Mass Effect: Andromeda getting no singleplayer DLC

The singleplayer side of Mass Effect: Andromeda [official site] is now officially as done as it’ll ever be, as BioWare have confirmed they have no plans for more singleplayer patches or any singleplayer DLC. Multiplayer additions and events will continue but Andromeda’s singleplayer is complete. Given that it was a disapointing new start for the sci-fi RPG series, that doomsaying rumours have circulated for months, and that the studio which made Andromeda has since subsumed into another studio, this isn’t much of a surprise. But as BioWare RPGs tend to receive a fair few story expansions, giving up on this isn’t a good omen for the prospect of another Mass Effect game.

The Andromeda team said in Saturday’s statement:

“Our last update, 1.10, was the final update for Mass Effect: Andromeda. There are no planned future patches for single-player or in-game story content.

“In the coming weeks, our multiplayer team will provide details of their ongoing support and upcoming content, including new multiplayer missions, character kits, and what’s in store for N7 Day.

“We appreciate all the millions of people who came with us to the Andromeda galaxy. We hope to see you again in the Mass Effect universe.”

Andromeda’s post-launch patches fixed some of its more obvious flaws, such as the dead faces and ha-ha-hilarious animation bugs, but Polyfilla can only smooth over so many problems. Too much was too bland and too clumsy.

As John said in his review, “as a follow-up to the previous trilogy, it’s a timid and tepid tale too heavily reliant on what came before, too unambitious for what could have been, trapped in a gargantuan playground of bits and pieces to do.”

Back in June, Kotaku had a good luck at the many troubles of Andromeda’s development, speaking several of the folks who made it (under cloak of anonymity).

BioWare aren’t quite done with the Andromeda Galaxy, as comics and novels will explore more of it (including seeing what happened to the Quarian ark), but I probably wouldn’t expect another game any time soon. When EA decline to milk a game for DLC, something’s up.


  1. Diziet Sma says:

    Err is that a massive spoiler on the whereabouts of the Quarian ark? Like now I know I won’t find it in the game.

    • Premium User Badge

      Ninja Dodo says:

      Not really, since the Quarians (and a few other groups) were never mentioned or shown in any of the marketing, plus their re-inclusion was rumoured as the main thing that could be the subject of possible story DLC. Maybe it was planned at one point, but scrapped because of the response to the game. It’s a real shame.

    • Azhrarn says:

      You’re told fairly early on that the Quarian Ark is arriving later than the initial 4, because they took longer to get ready and underway. You won’t be finding any further mention of that ark until almost the end of the game.

  2. mavrik says:

    Ah yes, Mass Effect, the franchise famous for it’s epic and popular multiplayer that warrants continued support as opposed to it’s very unpopular, 0-fans, single player experience.

    This Andromeda crapshow really never fails to deliver.

    • Ghostwise says:

      MP is an income.

      • mavrik says:

        How exactly?

        • Stromko says:

          EA sells lootboxes for the multiplayer. You start off with really poor weapons so unless you invest additional money just for lootboxes (or even if you do, if you’re unlucky) you’re going to have a really hard time… winning enough missions to unlock yet more lootboxes.

          It’s sadly very compelling to open the highest-tier lootboxes, even though a lot of the time you’re just going to get an upgrade (not even sure what that does) of a character you’ve already unlocked that you don’t even want to play, or a higher tier of a gun that will still suck 90% of the time regardless of said boost.

          I found the multiplayer to actually be fun for a good bit (but I had to invest 40$ and all I got was a badass combat shotgun that made every other lootbox worthless in comparison). Horde mode with teammates is naturally compelling, and being highly mobile with dashing and air boosts is a good twist for awhile. Ultimately I was burnt out by the overall bullet-spongy enemies (I became used to completely unloading that full auto shotgun point-blank just to handle the grunts) and the even more durable enemies that would arrive in later waves who would, if they got close, lock you in an animation resulting in your irrevocable death (at least until the wave was over). If the netcode was acting up or you just blundered around a corner into them, you’d be pulled out of the action with no real fault of your own and have to hope your teammates could pull through without you.

          • welverin says:

            Wow, you overstated how necessary things, you don’t need to any equipment to get started.

            leveling up a character is more important to success than equipment, and for that you should start out playing bronze matches. As you level up you play higher difficulty matches.

            As for buying crates, you never have to spend actual money on aythineg, ever! I spent about 200 hours playing ME3 mp, and quite a bit with MEA’s mp and have never spent any money either and do not lack for options. I’m only missing a few characters in MEA (all ultra rares), and probably have the majority of the basic weapons and weapon mods.

            The only way you’ll struggle succeeding is if you insist on taking a level one character into a gold match or thinking you solo a match with one.

