249 réponses à ce sujet

[ADLegend21]

Because it's the START of the war with the Reapers. It's always good to jump in at the START of the long event that was built up to.

[Dark_Caduceus]

It's not a good entry point, anymore than Alien 3 would be a good entry point to the Alien franchise. But Bioware is a business and their marketing is intended to make people buy their game, not provide an optimal gameplay/story telling experience. Not that there's anything wrong with that, doing anything else would mean they're bad at their jobs.

[SomeKindaEnigma]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Hasn't this thread already happened?

It happens about 3 or 4 times a week

[ThePwener]

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

This again? I thought we already knew that this was just marketing?

Look at his avatar! we have a mole!

[Kusy]

crimzontearz wrote...
Following your own (flawed) mentality I am an idiot because I am not a PC gamer thus I could only play Crysis 2 without playing crysis 1 first (regardless of whatever measures I took to get up to speed)
you need to add some qualifyers

Over simplicity is my good friend. That's about right.

Again, if you bought the game knowing absolutely nothing about the previous one - that's plain dumb considering that the game is advertised as a space opera, it's main selling point are the decisions and the story and to be honest it has pretty bad gameplay mechanics compared to other shooters - and anyone writing a review stating otherwise is simply lying or overexcited about the game.

If you are a PS3 gamer, and you heard about this cool new game called Mass Effect 2 and decided to buy it (as menioned - advertised as the second part of the trilogy) without showing interest in the first one, it's still dumb. If you had no chance to play the first game - because you don't have a PC, but you ACTUALY listened to what the advert was saying (so by that time you figured out it's THE SECOND PART OF A TRILOGY) and decided to check up what you are getting yourself into - in other words looking at the previously estabilished story - you obviously are not stupid, aren't you? Because that's the logical thing to do.

Were Crysis one or Crysis two advertiesed as a tightly related to each other parts of a great story, as two installments that follow the same story arch and allow you to take decisions with a variety of long term consequences? They were not, just like Halo 1, 2 and 3 were not advertised as a space saga where one games directly affect the other, where the main point of the game is that it's a trilogy, a single story, choped into three pices. Just like KOTOR 2 was not direct followup to KOTOR.

If you don't see that something doesn't add up when a spokesperson tells you "Our game is all about story and choice" and then adds "but you might as well join up in the second or third installment - you won't really miss that much" - sorry, I can't describe it in any other way as plain stupid.

[King Minos]

If I was making games and advertising them, everything I say will be 99.9 percent bull**** and I will be milking a successful game non stop so badly Bobby Kotick would be proud, you can never have enough money.

[The Spamming Troll]

laecraft wrote...

The people who start from the last game are smart, because the latest game is always the best. There's nothing enjoyable about playing an outdated game. Two years can make a drastic difference in graphics and gameplay. As of today, ME2 is fun, while ME1 is a chore. ME3 will be even better.

depends if you only play video games for the graphics.

[Bluko]

marshalleck wrote...

How? Easy.

Remember how ME2 had very little to do with anything in ME1? Well, get ready for that again in ME3. The game's plot and characters will be written that it is a standalone game, with a sprinkling of cameos here and there for the importers, as well as tons of email.

Yep.

Bioware can say whatever they want (There's over 900 variables! etc.) but reality is ME3 is going to play pretty much the same whether you've played each game prior or are fresh off the boat. There'll be a few cameos for importers, but seriously folks you're not going to get a radically different experience based on whether you saved the Council or not, or the Collector Base.

It'll be interesting to see the storm people make when they realize 90% of the ME2 crew is not coming back with you on the Normandy. Garrus and Tali seem to be exceptions at this point. So I suppose you might end up with Barrus (Garrus evil twin brother who's also an Infiltrator) as something to add variety or maybe you'll just be short a squadmate.

