557 réponses à ce sujet

[txgoldrush]

blueumi wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

blueumi wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

blueumi wrote...

dragon age 2 they took away most of your inventory they made the game easy to play
dragon age 1 is a true rpg dragon age 2 is a simple action rpg that really did not take much to beat

I liked the mage vs templar theme which was in dragon age 1 but unlike dragon age 1 where it was subtle dragon age 2 bashed you over the head with it

thats why people like varric so much he is the only one not going on and on and ON about it

I adore Anders he is the best thing in dragon age 2 but it still gets old when he talks about nothing else

Anders in dragon age 1 made his point well and was easy to like I miss that corrosive and whimsical personality he had that made me adore him in the first place

I will always enjoy the Anders romance bioware do that well in most games they make but the game still is lacking something special the first game has

Because DAO tries to be about everything and ends up being about nothing. DAO has no real central theme, and the side stories have barely anything to do with the main plot. Hell, there is a problem when a disconnected side story upstages the main plot....with the Dalish and werewolves being the best of them. DA2 HAS a central theme and teh side storys DO connnect to either the main plot or its themes. And unlike DAO, the characters outside the deuteragonist actually PARTICIPATE IN THE PLOT (or connect to the themes or conflict), unlike DAO characters who are just there for the sake of being there.

In fact, DA2 is suprising more balanced....there are less easy to win exploitable skills, unlike the first game hwere you can have OP builds that kill everything without tactics.

The problem with Bioware fans is that they rate DAO so highly, even claiming it as the pinnacle of Bioware....when its their most conservative and overrated RPG, that shows Bioware as a one trick pony, only capable of a certain type of plot, or certain tiype of characters, afraid to do something different and afraid to think outside the box.

dragon age 1 is amazing how you can say it tried to be everything and then defend dragon age 2 which was all over the place all the time

well without dragon age 1 therr is no 2 so yeah like what ever you want but it's odd to hate on the game that gave you the one you like weird

Dragon Age 2 seems all over the place AT FIRST, but then come Act II and III, and all those plot lines come together and converge, where characters from Act I sidequests will appear in the main plot in Act II and III, and all play apart in causing order to collapse.

dragon age 1 out sold dragon age 2 so much that bioware just said ok on to dragon age 3

yeah I know like alll the people who bought dragon age 1 instead which one is better

on to dragon age 3 it can't be as BAD as 2

Just because a game outsells another doesn't make it better.

And really both games aren't great and have massive problems.

[txgoldrush]

ticklefist wrote...

I'm convinced. Shepard does deserve better fans than txgoldrush.

And fans like you will make bioware run in place, unable to branch out and grow, forced to recycle the same game over and over. Basically everything has to be like KOTOR and use the same formula.

Fans like you will kill Bioware.

[Tritium315]

txgoldrush wrote...

ticklefist wrote...

I'm convinced. Shepard does deserve better fans than txgoldrush.

And fans like you will make bioware run in place, unable to branch out and grow, forced to recycle the same game over and over. Basically everything has to be like KOTOR and use the same formula.

Fans like you will kill Bioware.

If trying new things means we get **** like ME3 and DA2 then maybe they should just run in place. Nothing wrong with sticking to your guns and doing what you're good at.

[txgoldrush]

Tritium315 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

ticklefist wrote...

I'm convinced. Shepard does deserve better fans than txgoldrush.

And fans like you will make bioware run in place, unable to branch out and grow, forced to recycle the same game over and over. Basically everything has to be like KOTOR and use the same formula.

Fans like you will kill Bioware.

If trying new things means we get **** like ME3 and DA2 then maybe they should just run in place. Nothing wrong with sticking to your guns and doing what you're good at.

And then you will be exposed as a one trick pony and will also lose elite status....

Funny how the Ultima series all have different and varying plot lines in th esmae universe while Bioware games have the same style of plotlines along different universes....lol

You will get to the point where people just don't want to see the same tricks over and over.

[Auztin]

Endings were good but I liked Dragon Age 2 ending(Yes.I liked it.GET OVER IT.)because the way I played it.It was like watching a long ass movie just like Mass Effect.

[Tritium315]

txgoldrush wrote...

Tritium315 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

ticklefist wrote...

I'm convinced. Shepard does deserve better fans than txgoldrush.

And fans like you will make bioware run in place, unable to branch out and grow, forced to recycle the same game over and over. Basically everything has to be like KOTOR and use the same formula.

