Mass Effect Andromeda status: server issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours

The graph below depicts the number of Mass Effect Andromeda reports received over the last 24 hours by time of day. When the number of reports exceeds the baseline, represented by the red line, an outage is determined.

Most Reported Problems

The following are the most recent problems reported by Mass Effect Andromeda users through our website.

• Online Play (67%)
• Game Crash (33%)

Live Outage Map

The most recent Mass Effect Andromeda outage reports came from the following cities:

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Auckland	Game Crash	2 months ago
São Joaquim da Barra	Online Play	2 months ago
Lichfield	Online Play	3 months ago
Mobile	Online Play	9 months ago
Leeds	Online Play	9 months ago
King's Lynn	Sign in	10 months ago

Full Outage Map

Community Discussion

Tips? Frustrations? Share them here. Useful comments include a description of the problem, city and postal code.

Beware of "support numbers" or "recovery" accounts that might be posted below. Make sure to report and downvote those comments. Avoid posting your personal information.

Mass Effect Andromeda Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Vanclomming (@Libertonian13) reported 2 minutes ago

  @hg17_daisuki I used to run Veilguard on my old PC it had both an SSD and an HDD and games would lag because Windows was running slowly in the background. Veilguard wasn’t the only thing causing the lag, and I was especially into modding, but it took up a lot of space. The Mass Effect mods I downloaded took up nearly 20 GB in total. Now that my new system doesn’t have an HDD, I can’t download many mods. Those were the good old days I really loved modding back then.

• 
  Patch Ledger (@patch_ledger) reported 3 minutes ago

  An analyst told CNBC EA might have to sell IP to service its buyout debt. Four days later, BioWare showed up in exactly that sentence. > Aug 2: CNBC quotes an analyst on the $55B EA buyout - "I don't know how EA is going to service this debt without... studio closures, and possibly IP sell-off" > the buyout added $18-20B in new debt to the balance sheet, confirmed across multiple reports this week > Aug 6: EA is reportedly looking to sell BioWare and other IPs specifically to pay that debt down > EA has not confirmed or denied it - the studio that made Mass Effect and Dragon Age is now a line item in a debt-service plan, not a press release Four days between "here is what selling IP would look like" and BioWare's name landing in that exact sentence is not a leak. It is a timeline. What is next on that list?

• 
  Okkotsu D. Skywalker (@meechoeking___) reported 7 minutes ago

  @H_omiu Lame excuse + slight skill issue, i was mad asf i couldn’t romance Flemeth in Dragon Age & Dr. Chakwas in Mass Effect Older women are hot too !!

• 
  Eljefe.eth (Ø,G) | (@Orly2611) reported 11 minutes ago

  @tokyosdaughter hmmmm this is a bit of a take where i can have mixed feelings much as i dislike woke and DEI and all that shi. Didn't mass effect / kotor followed a similar pattern? it was ok issue should be indoctrination ig but art and design different have always existed, not a fan tho

• 
  Noir_Discourse🔞 (@Noir_Discourse) reported 12 minutes ago

  @Rookie_425 I was watching a friend stream this with a group, and no one there had any issues with this. It was all "oh cool an ODST" or "hey cool, is her name a Mass Effect reference?". Imagine my shock when I looked on Twitter the next day. 🫤

• 
  WeAreSpartan117 (@WeAreSpartan117) reported 13 minutes ago

  @ray_ray200108 Sale vs non-sale. You can't be that stupid? I bought DBZ Kakarot for £2.74 Mass Effect Trilogy 4.99 Origins 7.99 MCC 3.99 Halo 5 3.99 These are non issue prices. 25 for Metal Gear is a genuinely good price considering its age, but lets not actually like digital doesnt sale

• 
  captaindino123 (@captaindin123) reported 18 minutes ago

  @biggieU_U @Henry10113 I absolutely love mass effect, literally one of 3 tattoos I have is from ME, 1 is ******* rough to play, probably the best story but the game play was bad even when it came out, tried and dropped after the big Game Informer issue on it, only went back after playing and loving 2

• 
  🔥M̵̦̳̃̓ä̸͇́͊n̴̞̾̾n̴̬̅ȍ̸̪l̷̢̰̐͌ó̴̪̭͝🔥 (@targetZR0) reported 20 minutes ago

  @Rogues_Sugah7 Fix that ending how they fixed mass effect 3s ending. That choice bullshit is bleh. 😓

