359 réponses à ce sujet

[Avl521]

Waited more for a triple A game??? OUTRAGEOUS!!!

/Sarcasm.

Yes, I would have waited till 2015 if need be, I just wanted an epic game not a rushed ending.

[MordicaiBlack]

as long as it takes, this game more than most deserved the full development time.....

[CimCake]

yes, I would have waited for a complete game that was as good as the other two games

[P47 ace]

I have been wiating 2 years for GR:FS
I could have waited 6 mouths for ME3

[Druzgot]

Yes, maybe they would then add cut off dialogues and make earth sequence(and engings) better

[Chrishenanigans]

Oh yes, happily.

Let me just say that the "it's done when it's done" concept isn't for every developer or for every project. But if BioWare said that at any point in the development, I would have been just fine with the decision. I'm glad Blizzard said it with Starcraft and have been very patient with Diablo 3 in the years since its reveal, 8 months or more for ME3 wouldn't have fazed me.

[TemplePhoenix]

Yeah, I would have had no problem waitin'.

[magikbbg]

I would've gladly accept a mass effect 2.5 in march. Maybe a series of stories expanding on what our other characters were doing for that 6 months in jail. It could be total BS stories too, just a filler; so main dev team could work on me3 for another year or more to make a great game and even better multiplayer. And I'm sure many of you wouldn't have minded a me2 expac based on other characters/global scene (ie citadel poltics).

[GroverA125]

RKB28 wrote...

As much as I may hate the endings, this is still miles above ME1 and ME2, and it´s not as unfinished of a product as some say.

The last 10/15 minutes are rushed as all hell, but up to then, the game is a crowning achievement. And that´s what hurts the most. That such an incredible game has such crap endings.

And yes, I would have waited whatever amount of time necessary to get an even game, with endings that were true to the Mass Effect tradition.

You know the rules: Beginning, middle and end. Beginning being Earth, middle being Citadel Coup, end being Crucible. Beginning: Good. Middle: Good. Ending: So bad I want to throw myself in front of a Challenger-II tank.

The three main parts, and one is so terrible that it has pretty much split the entire gaming review franchise in half. If one of these three parts is bad, the game is undeniably bad. If one of these parts is mediocre, the game is mediocre. Everything that happens between these three parts is a filler, and counts for nothing until the three points are accounted for.

[Kenta Shuuichi]

Game needed polish. Deserving. Better Product overall. Much nicer to wait. *deep inhale* Happy to do it.

[Dominator24]

Do you even need to ask?? its obvious.

[ShepGep]

Wasn't the game already delayed 6 months? I mean, it had a good,solid development time, especially considering they began working on it before ME2 was even released. The ending was just terrible story telling and lazyness on the company's part, plain and simple. Everything else about the game, for the most part, felt right and like a finished product. The ending...the story just stops. There is no ending, no conclusion.

Modifié par ShepGep, 25 mars 2012 - 09:41 .

[LolaLei]

Sure

[Azrael08151819]

Sure. I would have waited as long as necessary for Me 3 and my happy end!!!

[Slaiyer]

Yes

If pre-release they told me it would be delayed to improve the game - most certainly. Would I have liked it? Prob not. But I would have dealt with it.  "A delayed game is eventually good. A bad game is forever bad." Or something like that.

Blizz take forever to complete their games, and the end product is near allways up to snuff.

Modifié par Slaiyer, 25 mars 2012 - 09:50 .

[NormanRawn]

Looking at it now, sure, but honestly, if I had heard there was another delay, I would have gotten very impatient. But seeing how 90% of the game is so good, the wait would have been worth it.

[SwiftRevenant]

Blizzard is great with this concept save with their MMO (it will never be finished which is true) but they don't release their games for the most part unless they are sure it meets their standard. As many of us have said on here ME3 for 90% its amazing, but the last 10% it goes against everything Bioware stood for in regards to your decisions mattering/being thorough/superb replay value and it wrecks the experience for a lot of people. Throw in MP (which is fun but not for everyone) that forces you to try it to get a high enough EMS for a "perfect ending" if you want to call it that and I expected a lot of people to be up in arms (respectfully of course).

Modifié par SwiftRevenant, 25 mars 2012 - 09:45 .

[DarkSpiral]

I hate these questions, frankly. Would I have been okay with waiting if I knew FOR A FACT that the final product would have more polish that it did? I suppose I would.

But to be honest the game was stellar right up until the ending for me. There is a difference between wasted potential, and losing the focus.

The ending was a terrible way for the series to go out, but I felt that the game was a "full game" already.

[Srefanius]

If you would have asked a week before release there would be different answers, but still I think everybody agrees that developers should always take their time to finish a game.

[Phaedros]

Of course! Not that I'd have had a lot of choice there..

[Lil-Vinny29]

Hoping afew DLCs and patches will fix and improve the game to what Bioware used to offer us with ME, ME2, DA:O

[Turran]

No one should say "No" as a game should never be rushed.

A game should be given all the time it needs (Gentle pushes now and again to speed things up a bit if need be) to fully complete itself.
If it meant we had a more in-depth ending, characters delivered more than cameos and such I would of waited a year for a truely EPIC conclusion.


I am British, we know how to queue, we know how to wait.
(Been waiting for GW2 for years now)

[moater boat]

If they said they needed to wait a whole year, and becuase they invested so much into the game it was going to cost a little more (like $10 or so) I would have been ok with it. Not happy, but I would have just said "I'm glad they are taking the time to do things right"

Instead they rushed it, ruined it, and shot to hell any chance of selling a lot of DLC. Idiots.

[GreenDragon37]

 Yes. Hell, ZI would have waited another two years if it meant that everything was going to be whatvit was promised to be and much much more! You don't rush a game like this (or any really) out in (less than?)two years. Three years should be the minimum for any game in my view. 

Modifié par GreenDragon37, 25 mars 2012 - 09:56 .

[Dark_Caduceus]

I waited like five years for SC2 and I was even more excited about Mass
effect 3, so yeah, for sure.