Fans like you will kill Bioware.

If trying new things means we get **** like ME3 and DA2 then maybe they should just run in place. Nothing wrong with sticking to your guns and doing what you're good at.

And then you will be exposed as a one trick pony and will also lose elite status....

Funny how the Ultima series all have different and varying plot lines in th esmae universe while Bioware games have the same style of plotlines along different universes....lol

You will get to the point where people just don't want to see the same tricks over and over.

You're right dude, they will stagnate and die and no one will buy the games anymore, like Call of D... wait a minute.

[txgoldrush]

Tritium315 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Tritium315 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

ticklefist wrote...

I'm convinced. Shepard does deserve better fans than txgoldrush.

And fans like you will make bioware run in place, unable to branch out and grow, forced to recycle the same game over and over. Basically everything has to be like KOTOR and use the same formula.

Fans like you will kill Bioware.

If trying new things means we get **** like ME3 and DA2 then maybe they should just run in place. Nothing wrong with sticking to your guns and doing what you're good at.

And then you will be exposed as a one trick pony and will also lose elite status....

Funny how the Ultima series all have different and varying plot lines in th esmae universe while Bioware games have the same style of plotlines along different universes....lol

You will get to the point where people just don't want to see the same tricks over and over.

You're right dude, they will stagnate and die and no one will buy the games anymore, like Call of D... wait a minute.

and yet Black Ops II is trying to break some of that stagnation single player wise.....nevermind people buy the next game because the last game goes out of date. From its multiplayer aspect, people buy the next gamebecause everybody moves out of the last game.

[ticklefist]

txgoldrush wrote...

ticklefist wrote...

I'm convinced. Shepard does deserve better fans than txgoldrush.

And fans like you will make bioware run in place, unable to branch out and grow, forced to recycle the same game over and over. Basically everything has to be like KOTOR and use the same formula.

Fans like you will kill Bioware.

And you got all that from me saying... what, exactly?

[spirosz]

txgoldrush wrote...

ticklefist wrote...

I'm convinced. Shepard does deserve better fans than txgoldrush.

And fans like you will make bioware run in place, unable to branch out and grow, forced to recycle the same game over and over. Basically everything has to be like KOTOR and use the same formula.

Fans like you will kill Bioware.

Because KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, etc works for a lot of us. I'd rather they branch out and grow with new IP's, but not what they did with Mass Effect series, it was trying to be too much with the last two titles, but whatever. - that's my mindset anyway. 

[Essalor]

You can branch out all you want, just make a new IP. The main problem with ME3 ending is it's inconsistency with previous lore, which spans over three games. The ending kind of works thematically (but not logically or lore-wise no-no!) only if you take into the account the ME3 storyline, and even then the whole starchild thing is crazy. This is weak.

The problem is that ME3 ending is the ending for all the franchize, not just one game. That's why branching out to (subjectively my optinion) shoddy, logic-less ending is unacceptable. All the themes and reasons you describe are very mild and never appear before ME3. Starchild appears out of the blue in the last 10 minutes.

The Witcher has some crazy world-shattering choices in-game but they are still logical and fluid because they fit not only the theme, and mood but the logic and expectations of the franchize. In Song of Ice and Fire people die left and right, so you don't expect a happy end for everyone, otherwise it'll be ****.

In ME you shape the fate of galaxy only to throw them into the bin in the end. In the same game you can choose to save/kill Mordin, Grunt and all your squadmates based on previous choices, that's not consistent.

[Essalor]

spirosz wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

ticklefist wrote...

I'm convinced. Shepard does deserve better fans than txgoldrush.

And fans like you will make bioware run in place, unable to branch out and grow, forced to recycle the same game over and over. Basically everything has to be like KOTOR and use the same formula.

Fans like you will kill Bioware.

Because KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, etc works for a lot of us. I'd rather they branch out and grow with new IP's, but not what they did with Mass Effect series, it was trying to be too much with the last two titles, but whatever. - that's my mindset anyway. 

Thank you! (beat me by one post!!!)

[spirosz]

Essalor wrote...

You can branch out all you want, just make a new IP. The main problem with ME3 ending is it's inconsistency with previous lore, which spans over three games. The ending kind of works thematically (but not logically or lore-wise no-no!) only if you take into the account the ME3 storyline, and even then the whole starchild thing is crazy. This is weak.