Bioware has made a very conscious effort to bring in new people at the expense of existing fans for awhile now. This should be obvious to all what with the complete overhaul that went on with ME2's gameplay. They didn't re-create ME's gameplay to address fans concerns. They did it because Mass Effect only sold about 2 millionish copies which while good, doesn't compare to most other exclusives that will sell 4+ million copies. So they ripped out ME1's guts and shoved something more akin to Gears of War in it's place so it would sell more to the young male adult crowd. Cause guess what Gears of War sells about twice as many copies on the Xbox 360 alone.

The frst two questions I asked myself when starting ME2 is WTF is there ammo? and Why am I taking cover just like Marcus Fenix? It truly makes me sad to think what ME2 may have been like they actually bothered to fix what was wrong with ME1.

Now I'm sure I'll get a comment from someone telling me everything about ME1 was broken hence the need for a complete overhaul. And you know what I'm happy that your content to play a Gears of War RPG TPS. Me not so much. I really do think it would have been much better if the series had at least tried to keep the gameplay the same as the original as if anything there's a very stark disconnection from ME1 to ME2 that basically ends up with you liking one game over the other(s) no matter how impartial you may be. Also I don't feel ME2's sales really eclipsed ME1 sales to warrant ME2 as an improvement over its predecessor.


Anyways, the sooner you wake up and realize that Bioware doesn't really care too much what you want cause they figure you're enough of a fanboy that'll you'll pick up ME3 no matter what that they can pretty much focus on selling the game to new people. That's exactly where blind fanboyism takes you. Of course that's what every company wants cause in the short term perspective it makes you  easy to soak for money. (Hence the over-abundant amount of DLC garbage lately.) Problem is this brings a decline in a quality as they are no longer interested in the longevity of their company/brand.

[N7Infernox]

It's just marketing: WHO CARES?

[Leaser Resael]

Bluko wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

How? Easy.

Remember how ME2 had very little to do with anything in ME1? Well, get ready for that again in ME3. The game's plot and characters will be written that it is a standalone game, with a sprinkling of cameos here and there for the importers, as well as tons of email.

Yep.

Bioware can say whatever they want (There's over 900 variables! etc.) but reality is ME3 is going to play pretty much the same whether you've played each game prior or are fresh off the boat. There'll be a few cameos for importers, but seriously folks you're not going to get a radically different experience based on whether you saved the Council or not, or the Collector Base.

It'll be interesting to see the storm people make when they realize 90% of the ME2 crew is not coming back with you on the Normandy. Garrus and Tali seem to be exceptions at this point. So I suppose you might end up with Barrus (Garrus evil twin brother who's also an Infiltrator) as something to add variety or maybe you'll just be short a squadmate.

Bioware has made a very conscious effort to bring in new people at the expense of existing fans for awhile now. This should be obvious to all what with the complete overhaul that went on with ME2's gameplay. They didn't re-create ME's gameplay to address fans concerns. They did it because Mass Effect only sold about 2 millionish copies which while good, doesn't compare to most other exclusives that will sell 4+ million copies. So they ripped out ME1's guts and shoved something more akin to Gears of War in it's place so it would sell more to the young male adult crowd. Cause guess what Gears of War sells about twice as many copies on the Xbox 360 alone.

The frst two questions I asked myself when starting ME2 is WTF is there ammo? and Why am I taking cover just like Marcus Fenix? It truly makes me sad to think what ME2 may have been like they actually bothered to fix what was wrong with ME1.

Now I'm sure I'll get a comment from someone telling me everything about ME1 was broken hence the need for a complete overhaul. And you know what I'm happy that your content to play a Gears of War RPG TPS. Me not so much. I really do think it would have been much better if the series had at least tried to keep the gameplay the same as the original as if anything there's a very stark disconnection from ME1 to ME2 that basically ends up with you liking one game over the other(s) no matter how impartial you may be. Also I don't feel ME2's sales really eclipsed ME1 sales to warrant ME2 as an improvement over its predecessor.


