This might feel a little random take but bear with me for a second:
First, there is one assumptions that'll make here which in necessarily for my reasoning: the next Mass Effect will be an open world game. It seems that all AAA RPGs now needs to be open world, so I wll be really surprised if either the next DA or the next Mass Effect are not.
And the thing is, with an open world design the cover oriented gameplay of ME2 and ME3 don't work that well because they rely on, well, cover. And with an open world design you need a combat system that can work at any time, with or without cover.
For all Andromeda's shortcomings, it was very aware of that, and it tackled this challenged with some success, but also by an avenue that made its gameplay lesser when compared to the two previous titles. In Andromeda it was about dealing damage to the enemies. There was little in the way of strategy or careful aiming, you just gotta maximize raw damage output. I believe the moment where you play or other sibling really highlights the shortcomings of this approach:
This is the very definition of bullet spongy enemies.
Even dealing headshots, your damage output is minimal, and they often don't react at all. The play have no option but to turtle and slowly damage the enemies, as if he tries to be any more aggresive they'll quickly die (on insanity). I dont mean to say this is representative of Andromeda's gameplay, it's not, but it's a great way to highlight its problems. They are sitll there when you have all your weapons and powers, they are just better hidden.
Now take Control (!):
Just as with Andromeda's video, this isn't representative of the game gameplay, but just a small comparison of what it would like to face the most common enemies with a basic weapon. They react much more and die much quicker, moreover, their aim is quite flawed if you're moving, which allows Jesse to move around and have much more freedom in combat encounters.
And this is a much better approach. And one that could work extremely well in a Mass Effect open world game. Allowing the players to move more freely and having better and more reactive enemies that don't take 20 seconds to kill (you can still have those, but not every single one) would be a major step up. Every weapon should be useful, and the game shouldn't be balanced around raw damage. Then you have all the ME powers that can fit this take extremely well. Indeed, if you compare the two games there are a few powers that have similar functions (biotic barrier and control own barrier power, for example). But while in Control that power is extremely useful, in Andromeda it's much less so, because you still have to rely to much on cover as enemies kill you too fast.
Also levitate is so much better than any jetpack I've ever seen in any game.
First, there is one assumptions that'll make here which in necessarily for my reasoning: the next Mass Effect will be an open world game. It seems that all AAA RPGs now needs to be open world, so I wll be really surprised if either the next DA or the next Mass Effect are not.
And the thing is, with an open world design the cover oriented gameplay of ME2 and ME3 don't work that well because they rely on, well, cover. And with an open world design you need a combat system that can work at any time, with or without cover.
For all Andromeda's shortcomings, it was very aware of that, and it tackled this challenged with some success, but also by an avenue that made its gameplay lesser when compared to the two previous titles. In Andromeda it was about dealing damage to the enemies. There was little in the way of strategy or careful aiming, you just gotta maximize raw damage output. I believe the moment where you play or other sibling really highlights the shortcomings of this approach:
This is the very definition of bullet spongy enemies.
Even dealing headshots, your damage output is minimal, and they often don't react at all. The play have no option but to turtle and slowly damage the enemies, as if he tries to be any more aggresive they'll quickly die (on insanity). I dont mean to say this is representative of Andromeda's gameplay, it's not, but it's a great way to highlight its problems. They are sitll there when you have all your weapons and powers, they are just better hidden.
Now take Control (!):
Just as with Andromeda's video, this isn't representative of the game gameplay, but just a small comparison of what it would like to face the most common enemies with a basic weapon. They react much more and die much quicker, moreover, their aim is quite flawed if you're moving, which allows Jesse to move around and have much more freedom in combat encounters.
And this is a much better approach. And one that could work extremely well in a Mass Effect open world game. Allowing the players to move more freely and having better and more reactive enemies that don't take 20 seconds to kill (you can still have those, but not every single one) would be a major step up. Every weapon should be useful, and the game shouldn't be balanced around raw damage. Then you have all the ME powers that can fit this take extremely well. Indeed, if you compare the two games there are a few powers that have similar functions (biotic barrier and control own barrier power, for example). But while in Control that power is extremely useful, in Andromeda it's much less so, because you still have to rely to much on cover as enemies kill you too fast.
Also levitate is so much better than any jetpack I've ever seen in any game.