The problem is that ME3 ending is the ending for all the franchize, not just one game. That's why branching out to (subjectively my optinion) shoddy, logic-less ending is unacceptable. All the themes and reasons you describe are very mild and never appear before ME3. Starchild appears out of the blue in the last 10 minutes.

The Witcher has some crazy world-shattering choices in-game but they are still logical and fluid because they fit not only the theme, and mood but the logic and expectations of the franchize. In Song of Ice and Fire people die left and right, so you don't expect a happy end for everyone, otherwise it'll be ****.

In ME you shape the fate of galaxy only to throw them into the bin in the end. In the same game you can choose to save/kill Mordin, Grunt and all your squadmates based on previous choices, that's not consistent.

Exactly, be consistent with what you were trying achieve since the first game, I understand things don't go as planned and there are always interior and exterior influences, but the whole "Best place to start" and PR bull**** they've been doing doesn't help estbalish a good connection with certain fans, but again, I guess most of us that do complain are always going to be seen as the "minority", regardless if that's true or not. 

[blueumi]

txgoldrush wrote...

Tritium315 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

ticklefist wrote...

I'm convinced. Shepard does deserve better fans than txgoldrush.

And fans like you will make bioware run in place, unable to branch out and grow, forced to recycle the same game over and over. Basically everything has to be like KOTOR and use the same formula.

Fans like you will kill Bioware.

If trying new things means we get **** like ME3 and DA2 then maybe they should just run in place. Nothing wrong with sticking to your guns and doing what you're good at.

And then you will be exposed as a one trick pony and will also lose elite status....

Funny how the Ultima series all have different and varying plot lines in th esmae universe while Bioware games have the same style of plotlines along different universes....lol

You will get to the point where people just don't want to see the same tricks over and over.

so dragon age 2 helped them grow by not selling well I see tried and true which sells better no thats bad really bad

call of duty sells so bad since it does what it does best so fans know what they are in for

yes games should grow but dragon age 2 was too different from it's source that people did not like it

which is what mass effect 3s ending did and that is not doing bioware any good

[Femlob]

txgoldrush wrote...

Fans like you me will kill Bioware.

Fixed that for you.

[txgoldrush]

blueumi wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Tritium315 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

ticklefist wrote...

I'm convinced. Shepard does deserve better fans than txgoldrush.

And fans like you will make bioware run in place, unable to branch out and grow, forced to recycle the same game over and over. Basically everything has to be like KOTOR and use the same formula.

Fans like you will kill Bioware.

If trying new things means we get **** like ME3 and DA2 then maybe they should just run in place. Nothing wrong with sticking to your guns and doing what you're good at.

And then you will be exposed as a one trick pony and will also lose elite status....

Funny how the Ultima series all have different and varying plot lines in th esmae universe while Bioware games have the same style of plotlines along different universes....lol

You will get to the point where people just don't want to see the same tricks over and over.

so dragon age 2 helped them grow by not selling well I see tried and true which sells better no thats bad really bad

call of duty sells so bad since it does what it does best so fans know what they are in for

yes games should grow but dragon age 2 was too different from it's source that people did not like it

which is what mass effect 3s ending did and that is not doing bioware any good

Dragon Age II helps them grow. Why? Becuase it shows what worked and what didn't. In fact, they are keeping the voiced protagonist, the way DA2 did characters, and teh friendship/rivalry system.

However, Call of Duty is doing things differently for Black Ops II, like branching storylines, choice and consquence, and permamant death factoring into the gameplay. They are NOT staying stagnant. Hell, the gameplay in th esingle player is going to also be more wide open. Treyarch is NOT willing to rehash again.

Sorry but this is a fan problem, not a developer problem. Its because fans are closed minded and latch on to things that work in the past instead of trying to find new things that work.

Modifié par txgoldrush, 08 août 2012 - 09:05 .

[txgoldrush]

Essalor wrote...

You can branch out all you want, just make a new IP. The main problem with ME3 ending is it's inconsistency with previous lore, which spans over three games. The ending kind of works thematically (but not logically or lore-wise no-no!) only if you take into the account the ME3 storyline, and even then the whole starchild thing is crazy. This is weak.

The problem is that ME3 ending is the ending for all the franchize, not just one game. That's why branching out to (subjectively my optinion) shoddy, logic-less ending is unacceptable. All the themes and reasons you describe are very mild and never appear before ME3. Starchild appears out of the blue in the last 10 minutes.