    • Carra says:

      I finished the game but never touched the multiplayer part. I thought most people didn’t bother with it…

    • fiasco says:

      We have dismissed that claim.

    • Premium User Badge

      Iamblichos says:

      Maybe they can contract out for the single player expansion. Given how ME:A has gone so far, I would suggest a team led by Peter Molyneux and Sean Murray. It’ll be HUGE!

      • mavrik says:

        Adding David Cage would probably make it even better!

      • Captain Narol says:

        Just hire Chris Avellone to give the game an interesting scenario and some memorable characters, that should do the trick and save the franchise !

    • Parrilla says:

      Probably trying to go the GTAV model to squeeze what little revenue they can from it, rather than sink more into an unpopular singleplayer game.

    • mouton says:

      Actually Mass Effect 3 had excellent Killing Floor-style multiplayer with tons of fun classes and easy casual levelling. It was quite popular and the team kept adding to it for a long time. In the end you could play, in addition to main races, things like Geth Juggernaut, Batarians, Vorchas, Volus or Krogan Warlords.

  3. wombat191 says:

    Pisses me off that they are abandoning it even if I expected it

  4. ahac says:

    I don’t think the bad reception of ME:A was the only reason for this.

    We know there were problems with the Bioware Montreal leadership, they didn’t work well with Bioware Edmonton, etc. But EA also has Motive, led by Jade Raymond and working on a Star Wars game, in the same city. They seem to be doing OK, have many of job openings and EA is betting a lot on Star Wars.

    If they needed more people at Motive, it makes sense to move the ME:A team there. But that means there is no one left to do the DLC and Bioware Edmonton is busy with Anthem and Dragon Age 4.

  5. Hoot says:

    Like I said after I played the trial, trying to fix the trite story, vapid world and terrible script/voice acting with patches would be like trying to sellotape shut a gaping bullet wound.

    Damage was done long before the game was even released.

  6. ilitarist says:

    Sad. MEA had the best gameplay ever produced by BioWare.

    • noodlecake says:

      Yep. There was a lot of good about it but the story felt contrived and the dialogue was poor and that’s what ME fans wanted the focus on, I guess.

      Also nothing annoys RPG fans more than devs trying to be creative and innovate gameplay. They want the same gameplay over and over for eternity.

      • Nahadoth says:

        Or you know, RPG’s are driven by story and characters and setting. If those are mediocre at best all the gameplay in the world isn’t going to make it fun. Bioware used to excel at those. There are hundreds of solid shooters and action games with half-assed stories and stock characters for people like you to enjoy. There’s no need to be an asshole about it.

        • ilitarist says:

          BioWare did excel at that?.. Maybe 10 years ago when there were few story-driven games. Now they have a lot of competition. MEA has better dialogues than ME1 had but it’s not enough anymore. They are fighting against a nostalgic rose-tinted view and they didn’t up their game to compensate for it. They thought that the same B-movie sloppy story as in ME1-3, only slightly better, would be enough for people. Besides now there’s a gameplay and the game is not a scroll shooter anymore.

          Nope, all people wanted was challengeless series of nicely animated cutscenes.

          • Hoot says:

            The only challenge ME:A presented was navigating the god awful UI, clearly designed by a man born with an XBox controller for 1 hand and a hook for the other.

            There’s no rose-tinted nostalgia colouring my views on the game, ME1 was very much a game of it’s time and doesn’t stand up as well as it once did, but ME2 and ME3 are still epic RPGs in scope, character and story. I can’t even remember the name of the main character in ME:A, it’s that bland and forgettable.

            Also, if you’re playing a third person RPG for a mechanical skill based challenge you’re looking in the wrong place. SFV, SC2, Battlerite, these are pure mechanics driven games. RPGs are driven by story and character.

            Not to mention that the “oh hey, there’s a thing in your head which means you can basically be all the skills, all the time” ploy was a very silly way of saying “we’re too lazy to do proper combat so here, be everything, but everything actually only consists of 3 status effect / detonation combos and a jump”.

            ME:A is indefensible by any gamer’s standards when taken on it’s own merits, doubly so when compared to what came before.

          • ilitarist says:

            MEA is still more epic than ME1-3 however you measure it. It does have more mature and natural dialogue more suitable for supposedly realistic universe, while ME1-3 was full of joking clowns living through forced drama. It was more memorable – probably, but it was cringe fest, it was a B-movie you’d watch in MST3K. MEA is still bad in its own ways but it’s at least not as offensive and childish.

            RPG is a genre like any other. ME1-3 lacked challenge and therefore gameplay was a joke, no way around it. It was a mess of systems without balance and thought. MEA is a better game even if it didn’t have a story at all. And if you think that story is the most important element in an RPG – well, then I’ve got a thousand or so books for you that are better than any RPG you’ve played. Don’t have any book or movie with a better gameplay though.

