344 réponses à ce sujet

[Zulu_DFA]

Nozybidaj wrote...

SurfaceBeneath wrote...
 It's a pretty obvious fact that Bioware actually did address just about every complaint that was voiced about the first game in some manner.

Some one complained about the Mako.  Get rid of it.
Some one complained about the Inventory.  Get rid of it.
Some one complained about the guns overheating.  Get rid of it.
Some one complained about Ash/Kaidan.  Get rid of them.
Some one complained about Liara.  Get rid of her.
Some one complained about the Reapers.  Get rid of them.
Some one complained about the story.  Get rid of it.

Yeah, I can see your point.

Lol.

I guess some one must have complained about the helmet toggle.

[nelly21]

@ Bourne

You seem to believe that I dislike Mass Effect when nothing could be further from the truth. My 12 (and counting) playthroughs should suggest that I LOVE ME 1.

The point of my comment is that people like you have retreated into this world where Bioware must adhere to the strictest rpg elements and make the game exactly how YOU want it or else it's a failure and they don't listen to fans. The fact is they do listen. But they aren't going to compromise THEIR vision on THEIR game in order to satisfy a disgruntled extreme minority in their fanbase.

Say you write a book. The book is extremely popular. People are buying it in droves. You write a second book in the same series and it sells even better, wins more awards and makes you even more money. Are you going to change the direction of YOUR intellectual property to satisfy the few people that are offering nothing but "I didn't like it so it must suck"? Or are you going to stick to your guns and tell the story you want to tell to satisfy the massive amounts of people that want to see where you'll take them next?

You and people like you do not offer constructive criticism. What you offer is a demand to move backwards. Bioware is choosing to move forwards in their series. Most of us want to be along for the ride. If you don't, then don't buy the game. No one is forcing you. If you think the story sucks, write a better one. Go out there and pitch an idea for your game. God willing, it will go well for you and you will make millions of dollars. And when you do, check your game's website forum and listen to me **** and complain about how I and a handful of others didn't enjoy your game. See how willing to "listen" you'll be then.

Modifié par nelly21, 16 décembre 2010 - 08:49 .

[Babli]

Phaedon wrote...

Babli wrote...
Fix´d

No.
Also, sites with user ratings.

I did like the game. But not story or most of the changes.And yet still it´s 9/10 game for me.  And I m not alone who feels that way. So I can too make this as fact like you did.

[shinobi602]

[spam image removed]

Modifié par Stanley Woo, 17 décembre 2010 - 12:52 .

[Zulu_DFA]

nelly21 wrote...
You and people like you do not offer constructive criticism. What you offer is a demand to move backwards. Bioware is choosing to move forwards in their series.

I'd say the thermal ammo was a move backwards.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 16 décembre 2010 - 08:57 .

[AlanC9]

Nozybidaj wrote...

You could have swapped out Shepard with Conrad Verner and nothing about the story would have changed significantly except the opening sequence. You could have even swapped out Shepard for a DAO style silent protagonist gun totting bad a** space marine #98,798,798 and nothing significant would have changed. I fail to see how Shepard was somehow vital enough to ME2 to make it "his" story.

Of course, when you say Verner you're simply lying. He doesn't have the skills or the personality for the job, as you well know. But yeah, there's nothing magic about Shepard in ME2; some other great warrior and leader could conceivably have accomplished the mission

Is it really your position that there has to be something magic about the protagonist of an RPG, so only that one person in the whole universe could possibly even attempt to do what he does?

In Dragon Age there's nothing special about the PC. He's an ordinary Grey Warden; the only thing differing him from all the other Grey Wardens of Ferelden (except Alistair) is that they died at Ostagar and he did not. Did this bother you?

[Moondoggie]

nelly21 wrote...

@ Bourne

You seem to believe that I dislike Mass Effect when nothing could be further from the truth. My 12 (and counting) playthroughs should suggest that I LOVE ME 1.

The point of my comment is that people like you have retreated into this world where Bioware must adhere to the strictest rpg elements and make the game exactly how YOU want it or else it's a failure and they don't listen to fans. The fact is they do listen. But they aren't going to compromise THEIR vision on THEIR game in order to satisfy a disgruntled extreme minority in their fanbase.