• 
  Jeremy G. (@XeoMafia) reported 20 minutes ago

  @DanVMaul Halo Reach & Gears 3 were the only 1st party games. Mass Effect 2 was timed. Witcher 2 was exclusive by happenstance But you just showed that Xbox was relying heavily on 3rd party exclusives which was the problem & dwindled as time went on

• 
  thed.vawaifu (@KevinGame2013) reported 20 minutes ago

  @Grxit What he's a reliable journalist because of does his investigations on why games launch on bugs and unfinished games like mass effect Andromeda anthem black ops 4 redfall and other games that launch buggy broken and unfinished

• 
  William Wallace (Hunting for a 4 leaf clover) (@Wanzerfan) reported 23 minutes ago

  @PandaSub2000 I think @BioWare REALLY needs to fix “Mass Effect Andromeda”’s failure to load save game files game breaking bug.

• 
  Jude (@judithofleaves) reported 24 minutes ago

  @DiscussingFilm good thing idc about warhammer. just keep him away from mass effect or we’re gonna have issues

• 
  Julian II (@JulianHeliosII) reported 26 minutes ago

  @Knights_Path Thinking some more, when the player asks a question you have a problem to solve: The player idle while asking a question looks blank Mass Effect solved it through a close up shot here and there, obscuring the body so you can't see Shepherd's hands Baldur's Gate had transition anims between lines from pose w/ anim to pose w/ anim, which kept the silent protagonist of the dialogue engaging You should choose one of these, or a mix of both, to keep the character from feeling plastic. The speaker need not have this because they are generally receiving queries and questions from the speaker, but stance changes are crucial for the target speaker

• 
  Hank Rearden (@HankRearden_37) reported 27 minutes ago

  @Pirat_Nation Once again modders will fix what the devs try to wreck with these games. Just like when the modders brought back the Miranda buttshot in Mass effect legendary edition. Although that game was far less ****** with than Halo appears to be.

• 
  Nazzy (@Nazglue) reported 28 minutes ago

  @TheHiddenOneAC Mabey its because I've played yakuza and mass effect, but is it that much of an issue seeing reused animations?

• 
  TheMadGamer (@TheMadGamerHere) reported 32 minutes ago

  @vavaara It's too bad it's giving tou trouble. Mass Effect Legendary has a decent photo m9de, iirc

• 
  Surely not❄️🔥🦊 💜🦴🐟 💔💙 (@inth3nearfuture) reported 35 minutes ago

  @CorbynRed Its funny how, everytime someone says that, they basically JINXED the Game and Studio to fail. I heard people say that to Vailguard... Now Vailguard is the Reason that, if Mass Effect is not absolutely and 100% appealing to the predominantly male audience, the Studio will close. Then we have Avowed, which underperformed so hard, with "The Outerworld 2" as follow up Titel. AC Shadows: I would assume they are still in the Red, AT BEST near "broken even". Coming from a monstrous Company we saw, that even those games can fail. And EVERY. SINGLE. TIME... i got the statement "They will sell extremely good" and further cope... At the end, every game underperformed massively.

• 
  Trey👑 (@ThatGuyNamedTre) reported 35 minutes ago

  Yeah Max is spot on here. The games I own physically are the games I love. Mass Effect, Cyberpunk, Ghost of Yotei, Crash Bandicoot, Spyro, Sparking Zero, Astro Bot, and more. Next game I wanna own physically (if the reviews are good) is Halo. And I want GTAVI physically 😭

• 
  Sora (@Sora_1303) reported 39 minutes ago

  @MischiefsYT @sony2k1 @LionsFanAccount if he was never intended to be the Protagonist then why was he? OK higher up forced them to but they still did it. My problem is with how They discarded him. I played as him for 150+ hours. That meant something to me. Only to not see him in Valhalla DLC. Mass effect did that.