The Witcher has some crazy world-shattering choices in-game but they are still logical and fluid because they fit not only the theme, and mood but the logic and expectations of the franchize. In Song of Ice and Fire people die left and right, so you don't expect a happy end for everyone, otherwise it'll be ****.

In ME you shape the fate of galaxy only to throw them into the bin in the end. In the same game you can choose to save/kill Mordin, Grunt and all your squadmates based on previous choices, that's not consistent.

Wrong...because your choices can play a role in the end...notice the huge variance in the Destroy ending. If you have ow EMS, your squaddies die, the Crucible gets attacked and damaged, and the thing misfires destroying most of th egalaxy.

And the ME3 ending IS logical. Why? Because the Catalyst simply fits in the universe built by THE CONFLICT BETWEEN THE CREATORS AND THE CREATED. This conflict shapes the entire trilogy and much of the plotlines from the Morning War, to the Krogan Rebellions, to the Shadow Broker, to Overlord, to Cerebrus, to Miranda's story, to the Reapers themselves. Nevermind the various things the Protheans did.

Sorry but unifying the galaxy is not the main theme of the series, its the conflict between the reators and teh created. Nevermind that sacrifice is the main theme of ME3 itself (not the trilogy but the game).

[fainmaca]

txgoldrush wrote...
And fans like you will make bioware run in place, unable to branch out and grow, forced to recycle the same game over and over. Basically everything has to be like KOTOR and use the same formula.

Fans like you will kill Bioware.

If you're going to try some new style of story, make a new IP for it, or at least a new series. Don't change gears in such a jarring fashion mid-saga. KOTOR's style is completely different to the Original Trilogy to the point where the setting is the only thing they have in common, but its okay because they are separate entities in the same general setting. if you'd brought in a Revan-style narrative halfway through Luke Skywalker's story, the franchise as a whole would have suffered for it. The same rules apply to the ME franchise. they should have finished Shepard's story BEFORE they created something in the setting with such a glaringly different feel to it. Shepard's story was never about War Is Hell or Pain And Loss. It was about facing the unkown with big Guns and kicking its arse until it could taste its own underwear. It was about achieving the improbable and then coming away with a hugely triumphant feeling. And it was about making choices that shaped your outcome with consequences you actually got to see, not overriding them with one final choice presented right at the end.

[txgoldrush]

spirosz wrote...

Essalor wrote...

You can branch out all you want, just make a new IP. The main problem with ME3 ending is it's inconsistency with previous lore, which spans over three games. The ending kind of works thematically (but not logically or lore-wise no-no!) only if you take into the account the ME3 storyline, and even then the whole starchild thing is crazy. This is weak.

The problem is that ME3 ending is the ending for all the franchize, not just one game. That's why branching out to (subjectively my optinion) shoddy, logic-less ending is unacceptable. All the themes and reasons you describe are very mild and never appear before ME3. Starchild appears out of the blue in the last 10 minutes.

The Witcher has some crazy world-shattering choices in-game but they are still logical and fluid because they fit not only the theme, and mood but the logic and expectations of the franchize. In Song of Ice and Fire people die left and right, so you don't expect a happy end for everyone, otherwise it'll be ****.

In ME you shape the fate of galaxy only to throw them into the bin in the end. In the same game you can choose to save/kill Mordin, Grunt and all your squadmates based on previous choices, that's not consistent.

Exactly, be consistent with what you were trying achieve since the first game, I understand things don't go as planned and there are always interior and exterior influences, but the whole "Best place to start" and PR bull**** they've been doing doesn't help estbalish a good connection with certain fans, but again, I guess most of us that do complain are always going to be seen as the "minority", regardless if that's true or not. 

Yes, you are the minority....and the 93 Metacritic is no fluke. And before that stupid "but EA paid them off" business....

EA has a 72 MC overall...they do not buy reviews and many highly anticipated titles like Medal of honor fell flat with reviewers. Nevermind that ME2 and ME3 are the two highest rated mainstream EA games of all time.

Sorry, but did you play that Bioware game where the hero is the survivor of a ruthless attack, then becomes part of a special organization who tasks him to go to three or four areas to complete objectives, with a typical good male lead, a goody goody female character, a comic murderer, and a stern warrior in tow. Then there is a typical twist where nothing is as it seems or there is a new revelation and then beats the final boss for a good or evil ending.