Say you write a book. The book is extremely popular. People are buying it in droves. You write a second book in the same series and it sells even better, wins more awards and makes you even more money. Are you going to change the direction of YOUR intellectual property to satisfy the few people that are offering nothing but "I didn't like it so it must suck"? Or are you going to stick to your guns and tell the story you want to tell to satisfy the massive amounts of people that want to see where you'll take them next?

You and people like you do not offer constructive criticism. What you offer is a demand to move backwards. Bioware is choosing to move forwards in their series. Most of us want to be along for the ride. If you don't, then don't buy the game. No one is forcing you. If you think the story sucks, write a better one. Go out there and pitch an idea for your game. God willing, it will go well for you and you will make millions of dollars. And when you do, check your game's website forum and listen to me **** and complain about how I and a handful of others didn't enjoy your game. See how willing to "listen" you'll be then.

This deserves a freakin medal or at least a drink from me should i ever cross paths with this dude. Said it exactly as it needs to be said.

[AlanC9]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...
When I claim to what a stronger focus on RPG, I do not necessarily desire statistics; although I do fancy them at times. I refer more to the story and characters, such as squad banter and a better structured main plot.

What exactly do you mean by a "better structured main plot"? Like Pacifien said, if you don't say exactly what was wrong and how it could be made better, you can't really expect to get the results you like.

[Aigyl]

Holy heated forum posts Batman! A few posts are getting a tad hostile.

Anyhoo, most of what could be said has been said, but I think it's clear Bioware listens to their fans. Not you as an individual specifically perhaps, or a group you affiliate yourself with, but they do listen and alter things according to what they think is best. Why wouldn't Bioware make the best possible game they think they can make?

To delve into EA conspiracy theories is a shakey claim at best. EA has a vested interest in Bioware making the best game they can, not shoehorning them into making a Gears of War clone or something if the Bioware team isn't motivated to do that, that means the game will probably get less favourable reviews and lose sales. EA likes sales.

[Nozybidaj]

AlanC9 wrote...

Nozybidaj wrote...

You could have swapped out Shepard with Conrad Verner and nothing about the story would have changed significantly except the opening sequence. You could have even swapped out Shepard for a DAO style silent protagonist gun totting bad a** space marine #98,798,798 and nothing significant would have changed. I fail to see how Shepard was somehow vital enough to ME2 to make it "his" story.

Of course, when you say Verner you're simply lying. He doesn't have the skills or the personality for the job, as you well know. But yeah, there's nothing magic about Shepard in ME2; some other great warrior and leader could conceivably have accomplished the mission

Is it really your position that there has to be something magic about the protagonist of an RPG, so only that one person in the whole universe could possibly even attempt to do what he does?

In Dragon Age there's nothing special about the PC. He's an ordinary Grey Warden; the only thing differing him from all the other Grey Wardens of Ferelden (except Alistair) is that they died at Ostagar and he did not. Did this bother you?

Nope didn't bother me a bit.

In regards to ME though, "your" position was that the story is about Shepard.  I simply stated that if you can completely remove Shepard from the equation and the story doesn't change, is the story really about Shepard?

You brought up DAO, go ask Mr Gaider, DAO is NOT about the Warden.  It is about Ferelden.  The Warden is just a blank slate through which you experience the story.

In Mass Effect, if your position (and BW's far as I can recall) is that the story is about Shepard, that it is "Shepard's story" then yes, I would expect there to be something unique about Shepard that requires him to be a part of the story.  Not a blank cardboard cutout that can be replaced by any generic space marine.

[Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien]

Bah as much as I feel the urge to quote some posts, I am just going to say I agree with what Nelly21, Pacifien and AlanC9 has said in last couple of pages.



Most of the 'complainers' of ME2 fail to grasp how to constructively criticise, thus giving the devs no help in how to improve things. Also some of the bare 'criticisms' fail to grasp how some things they consider 'little' are actually a lot bigger. Don't have to be a games designer to understand how things could be bigger than they seem.



@Aigyl The whole 'EA is evil' thing is more than shakey. Particularly as Bioware's CEO is a Senior VP of EA. As I've said before in other posts, somehow I think he is going to have a big say in what Bioware does.

[Phaedon]

nelly21 wrote...

@ Bourne

You seem to believe that I dislike Mass Effect when nothing could be further from the truth. My 12 (and counting) playthroughs should suggest that I LOVE ME 1.

