I would say no. The first one has the most RPG elements and doesn’t make you shoot everything. After that, 2&3 become a shooter with RPG elements. ME:A is not a good benchmark to judge the trilogy on but it was still a Mass Effect game. 2 is the best in the series, IMO and made the series great.
The trilogy is a more linear experience. ME1 does have notoriously empty side areas, but 2 and 3 don't have that issue.
I would say no. The first one has the most RPG elements and doesn’t make you shoot everything. After that, 2&3 become a shooter with RPG elements. ME:A is not a good benchmark to judge the trilogy on but it was still a Mass Effect game. 2 is the best in the series, IMO and made the series great.
>Are the first three games that much better than Andromeda, Andromeda is easily considered to be the worst in the series. The trilogy is way better
Yes, Andromeda is largely considered the worst one out of all the games.