        • RichUncleSkeleton says:

          BioWare has never excelled at anything except producing third-rate rip-offs of better fictional universes (or mediocre takes on licensed IP’s) and then doing the minimum work needed to build functional games around them. Space operas like Mass Effect and high fantasy like Dragon Age are a dime a dozen.

          • ilitarist says:

            Exactly. That’s why it’s laughable when people say new ME story is bad. Because yeah, it’s bad, why didn’t it stop you from loving previous Firefly expy characters in the series? Is it the case of sci-fi being on the rise again so ME series is not the only thing that is like Star Trek but not boring? Because now we have Star Trek movies that are made to not offend those who suffer from ADHD.

            It’s still the same Mass Effect, but it’s not enough anymore. Just as people whine about strategy games and hardcore RPGs not being same as they were while those genres now get best games they ever had.

          • Hoot says:

            What’s laughable is trying to defend the story or the writing in ME:A. It is more cringeworthy than anything in the previous 3 games, it plays out like it was written by a team of enthusiastic 15 year old fan fic wannabes.

            ME 1-3 were space operas, of course they had cringey elements, but by and large they were pretty well written. I mean come on, do I need to point out the youtube videos of the chat-up conversation between the main character in ME:A (so forgettable I forget the name) and that Scottish medic bird? Or the casual calls of “speed bump” when mowing down aliens who you’ve just met mere hours after witnessing the death of your father?

            I’ve read a great many novels and watched a great many movies, sure there’s only a handful of games with writing on par with a good novel (PST, TW3, etc), but ME1-3 easily eclipses ME:A, maybe because they weren’t written ad-hoc by a returning series writer in 18 months.

            As for the “challenge” point you are so keen to bring up, where is the challenge exactly? ME:A in terms of mechanical skill was exactly the same in terms of challenge than any other game in the series. Bullet sponge enemies, abilities to make you feel like a super hero. Jump about, press 2 buttons to use your detonate combo, rinse and a repeat. Like…if you found ME1-3 unchallenging but ME:A an absolute beast of thing akin to Metroid or Street Fighter in terms of mechanical difficulty, did you hit your head between now and when you played the originals? Or lose an arm?

            I get it though, man, I do. You’re suffering from big time buyers remorse and will defend the indefensible down to the ground. Luckily the 10 hour trial was enough to convince me not to waste my money. I bought NieR instead and had a wonderful 40 hours or so playing it through.

  7. zhivik says:

    It’s a real shame, especially with the backstory in the Kotaku article, which by the way will be expanded in a forthcoming book by Jason Schreier, coming out in two weeks. Sure, there seems to have been a problem with leadership and Bioware Edmonton had to get involved in order to have a game released at all. In the end, however, it wasn’t the team’s fault, because they had only 18 months of development time, with almost nothing done earlier.

    Sure, most of the Bioware Montreal people will not lose their jobs and will probably join Motive. Still, it is unfair to all the developers who worked against the clock, despite the game’s concept changing entirely less than two years before release. I refer to the original idea of having a procedurally generated galaxy, rather than fixed environments, which affects not only programming and graphic design, but also writing. This is why there was no story when development began in earnest, so I’d say the game didn’t turn out that bad at all, considering.

  8. fuzzyfuzzyfungus says:

    Transmission from Bioware HR to Bioware Montreal:

    “You exist because we allow it; you will end because we demand it.”

  9. noodlecake says:

    In my opinion you reap what you sow. Not every company is going to bend over backwards for a toxic gamer base that shits on everything they do. Had they continued to improve things and add free content the response would have just been mocking and cries of “too little too late”. Until gamers stop being so entitled I think we’re going to be seeing this kind of response more and more from big publishers.

    Andromeda wasn’t a good Mass Effect game. It didn’t satisfy the expectations of most Mass Effect fans, but had it been released as a new franchise without the ME name it would have been positively recieved as a solid 8/10 sci fi action adventure.

    • Shadow says:

      Yeah, God forbid the market punishes a AAA company for exploiting a franchise for a hollow cashgrab, once in a decade.

    • moke says:

      So what, they cancelled it because they didn’t want to get their feelings hurt any more?

      They cancelled it because they made a narrative based game with poor writing, direction and acting, and then hyped it beyond sense. The mainstream will not buy it any more. It feels like ersatz Bioware, the fake Mass Effect, a Mass Effect: the Extended Universe novel. It was panned and for good reason: it was shat out.

      Consumers should feel entitled to get a quality product in line with previous installments, and they are entitled to be disappointed when this isn’t the case.

      Just as you are entitled to come on here and demonstrate how very mature and grown up you are.

  10. dskzero says:

    Who woulda thunk uh?