• 
  Knight(Fate)1029384756 (@Knight10293847) reported 40 minutes ago

  My first gut instinct is to agree because yeah. Mass Effect doesn't need a canon ending and it should by all means respect what the players have done and explore those consequences to their natural conclusions. What the rachni choice should have been is exactly that. If you killed the rachni they shouldn't have showed up at all in ME3. Imagine hearing from a friend who killed the rachni and them saying "I didn't get that mission. Like I saw Grunt and we fought Reapers but the rachni didn't exist in my game. I killed them." And just being struck by how that decision not only makes the renegade choice correct (in a way) but also such a vast difference. An entire enemy type and race just doesn't have influence at all in the game. But that didn't happen. What happened is the rachni game back regardless and the only difference was if you paragon'd you paragon'd again to get war assets. If you renegaded you renegaded again to not loss war assets. Something that does have an effect but its not what the player expects on a bare bones basic or even what they wildly might think. And that is the issue with the ending choices of Mass Effect. The promise such divergent stories that can't simply be crunched into a similar path. There will just be fundamentally different conflicts and issues with each one of them. This video does suggest they just do what Mass Effect has always done but that is accepting a comprise instead of expecting what it should natural be. Not having different assignments to show that "Hey there are differences?" But genuine world differences. Synthesis is described where conflict isn't really a factor anymore. Where everyone knows what its like to be someone else. That story, that exploration of the themes would result in a much less action oriented game and more something like Disco Elysium where the central conversation is about what this life is like. Control is likewise a very different kind of conflict where smaller scale wars could happen. But galactic conflicts just won't exist. Something like a Krogan Civil War is just unlikely to happen with a Shepard controlling the Reapers. Where they could easily stomp down on any major conflict. And not only that but things like diseases, medically issues and similar things would nearly be erased. Maybe there is a story where Shepard becomes a tyrant and rules over organics as an AI god but I don't think many could see their Shepard doing that and I don't think BioWare could see Shepard doing that. Destroy likewise would just be about reconnecting the galaxy together and would be the one most similar to the setting before the Crucible. And all of this isn't even accounting for honoring other player choices. I mentioned it a bit with the Krogan Civil War hinted at in a N7 teaser but there is literally no way a Krogan Civil War can realistically exist in a Synthesis ending or a Control Ending. Not in the way the art depicts. Like I can not accept that if the quarians are dead in one playthrough that BioWare just goes. JK they live and the only difference is a mission. No, it should feel like a real loss. Something was fundamentally changed between a version of them living and a version of them dead. Because that is the promise of importing choices. A major decision was made and you will see how that plays out to its fullest. Not half, not a quarter but seeing it realized. The same feeling you get in a D&D session where a major choice you made comes back and makes you realize it would have been different if you made a different choice. I know for a fact that if BioWare does crunch the endings and the only difference is different side quests, I and other fans would be upset. Because that isn't what I wanted. The solution for BioWare is two fold. The hard path and the easy path. The first is they just buckle down make three games and honor the choices made in each game. Not saying Synthesis should be Disco Elysium but Mass Effect but its the one that makes the most sense in my head. But something that fully explores the ramifications of having this union between synthetics and organics. Same with Control and same with Destory. The second path is just canonize an ending. Its the easiest way because they can focus their efforts on story of the game instead of making a game that is literally about showing the player their choices and making the game before 2040. I think they should also canonize the Genophage, and quarian and geth choices because I know for a fact that if they don't it will be real sad seeing the only differences being less krogan, quarians and geth. And this isn't even considering the fact that the Krogan Civil War just won't happen at the scale shown in the artwork if Wreav is in charge, Eve is dead, and the Genophage isn't cured. Sorry but the krogan would just die out. Because the expectation of that combination of choices would be the krogan's extinction. Its how the games have framed it since the beginning and to alter that would introduce internal inconsistency. I hope this shows why this will be so difficult for BioWare but also why literally no other RPG studio has done it to this scale. What BioWare did with ME1 to 3 and DAO to DAI is astounding. Truly more than what I have seen. Because CDPR fumbled that and gave up with Witcher 3. Small example being Thaler is alive no matter what. And big example is that the dragon state you helped create alongside helping the Scoia'tael in the prior games just does nothing. No mention of it and not even the bare bones of them coming to help Geralt at Kaer Morhen. Obsidian did it fine enough but they just didn't do that with Outer Worlds 2 and Avowed. Larian? What about Larian? Larian has set each of their Divinity games 100s of years apart from each other just so they don't have to address it and on top of that they just are inconsistent. Only caring recently because they made it bigger. And don't even get me started with BG3. I know Wizards has already canonized events but what was with Viconia and Saervok? Just random guys with their names attached. Not even canonized endings just completely different people. Casey Hudson did an interview with Game Informer about this and he is right when he says this has to be planned out. So, many of these companions did these as features because BioWare did it because BioWare controlled what was supposed to be in an RPG. But as that feature waned without BioWare pushing it these other developers slowly removed it. Because its ******* hard to do. Great rewards if done right. A true feeling of your character existing in the world and having an effect long after it happened but a mountainous path it is. Again I want the hard path. BioWare. I'll wait man. Make three games and honor the choices of each of them. But as this video says its also about the money. And there isn't any reality where EA goes "Yeah, we can about 5 years with each release and for each of those games to be very different. Go head."