The point of my comment is that people like you have retreated into this world where Bioware must adhere to the strictest rpg elements and make the game exactly how YOU want it or else it's a failure and they don't listen to fans. The fact is they do listen. But they aren't going to compromise THEIR vision on THEIR game in order to satisfy a disgruntled extreme minority in their fanbase.

Say you write a book. The book is extremely popular. People are buying it in droves. You write a second book in the same series and it sells even better, wins more awards and makes you even more money. Are you going to change the direction of YOUR intellectual property to satisfy the few people that are offering nothing but "I didn't like it so it must suck"? Or are you going to stick to your guns and tell the story you want to tell to satisfy the massive amounts of people that want to see where you'll take them next?

You and people like you do not offer constructive criticism. What you offer is a demand to move backwards. Bioware is choosing to move forwards in their series. Most of us want to be along for the ride. If you don't, then don't buy the game. No one is forcing you. If you think the story sucks, write a better one. Go out there and pitch an idea for your game. God willing, it will go well for you and you will make millions of dollars. And when you do, check your game's website forum and listen to me **** and complain about how I and a handful of others didn't enjoy your game. See how willing to "listen" you'll be then.

As I said on my previous post, I completely agree with this.

[AlanC9]

Nozybidaj wrote...
In regards to ME though, "your" position was that the story is about Shepard.  I simply stated that if you can completely remove Shepard from the equation and the story doesn't change, is the story really about Shepard?

Sure. He's the hero. If some other character had been leading the mission then it would have been about that character. But Shepard did lead the mission and it is his story.

You brought up DAO, go ask Mr Gaider, DAO is NOT about the Warden.  It is about Ferelden.  The Warden is just a blank slate through which you experience the story.

What Gaider actually said was that Dragon Age is about Ferelden. Not DAO.

In Mass Effect, if your position (and BW's far as I can recall) is that the story is about Shepard, that it is "Shepard's story" then yes, I would expect there to be something unique about Shepard that requires him to be a part of the story.  Not a blank cardboard cutout that can be replaced by any generic space marine.

All I can say to that is that we have different expectations. I don't really want there to be something magic about Shepard that makes him The Chosen One, although I didn't especially mind this in ME1, and I was positively glad that ME2 was about him being a great soldier and leader rather than about him being the guy who accidentally stumbled into a Prothean beacon when it was activated.

[GHOST OF FRUITY]

nelly21 wrote...

@ Bourne

You seem to believe that I dislike Mass Effect when nothing could be further from the truth. My 12 (and counting) playthroughs should suggest that I LOVE ME 1.

The point of my comment is that people like you have retreated into this world where Bioware must adhere to the strictest rpg elements and make the game exactly how YOU want it or else it's a failure and they don't listen to fans. The fact is they do listen. But they aren't going to compromise THEIR vision on THEIR game in order to satisfy a disgruntled extreme minority in their fanbase.

Say you write a book. The book is extremely popular. People are buying it in droves. You write a second book in the same series and it sells even better, wins more awards and makes you even more money. Are you going to change the direction of YOUR intellectual property to satisfy the few people that are offering nothing but "I didn't like it so it must suck"? Or are you going to stick to your guns and tell the story you want to tell to satisfy the massive amounts of people that want to see where you'll take them next?

You and people like you do not offer constructive criticism. What you offer is a demand to move backwards. Bioware is choosing to move forwards in their series. Most of us want to be along for the ride. If you don't, then don't buy the game. No one is forcing you. If you think the story sucks, write a better one. Go out there and pitch an idea for your game. God willing, it will go well for you and you will make millions of dollars. And when you do, check your game's website forum and listen to me **** and complain about how I and a handful of others didn't enjoy your game. See how willing to "listen" you'll be then.

[spam image removed]

Well said sir. 

Modifié par Stanley Woo, 17 décembre 2010 - 12:56 .

[nelly21]

Nozybidaj wrote...

In Mass Effect, if your position (and BW's far as I can recall) is that the story is about Shepard, that it is "Shepard's story" then yes, I would expect there to be something unique about Shepard that requires him to be a part of the story.  Not a blank cardboard cutout that can be replaced by any generic space marine.