Anyways, the sooner you wake up and realize that Bioware doesn't really care too much what you want cause they figure you're enough of a fanboy that'll you'll pick up ME3 no matter what that they can pretty much focus on selling the game to new people. That's exactly where blind fanboyism takes you. Of course that's what every company wants cause in the short term perspective it makes you  easy to soak for money. (Hence the over-abundant amount of DLC garbage lately.) Problem is this brings a decline in a quality as they are no longer interested in the longevity of their company/brand.

I couldn't have said it any better. I fully agree with you.

[Gatt9]

Bluko wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

How? Easy.

Remember how ME2 had very little to do with anything in ME1? Well, get ready for that again in ME3. The game's plot and characters will be written that it is a standalone game, with a sprinkling of cameos here and there for the importers, as well as tons of email.

Yep.

Bioware can say whatever they want (There's over 900 variables! etc.) but reality is ME3 is going to play pretty much the same whether you've played each game prior or are fresh off the boat. There'll be a few cameos for importers, but seriously folks you're not going to get a radically different experience based on whether you saved the Council or not, or the Collector Base.

It'll be interesting to see the storm people make when they realize 90% of the ME2 crew is not coming back with you on the Normandy. Garrus and Tali seem to be exceptions at this point. So I suppose you might end up with Barrus (Garrus evil twin brother who's also an Infiltrator) as something to add variety or maybe you'll just be short a squadmate.

Bioware has made a very conscious effort to bring in new people at the expense of existing fans for awhile now. This should be obvious to all what with the complete overhaul that went on with ME2's gameplay. They didn't re-create ME's gameplay to address fans concerns. They did it because Mass Effect only sold about 2 millionish copies which while good, doesn't compare to most other exclusives that will sell 4+ million copies. So they ripped out ME1's guts and shoved something more akin to Gears of War in it's place so it would sell more to the young male adult crowd. Cause guess what Gears of War sells about twice as many copies on the Xbox 360 alone.

The frst two questions I asked myself when starting ME2 is WTF is there ammo? and Why am I taking cover just like Marcus Fenix? It truly makes me sad to think what ME2 may have been like they actually bothered to fix what was wrong with ME1.

Now I'm sure I'll get a comment from someone telling me everything about ME1 was broken hence the need for a complete overhaul. And you know what I'm happy that your content to play a Gears of War RPG TPS. Me not so much. I really do think it would have been much better if the series had at least tried to keep the gameplay the same as the original as if anything there's a very stark disconnection from ME1 to ME2 that basically ends up with you liking one game over the other(s) no matter how impartial you may be. Also I don't feel ME2's sales really eclipsed ME1 sales to warrant ME2 as an improvement over its predecessor.


Anyways, the sooner you wake up and realize that Bioware doesn't really care too much what you want cause they figure you're enough of a fanboy that'll you'll pick up ME3 no matter what that they can pretty much focus on selling the game to new people. That's exactly where blind fanboyism takes you. Of course that's what every company wants cause in the short term perspective it makes you  easy to soak for money. (Hence the over-abundant amount of DLC garbage lately.) Problem is this brings a decline in a quality as they are no longer interested in the longevity of their company/brand.

I agree as well.

This is what EA does,  years ago EA used to make sequels to their games,  incredible ones,  now they make sequels to someone else's game and put their IP's name on the box.

EA isn't interested in continuing the potentially revolutionary introduction of a Trilogy in gaming where you actually effect how the story progresses through the three entries.  Bioware could've changed gaming forever,  for the 2nd time in it's history.

Sadly,  EA doesn't want innovation,  they want GoW and CoD's sales.  So they'll toss out the potential,  give you emails and an occasional irrelevant cameo,  and do their best to mimic other games instead of building on their own.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Gatt9 wrote...

This is what EA does,  years ago EA used to make sequels to their games,  incredible ones,  now they make sequels to someone else's game and put their IP's name on the box.

Sad because it is so true.