• 
  Gareth Walker (@Revision_124c41) reported 41 minutes ago

  @Beastiarii @Darket696 @K__Med This is a misconception sadly. Robbie Bach was in charge during Xbox's most successful era. He's the one who launched the Xbox 360, he's the one who helped organize many of the studios and the companies IPs. Such as Halo, Gears, Fable, Forza etc. He was the one who planted a flag for exclusivity for titles like Bioshock and Mass Effect 1. he was head of Xbox until 2010. 5 years after 360's launch. That means that many of his decisions and efforts ran through to 2012. He's also the reason you got the NXE, Blades, Xbox Live, and the many deals for things like Netflix. When Mattrick took over in 2010, Xbox 360 was already a success and leading PS3. He greenlit the Kinect. He was the one who didn't continue the acquisitions of exclusives and studios while sony was stacking release after release after release. During his time he lost momentum and the PS3 caught up and surpassed the Xbox 360 in sales. He looked at the usage data of Xbox 360 users and decided that since most Xbox users use the 360 to stream entertainment that taking kinect to the next level and integrating a dying technology like cable TV into the xbox was the way to go. That lead to him setting course of the hardware and OS team to change direction for the Xbox One. It was under his watch that a shfit to overly strict always on connections was decided for Xbox. Then in 2013 he revealed the hardware, told 80m xbox 360 gamers that they should stay on 360 if they didn't want an online connection. This resulted in the walking back of a heavily integrated drm system and publication process that wrecked the XBox XDK to the point that it actually got worse. Ruined Xbox's reputation. Destroyed their good will. Gave Sony the opportunity to pull out in front for the next generation. Did I mention these decisions also hurt the hardware architecture of the Xbox One because focus was put on non gaming features instead of game development? Well that happened. Xbox One VCR model was inferior to the PS4. At 100 dollars cheaper with a proper architecture suited for modern games that weren't madden. Sony trounced on them. That isn't even getting into the stupid name he green lit that gave gamers a way to taunt the brand, X-BONE. This lead to the quick dismissal of Don Mattrick from his position as he went to zynga. This lead to interim leadership with Julie Larson-Green for the following year until Phil could take the position in 2014. That means Mattricks plans were still in play, Julie was forced to hold an umbrella for someone else. Competent enough for the job imho, but never given the opportunity to prove herself to do so, since she was just there to keep the lights on. Then Phil came on board and had to right an already sinking ship that was being outsold 2.3 to 1. That gap would never close. Phil started out his first full year in 2015. They redesigned the One for the One S to put it on better or equal footing with the PS4. Got rid of the Kinect and made it possible for the VCR model to better compete. Gave us the One X and Backward Compatibility program (which was not cheap). Launched game Pass. by time he corrected these things his one weakness began to over take him. He doesn't know how to run studios. He's no Shuhei Yoshida (neither is anyone at sony these days mind you). By time all of this came together in 2017, the xbox was delivering compelling exclusive software. It was taking 3 years or more to get something out the door. Game Pass sabotaged any chance at a win they had. Just look at how poorly gears 4 and 5 did as a result, especially with that 1 month free. Discounts for the Halo MC steelbook and halo 5 steel book were dirt cheap within a matter of months. Day one game pass killed xbox and that was probably his first true bad move. Mattrick wouldn't have done a better job in this regard. I feel game pass was inevitable. Mostly because of Satya Nadella's position on software when he took over. Windows, Office, Cloud, anything microsoft was either cloud or subscription models. Do with that what you will, but this is why I start pointing to Satya as the actual problem here. Gears and Halo could have helped make Xbox healthy. Again assuming woke changes and other crazy nonsense wasn't at play. I have separate opinions for that and they are equally as negative. So where does that land us? two ceo's left with a dumpster fire because of two men. Don Mattrick and Satya Nadella.