They already told you what is unique about Shepard: He beat Sovereign.   They even address it in game when Shepard questions Illusive Man about why he didn't simply create an army with what it cost to bring him back. Or when Miranda is admitting that despite being genetical superior to Shepard, she couldn't have accomplished what he did. The reason is because Shepard is special. So no, you can't replace anyone in the storyline and have it fit.

Would Garrus follow Conrad Verner? No

Would Tali? No

Would Cerberus be interested in Conrad Verner? No

Would anybody follow Conrad Verner on a suicide mission? No

Your argument that anybody can be plugged into the story and have it work is ridiculous.

P.S.: Thanks for the comments guys.

Modifié par nelly21, 16 décembre 2010 - 10:06 .

[Ajara123]

nelly21 wrote...

@ Bourne

You seem to believe that I dislike Mass Effect when nothing could be further from the truth. My 12 (and counting) playthroughs should suggest that I LOVE ME 1.

The point of my comment is that people like you have retreated into this world where Bioware must adhere to the strictest rpg elements and make the game exactly how YOU want it or else it's a failure and they don't listen to fans. The fact is they do listen. But they aren't going to compromise THEIR vision on THEIR game in order to satisfy a disgruntled extreme minority in their fanbase.

Say you write a book. The book is extremely popular. People are buying it in droves. You write a second book in the same series and it sells even better, wins more awards and makes you even more money. Are you going to change the direction of YOUR intellectual property to satisfy the few people that are offering nothing but "I didn't like it so it must suck"? Or are you going to stick to your guns and tell the story you want to tell to satisfy the massive amounts of people that want to see where you'll take them next?

You and people like you do not offer constructive criticism. What you offer is a demand to move backwards. Bioware is choosing to move forwards in their series. Most of us want to be along for the ride. If you don't, then don't buy the game. No one is forcing you. If you think the story sucks, write a better one. Go out there and pitch an idea for your game. God willing, it will go well for you and you will make millions of dollars. And when you do, check your game's website forum and listen to me **** and complain about how I and a handful of others didn't enjoy your game. See how willing to "listen" you'll be then.

I agree with this.

[ZJR7621]

Dsurian wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

It's always going to be about what's best for the game.

Of course, it does mean that we won't be able to please everyone all the time (where have I heard that said before?), but we'll always try to release a product that we think is fun, exciting, and that we can be proud of... unexpected problems notwithstanding. And maybe, just maybe, millions of gamers out there will agree with us.

I can't help but feel that (particularly since EA became your parent) Bioware is turning into another 'jack of all trades' game company, though.  You can't please everyone, sure, yet you start trying so hard and listening to everyone, and the game itself turns into something mediocre for everyone instead of something spectacular for a smaller group of people. 

Jesse Houston wrote...

...All the while living under the constraint that we must produce something that is a 'BioWare Quality' product.

You mean an "EA 'quality' product", right?  I can imagine what would have happened to Baldurs Gate if EA had any say in it...and it doesn't look good...

I agree with you 100%, since EA took over it's been about what "everyone" wants I understand it is impossible to please everyone and don't get me wrong I loved ME2 but some of the  RPG elements were stripped to satisfy shooter fans simple philosophy.  What Bioware has been saying has been basically well the millions of fans seem to like it!  Yeah sure the new fans like it but i'm sure if the elder scrolls series changed to a strategy game a few hundred thousand people would jump on board and love it but it wouldn't mean the people who gave you all your job and kept the lights on at your house and food on your table, the fans will like it!  

[Bourne Endeavor]

nelly21 wrote...

@ Bourne

You seem to believe that I dislike Mass Effect when nothing could be further from the truth. My 12 (and counting) playthroughs should suggest that I LOVE ME 1.

The point of my comment is that people like you have retreated into this world where Bioware must adhere to the strictest rpg elements and make the game exactly how YOU want it or else it's a failure and they don't listen to fans. The fact is they do listen. But they aren't going to compromise THEIR vision on THEIR game in order to satisfy a disgruntled extreme minority in their fanbase.

Say you write a book. The book is extremely popular. People are buying it in droves. You write a second book in the same series and it sells even better, wins more awards and makes you even more money. Are you going to change the direction of YOUR intellectual property to satisfy the few people that are offering nothing but "I didn't like it so it must suck"? Or are you going to stick to your guns and tell the story you want to tell to satisfy the massive amounts of people that want to see where you'll take them next?