[KotorEffect3]

Gatt9 wrote...

Bluko wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

How? Easy.

Remember how ME2 had very little to do with anything in ME1? Well, get ready for that again in ME3. The game's plot and characters will be written that it is a standalone game, with a sprinkling of cameos here and there for the importers, as well as tons of email.

Yep.

Bioware can say whatever they want (There's over 900 variables! etc.) but reality is ME3 is going to play pretty much the same whether you've played each game prior or are fresh off the boat. There'll be a few cameos for importers, but seriously folks you're not going to get a radically different experience based on whether you saved the Council or not, or the Collector Base.

It'll be interesting to see the storm people make when they realize 90% of the ME2 crew is not coming back with you on the Normandy. Garrus and Tali seem to be exceptions at this point. So I suppose you might end up with Barrus (Garrus evil twin brother who's also an Infiltrator) as something to add variety or maybe you'll just be short a squadmate.

Bioware has made a very conscious effort to bring in new people at the expense of existing fans for awhile now. This should be obvious to all what with the complete overhaul that went on with ME2's gameplay. They didn't re-create ME's gameplay to address fans concerns. They did it because Mass Effect only sold about 2 millionish copies which while good, doesn't compare to most other exclusives that will sell 4+ million copies. So they ripped out ME1's guts and shoved something more akin to Gears of War in it's place so it would sell more to the young male adult crowd. Cause guess what Gears of War sells about twice as many copies on the Xbox 360 alone.

The frst two questions I asked myself when starting ME2 is WTF is there ammo? and Why am I taking cover just like Marcus Fenix? It truly makes me sad to think what ME2 may have been like they actually bothered to fix what was wrong with ME1.

Now I'm sure I'll get a comment from someone telling me everything about ME1 was broken hence the need for a complete overhaul. And you know what I'm happy that your content to play a Gears of War RPG TPS. Me not so much. I really do think it would have been much better if the series had at least tried to keep the gameplay the same as the original as if anything there's a very stark disconnection from ME1 to ME2 that basically ends up with you liking one game over the other(s) no matter how impartial you may be. Also I don't feel ME2's sales really eclipsed ME1 sales to warrant ME2 as an improvement over its predecessor.


Anyways, the sooner you wake up and realize that Bioware doesn't really care too much what you want cause they figure you're enough of a fanboy that'll you'll pick up ME3 no matter what that they can pretty much focus on selling the game to new people. That's exactly where blind fanboyism takes you. Of course that's what every company wants cause in the short term perspective it makes you  easy to soak for money. (Hence the over-abundant amount of DLC garbage lately.) Problem is this brings a decline in a quality as they are no longer interested in the longevity of their company/brand.

I agree as well.

This is what EA does,  years ago EA used to make sequels to their games,  incredible ones,  now they make sequels to someone else's game and put their IP's name on the box.

EA isn't interested in continuing the potentially revolutionary introduction of a Trilogy in gaming where you actually effect how the story progresses through the three entries.  Bioware could've changed gaming forever,  for the 2nd time in it's history.

Sadly,  EA doesn't want innovation,  they want GoW and CoD's sales.  So they'll toss out the potential,  give you emails and an occasional irrelevant cameo,  and do their best to mimic other games instead of building on their own.

I love how you guys make baseless assumptions about ME 3 while ignoring that ME 2 had to account for continuity giving it less wiggle room.

[The Spamming Troll]

Gatt9 wrote...

Bluko wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

How? Easy.

Remember how ME2 had very little to do with anything in ME1? Well, get ready for that again in ME3. The game's plot and characters will be written that it is a standalone game, with a sprinkling of cameos here and there for the importers, as well as tons of email.

Yep.

Bioware can say whatever they want (There's over 900 variables! etc.) but reality is ME3 is going to play pretty much the same whether you've played each game prior or are fresh off the boat. There'll be a few cameos for importers, but seriously folks you're not going to get a radically different experience based on whether you saved the Council or not, or the Collector Base.