• 
  TheScarlettyeti - Vtuber - VEerie (@TheScarlettYeti) reported 43 minutes ago

  had some issues with the install so i did mass effect first but now Im on palworld, come check out the 1.0 realese

• 
  JoeyA (@JoeyAGamer) reported 45 minutes ago

  @GameSpot Guys, who gives a **** about remaster, remake that entire ****, fix the bugs, bring us a new trilogy like Resident Evil, you see how Black Flag Resynced is doing, Ocarina of Time is shaking people. GOOD GAMES deserves GOOD REMAKES, not ****** remasters. Mass Effect is EXCEPTION

• 
  Nₒₖₖᵢₑ (@Nokkie) reported 46 minutes ago

  @MBoukersen @Pirat_Nation Mass Effect (starting at 2) does. Albeit it's not that noticable and you can fix it if you want later.

• 
  I Am Man (@XeoNe0n) reported 48 minutes ago

  @flamingarc I think Mass Effect: Andromeda was only 600 years after the trilogy. Mind you, Andromeda had a myriad of issues, and that time jump is double what we're potential looking at with FW, but it IS possible to have the story set after big player-choice events and not interfere.

• 
  Plat0x.eth (Σ🧠Ξ) (@at0x_eth) reported 50 minutes ago

  @kennyistyping idk there's like a mass effect issue also lens had somewhat the right idea of being just a backend but when you are so open ended curation gets hard and even moreso when you have adversarial usage. i think it takes something really paradigmic to get you off of that.

• 
  Jeff Seely (@InJeffable) reported 51 minutes ago

  @RinoTheBouncer I agree that this would've made a great Mass Effect spinoff. What if this was the planet the Normandy crash-landed on at the end of Mass Effect 3? With all of the mass relays destroyed, the Normandy crew presumably would've had to make the best of their situation on that planet.

• 
  ZOG the Forever Toad🐸 (@WilemElliott) reported 52 minutes ago

  @SCShipyards Some of the world building they did with Tali Zorah nar Rayya in Mass Effect. She had trouble sleeping on the Normandy because the ship ran so quiet

• 
  𝓑𝓵𝓾𝓮-𝓔𝔂𝓮𝓼 𝓦𝓱𝓲𝓽𝓮 𝓓𝓲𝓬𝓴𝓰𝓲𝓻𝓵 (@CH4R10T_TV) reported 54 minutes ago

  my real problem isn't writing at all, actually, it's the combat. the action style requires more commitment to enemy movesets, which the game does not deliver on. the companion skills are gutted. the loop is very repetitive on further playthroughs. they made mass effect 2 two.