You and people like you do not offer constructive criticism. What you offer is a demand to move backwards. Bioware is choosing to move forwards in their series. Most of us want to be along for the ride. If you don't, then don't buy the game. No one is forcing you. If you think the story sucks, write a better one. Go out there and pitch an idea for your game. God willing, it will go well for you and you will make millions of dollars. And when you do, check your game's website forum and listen to me **** and complain about how I and a handful of others didn't enjoy your game. See how willing to "listen" you'll be then.

Coincidently, you seem to perceive I dislike Mass Effect 2 and that I desire a return to the old ways. In actuality, you essentially state precisely that, despite my post openly and specifically going against this. I recommend you read the entirety of someone's criticism prior to making baseless assumptions that prove inadequate or to be blunt, wrong. I shall even quote myself. "I am more willing to compromise inclusions in ME2 that some disliked if other areas receive more necessary attention. One would be the inventory system. I am indifferent to it since I never believed it could not be rectified from the monotonous chore it had been in ME, yet do not dislike the weapon locker concept utilized in ME2."

Care to point out where it was I fancied Bioware "moving backwards" as you so eloquently stated? If anything I showed a complete indifference or even preference to their removal. Frankly, it is more the former because I am not bothered by having to scroll though menus, yet enjoyed the more streamlined approach in this section for its haste. If you had bothered to read it, this should have been blatantly apparent.

Furthermore, you claim I do not offer constructive criticism, despite there existing a follow up post delving into explicit detail upon every single complaint I had. If you turn a glance to the post in question, many are not "strictest RPG elements" and are merely technical foibles such as loading screens or the romance subplot. Some do adhere to past ventures, primarily the Mako, planet exploration and side missions. Ironically, even more mainstream review sites complained about planet exploration or lack thereof. The N7 Missions I stated once again, in detail, my qualms with them, citing them as tedious in comparison to more dialogue driven missions. I did not demand their removal, simply stated preference, much akin to the Mako. If holding a mild disdain for the Hammerhead is "moving backwards" or demanding Bioware "adhere to the strictest RPG elements." Well I put my hands up, you have me there. You know, because driving a vehicle is primarily a RPG thing, non?

Subsequently, I discuss customization and offer a recommendation merely stating a preference of having the aforementioned in comparison to an automated system, which performs the task for you. Offering a suggestion alongside the critism is the basis of constructive criticism and considering it is a far more in-depth feature then anything Mass Effect offered I cannot possibly be moving backwards now can I?

I need not continue as I believe I have blatantly rebuttal your inaccurate assumptions. Perhaps moderately harsh in conclusion. Nonetheless, I do not appreciate people attempting to berate posts I have made, which they did not even bother to read and evident by your post, you did nothing of the kind. If you did only read the first and overlooked the second, I recommend a glance as it is in even further contrast to what your assumptions of my preferences are.

Edit: To add to the last paragraph. Your response to complaints against the storyline is "write a better one?" This, in translation, is "your opinion is wrong." So tell me. Is there a move, video game or novel that you believe is lackluster? Of course there is, people have preferences. So I shall reiterate your statement. "You don't like the movie? Go make a better one." Sound pointless and unnecessary? Good, glad we see eye to eye.

AlanC9 wrote...

Bourne Endeavor wrote...
When I claim to what a stronger focus on RPG, I do not necessarily desire statistics; although I do fancy them at times. I refer more to the story and characters, such as squad banter and a better structured main plot.

What exactly do you mean by a "better structured main plot"? Like Pacifien said, if you don't say exactly what was wrong and how it could be made better, you can't really expect to get the results you like.

You are correct. My primarily complaint with the main plot was its inconsistency and the lack of a centralized villain. Collectors were scarcely above Husks, possessing no depth or personality. They were the Covenant prior to Halo 2. So when I say "better structured main plot" I am citing the story focus on developing the Reaper plot, which was virtually ignored and having the story play a more integral plot in the game as whole. In ME2, the Collector missions felt disjointed. Not necessarily bad... just a stronger focus would have helped. We learn little about the Collectors, even less about the Reapers and absolutely nothing about the Collector General who could have played a compelling complex antagonist. The whole "Collectors are Protheans" was mentioned and forgotten.