It'll be interesting to see the storm people make when they realize 90% of the ME2 crew is not coming back with you on the Normandy. Garrus and Tali seem to be exceptions at this point. So I suppose you might end up with Barrus (Garrus evil twin brother who's also an Infiltrator) as something to add variety or maybe you'll just be short a squadmate.

Bioware has made a very conscious effort to bring in new people at the expense of existing fans for awhile now. This should be obvious to all what with the complete overhaul that went on with ME2's gameplay. They didn't re-create ME's gameplay to address fans concerns. They did it because Mass Effect only sold about 2 millionish copies which while good, doesn't compare to most other exclusives that will sell 4+ million copies. So they ripped out ME1's guts and shoved something more akin to Gears of War in it's place so it would sell more to the young male adult crowd. Cause guess what Gears of War sells about twice as many copies on the Xbox 360 alone.

The frst two questions I asked myself when starting ME2 is WTF is there ammo? and Why am I taking cover just like Marcus Fenix? It truly makes me sad to think what ME2 may have been like they actually bothered to fix what was wrong with ME1.

Now I'm sure I'll get a comment from someone telling me everything about ME1 was broken hence the need for a complete overhaul. And you know what I'm happy that your content to play a Gears of War RPG TPS. Me not so much. I really do think it would have been much better if the series had at least tried to keep the gameplay the same as the original as if anything there's a very stark disconnection from ME1 to ME2 that basically ends up with you liking one game over the other(s) no matter how impartial you may be. Also I don't feel ME2's sales really eclipsed ME1 sales to warrant ME2 as an improvement over its predecessor.


Anyways, the sooner you wake up and realize that Bioware doesn't really care too much what you want cause they figure you're enough of a fanboy that'll you'll pick up ME3 no matter what that they can pretty much focus on selling the game to new people. That's exactly where blind fanboyism takes you. Of course that's what every company wants cause in the short term perspective it makes you  easy to soak for money. (Hence the over-abundant amount of DLC garbage lately.) Problem is this brings a decline in a quality as they are no longer interested in the longevity of their company/brand.

I agree as well.

This is what EA does,  years ago EA used to make sequels to their games,  incredible ones,  now they make sequels to someone else's game and put their IP's name on the box.

EA isn't interested in continuing the potentially revolutionary introduction of a Trilogy in gaming where you actually effect how the story progresses through the three entries.  Bioware could've changed gaming forever,  for the 2nd time in it's history.

Sadly,  EA doesn't want innovation,  they want GoW and CoD's sales.  So they'll toss out the potential,  give you emails and an occasional irrelevant cameo,  and do their best to mimic other games instead of building on their own.

bluko and gatt,

you two are by far my favorite posters in this forum. your perspectives on what should be is spot on, atleast to me.

i dont mean to sound like a brown noser, but really, its great reading for me having you two around here.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 02 septembre 2011 - 02:56 .

[Bluko]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

I love how you guys make baseless assumptions about ME 3 while ignoring that ME 2 had to account for continuity giving it less wiggle room.

How is it baseless to assume ME3 is pretty much going to be ME2 again with some improvements? That's pretty much what I've seen from the trailers and the Developers basically all but say it themselves. I mean yes obviously the story will be different, but comeon.

Look I can almost bet you that ME3 will end the same way as both ME1 and ME2 did. You'll get to make some seemingly important decision(s), but ultimately the Reapers (probably) are going to lose. Maybe you'll have a cinematic with Turian ships instead of Salarians at the end getting blown up. But ME3 is going to end the same for everyone. Why wouldn't it? I really doubt ME3 is going to have starkly different endings.

Point is Bioware has stated an interest in continuing the games. You are not going to choose anything that could radically alter future games. If all the Krogan die, it will happen for everyone. You might end up screwing some races over more then others, but ultimately there will be enough survivors so when they make Mass Effect 4 set in the year 3128 there are still Turians, Geth, etc or they all died.