[txgoldrush]

fainmaca wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...
And fans like you will make bioware run in place, unable to branch out and grow, forced to recycle the same game over and over. Basically everything has to be like KOTOR and use the same formula.

Fans like you will kill Bioware.

If you're going to try some new style of story, make a new IP for it, or at least a new series. Don't change gears in such a jarring fashion mid-saga. KOTOR's style is completely different to the Original Trilogy to the point where the setting is the only thing they have in common, but its okay because they are separate entities in the same general setting. if you'd brought in a Revan-style narrative halfway through Luke Skywalker's story, the franchise as a whole would have suffered for it. The same rules apply to the ME franchise. they should have finished Shepard's story BEFORE they created something in the setting with such a glaringly different feel to it. Shepard's story was never about War Is Hell or Pain And Loss. It was about facing the unkown with big Guns and kicking its arse until it could taste its own underwear. It was about achieving the improbable and then coming away with a hugely triumphant feeling. And it was about making choices that shaped your outcome with consequences you actually got to see, not overriding them with one final choice presented right at the end.

Please, the entire trilogy has sacrifice, pain and loss, and war is hell themes, nevermind that Shepard isn't alone in defeating the Reapers but has past cycles helping as well. Oh wait the Crucible is thematically consistant with the Conduit and Ilos of ME1....oops. There goes another argument. Nevermind that in ME1, a character WILL die, and in ME2 some of the character stories do NOT have happy endings.

Nevermind if Drew K's draft was followed, the ending would be even MORE grim.

Face it, you want the same thing over and over again.

[blueumi]

txgoldrush wrote...

fainmaca wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...
And fans like you will make bioware run in place, unable to branch out and grow, forced to recycle the same game over and over. Basically everything has to be like KOTOR and use the same formula.

Fans like you will kill Bioware.

If you're going to try some new style of story, make a new IP for it, or at least a new series. Don't change gears in such a jarring fashion mid-saga. KOTOR's style is completely different to the Original Trilogy to the point where the setting is the only thing they have in common, but its okay because they are separate entities in the same general setting. if you'd brought in a Revan-style narrative halfway through Luke Skywalker's story, the franchise as a whole would have suffered for it. The same rules apply to the ME franchise. they should have finished Shepard's story BEFORE they created something in the setting with such a glaringly different feel to it. Shepard's story was never about War Is Hell or Pain And Loss. It was about facing the unkown with big Guns and kicking its arse until it could taste its own underwear. It was about achieving the improbable and then coming away with a hugely triumphant feeling. And it was about making choices that shaped your outcome with consequences you actually got to see, not overriding them with one final choice presented right at the end.

Please, the entire trilogy has sacrifice, pain and loss, and war is hell themes, nevermind that Shepard isn't alone in defeating the Reapers but has past cycles helping as well. Oh wait the Crucible is thematically consistant with the Conduit and Ilos of ME1....oops. There goes another argument. Nevermind that in ME1, a character WILL die, and in ME2 some of the character stories do NOT have happy endings.

Nevermind if Drew K's draft was followed, the ending would be even MORE grim.

Face it, you want the same thing over and over again.

mass effect was about hope and making our own fate living the way we want to no doing what a star child that they only came up with at the end said  what games are you playing it's sure not what the rest of us are

[Iakus]

blueumi wrote...

mass effect was about hope and making our own fate living the way we want to no doing what a star child that they only came up with at the end said  what games are you playing it's sure not what the rest of us are

Agreed.  Mass Effect was about breaking cycles and how nothing was inevitable.  You can make your own fate, either through cooperation or standing strong on your own.

ME3 turned it all into "It doesn't matter how much you struggle, you can't win unless they let you.  And you'll still die anyway"

[fainmaca]

@tx: I want what brought me to the franchise in the first place. That's what i paid for, and that's what I expected. ME3 cut out almost all of that to make room for these themes that had been, AT BEST, undercurrents. Like i said, they weren't what the franchise was about. they were just background flavour.

If I order a dessert where they season it with cinnamon, I won't thank you to replace the final few mouthfuls with entire spoonfulls of cinammon. These minor themes had their place, but never as the central be-all and end-all of the game.

[blueumi]

txgoldrush wrote...

blueumi wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Tritium315 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

ticklefist wrote...

I'm convinced. Shepard does deserve better fans than txgoldrush.