To summarize, I desire a more centralized antagonist and plot more in-depth than destroying faceless enemies. Similar in some capacity to Mass Effect, yet more action orientated. Essentially, we should discover more of the Reapers and not simply be told to destroy in one cinematic battle. And for the love of god, no "put a virus in them to destroy them all!" The less obvious the Deus Ex Machina, the better.

Modifié par Bourne Endeavor, 16 décembre 2010 - 10:44 .

[AlanC9]

ZJR7621 wrote...
I agree with you 100%, since EA took over it's been about what "everyone" wants I understand it is impossible to please everyone and don't get me wrong I loved ME2 but some of the  RPG elements were stripped to satisfy shooter fans simple philosophy.  What Bioware has been saying has been basically well the millions of fans seem to like it!  Yeah sure the new fans like it but i'm sure if the elder scrolls series changed to a strategy game a few hundred thousand people would jump on board and love it but it wouldn't mean the people who gave you all your job and kept the lights on at your house and food on your table, the fans will like it!  

This has nothing to do with EA. Bio has always tried to make best-selling games. That meant one thing in 2000, and it means another thing in 2010.

[AlanC9]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

You are correct. My primarily complaint with the main plot was its inconsistency and the lack of a centralized villain. Collectors were scarcely above Husks, possessing no depth or personality. They were the Covenant prior to Halo 2. So when I say "better structured main plot" I am citing the story focus on developing the Reaper plot, which was virtually ignored and having the story play a more integral plot in the game as whole. In ME2, the Collector missions felt disjointed. Not necessarily bad... just a stronger focus would have helped. We learn little about the Collectors, even less about the Reapers and absolutely nothing about the Collector General who could have played a compelling complex antagonist. The whole "Collectors are Protheans" was mentioned and forgotten.

I have to take issue with the italicized parts.

The Collectors are the Reaper plot. The Reaper plot just isn't what we thought it was.

We have learned everything important about the Collectors. They used to be Protheans. They're tools of the Reapers. They're helping the Reapers to reproduce. And that's it. Their history and culture are over; they're keepers with guns.

We've learned the most important things about the Reapers. What they need organics for, and that they think humans are good for that purpose. Possibly ideal for that purpose -- there's some talk about human genetic diversity being unique among sentients, which may be foreshadowing.

It also seems somewhat unfair to complain about the Collectors and husks having no depth or personality, since this is hardly different from the hordes of geth and krogan in ME1, or the hordes of darkspawn in DAO, or the hordes of..... pretty much any non-boss opponents in any RPG ever.

[Merchant2006]

They listen to us. Of course they can't take everything we say and put it into the game (for very obvious and apparent reasons) but I love BioWare. They know what they are doing... most of the times ^^.

[nelly21]

@ Bourne

You are right. My post was based on your comments pertaining to what I said to Jebel.

I had not read your next post. Now I have and I applaud you for making it. But you know as well as I do that posts like these are few and far between. 

Now pertaining to the story. What central antagonist should they have created? How would you have distinguished this character from Saren? How would the plot have differed from ME 1? What would this person have been doing to help the Reapers? The fight has gone beyond stopping one villian. Is bringing in a central antagonist moving the story forward?

These are questions writers have to answer. You did not like the story. I did. Are either of us the end all be all of the discussion? No. So Bioware has to write the story they want to write and hope enough people enjoy it and get hooked. Enough did. It was a success and will only bigger now that the PS3 owners can play it. 

The fact of the matter is the story is not going to change. Criticizing it will accomplish nothing. If you like it. Welcome aboard, if you don't, hey, no hard feelings. Of course there are movies, games, etc. that have storylines I do not like. I did not enjoy Avatar. I thought the story was cliche'. I am, however, in the minority. The overwhelming majority of people enjoyed the story. So can I make the demand that it should be changed? Should James Cameron rewrite it to suit my tastes? Of course not. Does that mean he doesn't listen to fans? No.

But yes, I will berate someone for suggesting that Bioware doesn't listen solely based on their not changing the direction of the franchise. It is a self-centered viewpoint to have and adds nothing to the conversation. 

Modifié par nelly21, 16 décembre 2010 - 11:35 .

[Fishy]

At Bourne and Nelly21



Blahblahblah





And yes they do listen.To some degree.

[Pacifien]

Keep the discussion civil and try not to get personal, folks.