Look marketing usually exists to bring new people in more then anything else. It's not to convince existing fans/consumers to buy, because they assume you'll buy the game no matter what. Which in all fairness probably is pretty true for just about everyone who posts here.

Bioware wants more new fans, it's that simple. If they make a few old fans grumpy that's really not a big deal to them as long as they get more new fans as a result.

[111987]

Actually, one of the confirmed endings is the Reapers winning, so, yeah. That will be a starkly different ending then if the Reapers are defeated.

[Gatt9]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Gatt9 wrote...

Bluko wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

How? Easy.

Remember how ME2 had very little to do with anything in ME1? Well, get ready for that again in ME3. The game's plot and characters will be written that it is a standalone game, with a sprinkling of cameos here and there for the importers, as well as tons of email.

Yep.

Bioware can say whatever they want (There's over 900 variables! etc.) but reality is ME3 is going to play pretty much the same whether you've played each game prior or are fresh off the boat. There'll be a few cameos for importers, but seriously folks you're not going to get a radically different experience based on whether you saved the Council or not, or the Collector Base.

It'll be interesting to see the storm people make when they realize 90% of the ME2 crew is not coming back with you on the Normandy. Garrus and Tali seem to be exceptions at this point. So I suppose you might end up with Barrus (Garrus evil twin brother who's also an Infiltrator) as something to add variety or maybe you'll just be short a squadmate.

Bioware has made a very conscious effort to bring in new people at the expense of existing fans for awhile now. This should be obvious to all what with the complete overhaul that went on with ME2's gameplay. They didn't re-create ME's gameplay to address fans concerns. They did it because Mass Effect only sold about 2 millionish copies which while good, doesn't compare to most other exclusives that will sell 4+ million copies. So they ripped out ME1's guts and shoved something more akin to Gears of War in it's place so it would sell more to the young male adult crowd. Cause guess what Gears of War sells about twice as many copies on the Xbox 360 alone.

The frst two questions I asked myself when starting ME2 is WTF is there ammo? and Why am I taking cover just like Marcus Fenix? It truly makes me sad to think what ME2 may have been like they actually bothered to fix what was wrong with ME1.

Now I'm sure I'll get a comment from someone telling me everything about ME1 was broken hence the need for a complete overhaul. And you know what I'm happy that your content to play a Gears of War RPG TPS. Me not so much. I really do think it would have been much better if the series had at least tried to keep the gameplay the same as the original as if anything there's a very stark disconnection from ME1 to ME2 that basically ends up with you liking one game over the other(s) no matter how impartial you may be. Also I don't feel ME2's sales really eclipsed ME1 sales to warrant ME2 as an improvement over its predecessor.


Anyways, the sooner you wake up and realize that Bioware doesn't really care too much what you want cause they figure you're enough of a fanboy that'll you'll pick up ME3 no matter what that they can pretty much focus on selling the game to new people. That's exactly where blind fanboyism takes you. Of course that's what every company wants cause in the short term perspective it makes you  easy to soak for money. (Hence the over-abundant amount of DLC garbage lately.) Problem is this brings a decline in a quality as they are no longer interested in the longevity of their company/brand.

I agree as well.

This is what EA does,  years ago EA used to make sequels to their games,  incredible ones,  now they make sequels to someone else's game and put their IP's name on the box.

EA isn't interested in continuing the potentially revolutionary introduction of a Trilogy in gaming where you actually effect how the story progresses through the three entries.  Bioware could've changed gaming forever,  for the 2nd time in it's history.

Sadly,  EA doesn't want innovation,  they want GoW and CoD's sales.  So they'll toss out the potential,  give you emails and an occasional irrelevant cameo,  and do their best to mimic other games instead of building on their own.

I love how you guys make baseless assumptions about ME 3 while ignoring that ME 2 had to account for continuity giving it less wiggle room.