And fans like you will make bioware run in place, unable to branch out and grow, forced to recycle the same game over and over. Basically everything has to be like KOTOR and use the same formula.

Fans like you will kill Bioware.

If trying new things means we get **** like ME3 and DA2 then maybe they should just run in place. Nothing wrong with sticking to your guns and doing what you're good at.

And then you will be exposed as a one trick pony and will also lose elite status....

Funny how the Ultima series all have different and varying plot lines in th esmae universe while Bioware games have the same style of plotlines along different universes....lol

You will get to the point where people just don't want to see the same tricks over and over.

so dragon age 2 helped them grow by not selling well I see tried and true which sells better no thats bad really bad

call of duty sells so bad since it does what it does best so fans know what they are in for

yes games should grow but dragon age 2 was too different from it's source that people did not like it

which is what mass effect 3s ending did and that is not doing bioware any good

Dragon Age II helps them grow. Why? Becuase it shows what worked and what didn't. In fact, they are keeping the voiced protagonist, the way DA2 did characters, and teh friendship/rivalry system.

However, Call of Duty is doing things differently for Black Ops II, like branching storylines, choice and consquence, and permamant death factoring into the gameplay. They are NOT staying stagnant. Hell, the gameplay in th esingle player is going to also be more wide open. Treyarch is NOT willing to rehash again.

Sorry but this is a fan problem, not a developer problem. Its because fans are closed minded and latch on to things that work in the past instead of trying to find new things that work.

mass effect 3s ending didn't work
we know that because they did ec free to FIX IT

most games make the largest amount of money in the first month it comes out so when you see that loads of people returned the game for a full refund that showed how bad the ending is
why do you think bioware changed the message at the end to try and win us back

if we were so few they never would have made ec and sure not FREE

mass effect 3 is rushed just like dragon age 2 and both games did too much that was different

people did not buy 3 games to get that ending

the box art said take earth back

it made it sound exciting and full of hope the way mass effect 1 and 2 were but then it changed in the last ten mins of the game

it changed everything we knew and insulted fans who have played for years

bioware are better then this I want them to do well because when they are given time no one can make better games in my opinion

[Essalor]

txgoldrush wrote...

fainmaca wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...
And fans like you will make bioware run in place, unable to branch out and grow, forced to recycle the same game over and over. Basically everything has to be like KOTOR and use the same formula.

Fans like you will kill Bioware.

If you're going to try some new style of story, make a new IP for it, or at least a new series. Don't change gears in such a jarring fashion mid-saga. KOTOR's style is completely different to the Original Trilogy to the point where the setting is the only thing they have in common, but its okay because they are separate entities in the same general setting. if you'd brought in a Revan-style narrative halfway through Luke Skywalker's story, the franchise as a whole would have suffered for it. The same rules apply to the ME franchise. they should have finished Shepard's story BEFORE they created something in the setting with such a glaringly different feel to it. Shepard's story was never about War Is Hell or Pain And Loss. It was about facing the unkown with big Guns and kicking its arse until it could taste its own underwear. It was about achieving the improbable and then coming away with a hugely triumphant feeling. And it was about making choices that shaped your outcome with consequences you actually got to see, not overriding them with one final choice presented right at the end.

Please, the entire trilogy has sacrifice, pain and loss, and war is hell themes, nevermind that Shepard isn't alone in defeating the Reapers but has past cycles helping as well. Oh wait the Crucible is thematically consistant with the Conduit and Ilos of ME1....oops. There goes another argument. Nevermind that in ME1, a character WILL die, and in ME2 some of the character stories do NOT have happy endings.

Nevermind if Drew K's draft was followed, the ending would be even MORE grim.

Face it, you want the same thing over and over again.

Thematically =/= logically. Cohesion of the world and story must always go first in a story-driven game. Once again, the choices have to be logically weaved in the story and not tacked on in the end. 

If you're going to quote metacritic you have to be objective and also give the user score which is 4.3. Don't skewer the facts.

[Nightwriter]

iakus wrote...

Mass Effect was about breaking cycles and how nothing was inevitable.  You can make your own fate, either through cooperation or standing strong on your own.

ME3 turned it all into "It doesn't matter how much you struggle, you can't win unless they let you.  And you'll still die anyway"

Yes. Yes. This. This. I hope they read this.

Oh what am I saying, it won't do any good.

Modifié par Nightwriter, 08 août 2012 - 10:07 .