  11. JiminyJickers says:

    I really enjoyed Andromeda, so very sad that there will be no DLC for it. Hope they continue it in one way or another.

    • malkav11 says:

      I agree, but the general reception has been such that even if we see more Mass Effect odds seem exceedingly poor that it will follow up Andromeda in any significant way.

  12. 1manandhisdroid says: many, I completed the trilogy and only tried the trial version of this…

    … it just felt ‘by the numbers’ – there are so many games vying for your attention, and not even AAA games that are doing things differently and mixing things up… ME:A brought absolutely nothing new to the table… the voice acting and especially dialogue choices were WORSE than I expected (and I had low expectations) – by the time I’d got to that door that wouldn’t open because I’d got there quicker than 10 hours in… I didn’t care… uninstalled and forgotten about…

    …people forgive shonky graphics and wonky performance, because you play games like this for the story… look at titles like Numenera, Divinity, even games like Nier, etc. – it’s not always about how much money you pump into it – it’s about the love and quality of writing that you feel from it… and Andromeda as is hollow as the sound of a cash register… that’s all it was… one big failed KERCHING. It reminds me of Dragon Age 2… they pulled it back with 3, but by god, I had real bad flashbacks of DAO2 playing Andromeda…

  13. ByrdWhyrm says:

    That is a shame. I played through the main story of Andromeda and found it to be be fine with moments of excellence, but overall I was disappointed. The game felt like a missed opportunity to do something new and different within the mass effect universe, but instead it felt like a rehash of mass effect one with less interesting characters and villains. Also unfortunately, the story became a lot more interesting if you unlocked all the memory points, but that was only because it tied back into the plot of the original trilogy.

  14. LostViking says:

    That’s a shame, I hope it doesn’t mean they are canning the whole series.

    I just started playing it, and while it’s not a perfect game I am having a lot of fun with it.

    • wombat191 says:

      It looks like they have canned the Andromeda spin off completely.. No story DLC and no sequels and no more answers

  15. spruce says:

    I’m playing through Andromeda presently. Must be at least 3/4 through it, I suppose. It has had its moments, but ultimately I feel it’s a disappointment. It’s too bad, because the core concept is solid, which is to say, the idea of being a pathfinder in an uncharted galaxy who shepherds a colony into existence by scouting out worlds and engages with the locals.

    Of course, even beyond all the fuckuppery that is well-documented here and elsewhere, I think this central conceit was ill-served by the gun fetishism and messiah complex that sadly seems to be what BioWare sees as the core of Mass Effect. And sure, maybe that’s what people want, but the hand-waved colonialist unpleasantness felt wrong. It plays like a more militaristic, libertarian Star Trek somehow. This is not exactly the mashup of my particular dreams. The original series at least followed the exploits of a peacekeeping soldier, so the vibe was very different.

    Even if they had to cram in a ton of combat, the gameplay felt like a very cursory reskinning of DA:Inquisition and a huge step back from the shooting in the first Mass Effect series. Whereas they stripped back the RPG elements as the series went on, Andromeda’s bullet sponges were tedious. The RPG-lite of ME2 and 3 made the combat feel a lot better.

    Oh I don’t know, it’s hard not to get on a roll when pointing out the game’s flaws. The companions were even dull, apart from Jaal and Peebee! Come on BioWare!

    The idea of a fourth Mass Effect was initially pretty exciting, but at this point, it might be more enjoyable to see BioWare try something really new, rather than to try a fifth.

  16. Scelous says:

    Mass Effect: Andromeda was the very first Bioware game where I was so bored, I was eager to have the game be over. It also had the worst NPCs in any Bioware game, even worse than Dragon Age: Inquisition, in my opinion.

    That being said, I did find the negativity towards ME:A was grossly, grossly overstated, as it pretty much always is. Toxicity towards Bioware is an expected thing, a time-honored tradition encouraged by most gamers.

    ME:A was pretty underwhelming; it felt very mediocre and I had a “blah” reaction to it. Was it the worst game ever made in every way possible in the history of mankind? No. I thought the concept had promise, and I am interested about the Quarian ark and other story bits, so I’ll be a bit disappointed if there is no sequel.

    • moke says:

      ME:A made me cringe far too many times. When it’s an indie game, cringe elicits pity. When it’s a $40,000,000 blockbuster, I feel only contempt.

      God, it felt so cheap, so often, I found it incredibly difficult to get into. It’s not so much “This is unplayable”, more like “Why am I spending valuable time on this game that makes me feel embarrassed?”

  17. Chaoslord AJ says:

    Good decision. Get over it. Wait two years then reboot the franchise hopefully with actual novelties like new races.
    Oh and close Montreal before they can do more damage. No, “more time” wouldn’t have saved the game because the design is just all over the place.