How is it baseless to expect no change based on what they did with ME2?

Further,  how did ME2 account for continuity?  It threw continuity out the window to implement characteristic features of other games.  Look at the thermal clips,  the explanation makes no sense,  it takes me about the same number of shots to kill a Geth as it did in ME.  Nevermind that it couldn't even keep continuity with itself,  putting thermal clips in places they can't possibly be,  and on enemies that have no use for them.   "Continutiy" in ME2 is at the very best,  background chatter and one-liners about how "Humans are taking over" with no real difference from what the other side chose.

ME2 didn't account for continuity,  all it did was make the occasional reference to ME,  while implementing a different game.

I see no reason to expect anything else here,  especially with the marketing promo "This is a great place to start!".  There'll be some cameos,  maybe a few emails,  possibly even a random line of dialogue or two.  But nothing of note,  because they won't want people to think they can only play ME3 if they already played the first two.  EA's priority isn't keeping the population they have,  it's hunting the snipe that's some other game's sales.

So it'll be like C&C is.  Each entry weaker than the last,  with less relation to the preceeding game,  and a steady decrease in quality.

Because that's EA's gameplan.  If something manages to sell a few copies,  keep pushing out sequels as close to annually as possible and try to mimic whatever sold well last year in any way possible.  It's not like it's a secret,  they even admit in their Press pieces they have "Annual series" and they aren't referring to just the Sports division.

[Bluko]

111987 wrote...

Actually, one of the confirmed endings is the Reapers winning, so, yeah. That will be a starkly different ending then if the Reapers are defeated.

Then that's just a fancy game over screen, probably just like the ME2 ending where Shepard dies. The games have a set story. Really the only choice or difference is whether you play "a nice guy" or "a mean guy" up to that point. 

I'm not really complaining as for the most part I'm pretty content to play the games just to see all the small little differences even if they don't really change anything. I just don't entertain such wishful thinking that I'm going to be able to decide to destroy all the Geth or destroy all Quarians. I may make a choice to side with one group over the other, but ultimately the Geth will be around in future titles for everyone or they won't.

It would be in very poor taste for Bioware to make Renegade or Paragon the canon story later on. I suppose they might, though honestly I'd have thought they learned this lesson from KOTOR. Doing so basically invalidates certain people's playthroughs. There is a limit to just how much you can trample over your original fanbase before you end up stepping on nails.

Look I don't expect Bioware to cater solely to their existing fans. I understand they need to get more new folks if they want to be successful. But I'm sorry if I don't get a bit annoyed when I feel my interests in the games are put into jeopardy so that maybe new folks might buy the game. For me most of the damage has been done at this point with ME2 so I don't care too much what happens anymore. Only thing keeping my interest at all is to see how the story ends as I don't find the ME2 style of gameplay that exciting

[111987]

Bluko wrote...

111987 wrote...

Actually, one of the confirmed endings is the Reapers winning, so, yeah. That will be a starkly different ending then if the Reapers are defeated.

Then that's just a fancy game over screen, probably just like the ME2 ending where Shepard dies. The games have a set story. Really the only choice or difference is whether you play "a nice guy" or "a mean guy" up to that point. 
*snip*

Yes it's a fancy gameover screen, but it does prove that the choices you do make will have at least somewhat of an impact. I do understand your frustratons though.

[Giantdeathrobot]

 Marketing happens. BSN reads too much into it.

More news at 11.

[DaringMoosejaw]

ThePwener wrote...

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

Many people disagree with you. Of course, you've dismissed those people I'm sure as drooling idiots like the other fellow in the thread so their opinion doesn't matter to a true connoisseur such as yourself.

Okay, now your just being mean. If someone takes the time to spent it here on the BSN strugggling trhough all the bs and real idiots to make one decent comment, they're ok in my book.

I think you've been around here long enough to know the threshold for 'mean' around here is pretty high. My level of sarcasm is so low I'm nearly inviting you over for tea.