• 
  Knight(Fate)1029384756 (@Knight10293847) reported 55 minutes ago

  My first gut instinct is to agree because yeah. Mass Effect doesn't need a canon ending and it should by all mean respect what the players have done and explore those consequences to their natural conclusions. What the rachni choice should have been is exactly that. If you killed the rachni they shouldn't have showed up at all in ME3. Imagine hearing from a friend who killed the rachni and them saying "I didn't get that mission. Like I saw Grunt and we fought Reapers but the rachni didn't exist in my game. I killed them." And just being struck by how that decision not only makes the renegade choice correct (in a way) but also such a vast difference. An entire enemy type and race just doesn't have influence at all in the game. But that didn't happen. What happened is the rachni game back regardless and the only difference was if you paragon'd you paragon'd again to get war assets. If you renegaded you renegaded again to not loss war assets. Something that does have an effect but its not what the player expects on a bare bones basic or even what they wildly might think. And that is the issue with the ending choices of Mass Effect. The promise such divergent stories that can't simply be crunched into a similar path. There will just be fundamentally different conflicts and issues with each one of them. This video does suggest they just do what Mass Effect has always done but that is accepting a comprise instead of expecting what it should natural be. Not having different assignments to show that "Hey there are differences?" But genuine world differences. Synthesis is described where conflict isn't really a factor anymore. Where everyone knows what its like to be someone else. That story, that exploration of the themes would result in a much less action oriented game and more something like Disco Elysium where the central conversation is about what this life is like. Control is likewise a very different kind of conflict where smaller scale wars could happen. But galactic conflicts just won't exist. Something like a Krogan Civil War is just unlikely to happen with a Shepard controlling the Reapers. Where they could easily stomp down on any major conflict. And not only that but things like diseases, medically issues and similar things would nearly be erased. Maybe there is a story where Shepard becomes a tyrant and rules over organics as an AI god but I don't think many could see their Shepard doing that and I don't think BioWare could see Shepard doing that. Destroy likewise would just be about reconnecting the galaxy together and would be the one most similar to the setting before the Crucible. And all of this isn't even accounting for honoring other player choices. I mentioned it a bit with the Krogan Civil War hinted at in a N7 teaser but there is literally no way a Krogan Civil War can realistically exist in a Synthesis ending or a Control Ending. Not in the way the art depicts. Like I can not accept that if the quarians are dead in one playthrough that BioWare just goes. JK they live and the only difference is a mission. No, it should feel like a real loss. Something was fundamentally changed between a version of them living and a version of them dead. Because that is the promise of importing choices. A major decision was made and you will see how that plays out to its fullest. Not half, not a quarter but seeing it realized. The same feeling you get in a D&D session where a major choice you made comes back and makes you realize it would have been different if you made a different choice. I know for a fact that if BioWare does crunch the endings and the only difference is different side quests, I and other fans would be upset. Because that isn't what I wanted. The solution for BioWare is two fold. The hard path and the easy path. The first is they just buckle down make three games and honor the choices made in each game. Not saying Synthesis should be Disco Elysium but Mass Effect but its the one that makes the most sense in my head. But something that fully explores the ramifications of having this union between synthetics and organics. Same with Control and same with Destory. The second path is just canonize an ending. Its the easiest way because they can focus their efforts on story of the game instead of making a game that is literally about showing the player their choices and making the game before 2040. I think they should also canonize the Genophage, and quarian and geth choices because I know for a fact that if they don't it will be real sad seeing the only differences being less krogan, quarians and geth. And this isn't even considering the fact that the Krogan Civil War just won't happen at the scale shown in the artwork if Wreav is in charge, Eve is dead, and the Genophage isn't cured. Sorry but the krogan would just die out. Because the expectation of that combination of choices would be the krogan's extinction. Its how the games have framed it since the beginning and to alter that would introduce internal inconsistency. I hope this shows why this will be so difficult for BioWare but also why literally no other RPG studio has done it to this scale. What BioWare did with ME1 to 3 and DAO to DAI is astounding. Truly more than what I have seen. Because CDPR fumbled that and gave up with Witcher 3. Small example being Thaler is alive no matter what. And big example is that the dragon state you helped create alongside helping the Scoia'tael in the prior games just does nothing. No mention of it and not even the bare bones of them coming to help Geralt at Kaer Morhen. Obsidian did it fine enough but they just didn't do that with Outer Worlds 2 and Avowed. Larian? What about Larian? Larian has set each of their Divinity games 100s of years apart from each other just so they don't have to address it and on top of that they just are inconsistent. Only caring recently because they made it bigger. And don't even get me started with BG3. I know Wizards has already canonized events but what was with Viconia and Saervok? Just random guys with their names attached. Not even canonized endings just completely different people. Casey Hudson did an interview with Game Informer about this and he is right when he says this has to be planned out. So, many of these companions did these as features because BioWare did it because BioWare controlled what was supposed to be in an RPG. But as that feature waned without BioWare pushing it these other developers slowly removed it. Because its ******* hard to do. Great rewards if done right. A true feeling of your character existing in the world and having an effect long after it happened but a mountainous path it is. Again I want the hard path. BioWare. I'll wait man. Make three games and honor the choices of each of them. But as this video says its also about the money. And there isn't any reality where EA goes "Yeah, we can about 5 years with each release and for each of those games to be very different. Go head."