d experiment with co-op multiplayer. Sure, the story will always follow who is playing Commander Shepard but while on a mission, I always thought it would be fun to have a few friends play as my squad mates to run through a mission.

      • odizzido
      • 4 years ago

      ME2 was so poorly done. How anyone could have denied that the reapers or even just something very dangerous attacked with probably over a million witnesses is just baffling. That alone knocked the game way down for me because it makes no sense unless you look at it as a way for the plot to keep going beyond its original intent. Which is terrible story telling. Simply dreadful.

      Of course ME2 had very little to do with the story in ME1. It was pretty much just a bunch of side missions for people you just met.

      For me ME2 was about a bunch of people I didn’t care about in a universe run by lunatics in mad denial made by writers who didn’t even play the first game.

        • Krogoth
        • 4 years ago

        ME1 was all about world-building.

        ME2 was about setting the stage for ME3. (The DLCs were an interquel)

        ME3 was alright until the obviously rushed ending. I suspect the intended ending had something to do with Element Zero being not so benign acting an allusion to fossil fuels.

        • the
        • 4 years ago

        Simple: they passed the Reapers off as Geth. The incident with the Citadel of course couldn’t be covered up but they just shifted the blame. Besides Shepard, who was saying anything about the Reapers? For me, that aspect of ME2 worked well.

          • Krogoth
          • 4 years ago

          The Reapers left little or no physical evidence of their existence. You only have a hearsay of a few individuals who may have a few loose screws. Shepard was briefly comatose from an ancient artifact and started to spout out some crazy non-sense. He/she build a cult of personality around themselves that managed to convinced themselves that the space boogie man is coming. That’s not exactly compelling evidence to take action.

          Geth were living in isolation for centuries. They have could possibly developed the technology behind Sovereign “Dreadnought”. Saren was simply a black ops agent that went rogue that wanted to pull a coup. He wanted to finish the “First Contact War”.

          What would be an easier pill for the council and galaxy to shallow? A rogue agent with an known history and grudge against humans that wanted to launch a crusade or he was merely an agent of “space boogiemen” that are going wipe out galactic civilization.

          The whole thing is a not subtle nod at the whole anthropological global warming debate.

      • DrMichael
      • 4 years ago

      I would like to see them do that as well, but I’m pretty sure Andromeda will rock. They can still leave out the multiplayer aspects by my reckoning though, both in the remodel, and in the new game.

    • James296
    • 4 years ago

    I love the ME Universe but this is a EA game so out comes the 50ft pole. I’ll wait for release before I drop any money on the game….I still feel the burn from ME3

    • Krogoth
    • 4 years ago

    Let the franchise RIP, but then again EA is a killer of franchises.

      • odizzido
      • 4 years ago

      I never played ME3. It died on the second game for me.

    • sweatshopking
    • 4 years ago

    those games got quite a bit worse with each game. This one would be at least dragon age 2 bad if trend continues.

      • odizzido
      • 4 years ago

      Yeah that’s usually how it goes. I never even bothered with the third game because I just knew it was going to be a turd.

        • the
        • 4 years ago

        The thing is that 95% of the third game is great but the last 5% at the end utterly ruins the entire series.

          • sweatshopking
          • 4 years ago

          I didn’t like any of three. I liked the gameplay of 1 the most.

          • DrMichael
          • 4 years ago

          Well, it did until the DLC’s came out, anyway. I’m very happy with the series now.

            • EndlessWaves
            • 4 years ago

            It’s a shame EA still haven’t got around to releasing a bundle with the DLC included.

      • Flapdrol
      • 4 years ago

      There was a downward trend, but me3 isn’t that much worse compared to 2. No way it’ll be dragonage 2 bad.

        • DrMichael
        • 4 years ago

        Me3 and Dragon Age 2 were both brilliant, aside from the ending for Mass Effect 3, which was later fixed. There are no better games.

          • sweatshopking
          • 4 years ago

          unhhhhhhhhhhhhh

          • BlackStar
          • 4 years ago

          errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrm

          • LovermanOwens
          • 4 years ago

          There is no way DA 2 could be considered brilliant. That game was a steaming pile compared to Origins. Critically, sales wise, it was a plagued bug fest when launched, the recycled environments, etc. The one good thing going for it was the writing.

    • lilbuddhaman
    • 4 years ago

    Hopefully hiring editors for their “writers”

    • TwoEars
    • 4 years ago

    Fine by me. Mass Effect 3 was rushed and they shouldn’t make the same mistake again. Mass Effect is a great universe to create games in, it deserves better. ME3 did improve a lot with the leviathan and citadel DLC which helped the flow of the story, but first impressions weren’t that great. I’ll add in my usual summation:

    Story: ME1 > ME2 > ME3
    Gameplay: ME3 > ME 2 > ME1

      • odizzido
      • 4 years ago

      I think the way they see it is ME2 did well enough for them to put not effort into ME3. ME3 was bad so they need to release another good one so they can later release another zero effort game to rake in the cash.

      Whether they will actually be able to deliver a good game is questionable, but they will at least try.

        • James296
        • 4 years ago

        well casey is no longer part of this project so hopefully no three color ending.

      • the
      • 4 years ago

      ME3 wasn’t exactly rushed. The core missions and interactions were well done.

      The problem was the last minute changes and this included the controversial choose your color ending. The script for the game leaked several months before one of its release dates (at this time, it had already been pushed back once) so as a response, the designer took matters into his own hands and rewrote the ending. The game then was pushed back several more months.

        • TwoEars
        • 4 years ago

        Yupp – the whole story line with the Geth and the Quarians is amazing, some of the best sci-fi writing I’ve ever seen. But then the ending missions and the three color ending just leaves a bad taste in your mouth. The star child actually isn’t that bad of an idea, just executed baldy and without the DLC it comes out of nowhere.

        • Krogoth
        • 4 years ago

        ME3 was rushed at the end to please EA executives to making sure that was going make Q2 2012.

        They just took the entire Geth and Quarian conflict and copy + paste it. Throw in color coded “Deus Ex Machina” in form of a starchild (blatant Space Odyssey: 2000 rip-off).

      • maroon1
      • 4 years ago

      ME2 was the worst story in the series. The ending was also horrible when compared to ME3 and 1

        • Krogoth
        • 4 years ago

        ME2 was setting the stage for the events in ME3. It was a foregone conclusion that ending would be a prelude to Reaper invasion.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This