326 réponses à ce sujet

[Fiery Phoenix]

IGN love Mass Effect. Wouldn't surprise me if ME3 does win. Not that I care.

[FlamingBoy]

Eterna5 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Ryoten wrote...

Well, when people pay you off, you dont exactly become an un-bias party.

Show me proof, then I'll agree with you.

Until then stfu. 

You have another explanation to Chobot/Allers?

THat doesn't mean EA bought off IGN. Try again. 

. What other purpose does she serve?  Why Chobot?

Why not Chobot? 

I think you in a bit of a tad denial mate, I mean why would you even want ign on your side anyway

[Eterna]

Chobots involvement does not mean IGN was payed off. Give me some proof, because right now you sound like blabbering ITers.

If it is so blatantly obvious they were payed off where is the proof? 

Modifié par Eterna5, 05 décembre 2012 - 08:53 .

[Alex Arterius]

Constipator369 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Constipator369 wrote...

Alex Arterius wrote...

I do find it highly suspicious that the vast amount of the fan base dislike the game where as the vast amount of video game journalists love the game, I mean, how do you explain that?

Maybe because the journalists actually stop to think for a while, instead of hating the endings for no logical reason?

Or maybe it's that:

A) They have no sense of proper story writing.

They have no taste and can't tell crap from gold.

C) They have to write at least something, regardless of its content to keep the site running with all the advertising.

D) All of the above.

Well, then point out at least one logical reason the ndings were bad.

There was no sense of scale or epicness and no real culmination to the games prior events (war assests etc) 
The Suicide Mission from ME2 got this right

[Femlob]

Arcian wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

 [sarcasm]This is a twist right out of one of M. Night. Schmamadan's movies.[/sarcasm]

*How in the hell did his name not get autocorrected when I purposefully misspelled it?

Because even your phone thinks he's a joke.

Wow. Now there's a sign of a truly advanced AI.

[Ryoten]

Eterna5 wrote...

Ryoten wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

"IGN disagrees with me, they're money grabbing EA ****s!"

You guys are fun.

Well, when people pay you off, you dont exactly become an un-bias party.

Show me proof, then I'll agree with you.

Until then stfu. 

You want proof?  Jessica Chobit.  So eat a d1ck, queer.

Modifié par Ryoten, 05 décembre 2012 - 08:55 .

[dreman9999]

Alex Arterius wrote...

Constipator369 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Constipator369 wrote...

Alex Arterius wrote...

I do find it highly suspicious that the vast amount of the fan base dislike the game where as the vast amount of video game journalists love the game, I mean, how do you explain that?

Maybe because the journalists actually stop to think for a while, instead of hating the endings for no logical reason?

Or maybe it's that:

A) They have no sense of proper story writing.

They have no taste and can't tell crap from gold.

C) They have to write at least something, regardless of its content to keep the site running with all the advertising.

D) All of the above.

Well, then point out at least one logical reason the ndings were bad.

There was no sense of scale or epicness and no real culmination to the games prior events (war assests etc) 
The Suicide Mission from ME2 got this right

That's an issue with Priority earth, not the ending.

[TheTrueObelus]

Alex Arterius wrote...

I do find it highly suspicious that the vast amount of the fan base dislike the game where as the vast amount of video game journalists love the game, I mean, how do you explain that?

In a number interviews I saw of reporters talking about ME3 a week or so after release you could tell they have a hard time remembering any of the details. Again it had only been a week. It was clear the IGN reporters basically breezed through the game. They enjoyed the pew pew and the side boob but the story barely registered with them.

I also have a sneaking suspicion that alot of game journalists who wrote glowing reviews about the game did so before finishing it. Something they wouldn't want to admit later...

[Eterna]

Ryoten wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Ryoten wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

"IGN disagrees with me, they're money grabbing EA ****s!"

You guys are fun.

Well, when people pay you off, you dont exactly become an un-bias party.

Show me proof, then I'll agree with you.

Until then stfu. 

You want proof?  Jessica Chobit.  So eat a d1ck, queer.

So you have none. Glad we could sort this out. 

[Alex Arterius]

dreman9999 wrote...

Alex Arterius wrote...

Constipator369 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Constipator369 wrote...

Alex Arterius wrote...

I do find it highly suspicious that the vast amount of the fan base dislike the game where as the vast amount of video game journalists love the game, I mean, how do you explain that?

Maybe because the journalists actually stop to think for a while, instead of hating the endings for no logical reason?

Or maybe it's that:

A) They have no sense of proper story writing.

They have no taste and can't tell crap from gold.

C) They have to write at least something, regardless of its content to keep the site running with all the advertising.

D) All of the above.

Well, then point out at least one logical reason the ndings were bad.

There was no sense of scale or epicness and no real culmination to the games prior events (war assests etc) 
The Suicide Mission from ME2 got this right

That's an issue with Priority earth, not the ending.

You seem to have confused the series of events.
Priorty Earth is in fact the last mission of the game, therefore by deafult making it the ending of the game as it is effecitively the culmination of 3 games worth of content and chronologically last.

[Ryoten]

Eterna5 wrote...

Ryoten wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Ryoten wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

"IGN disagrees with me, they're money grabbing EA ****s!"

You guys are fun.

Well, when people pay you off, you dont exactly become an un-bias party.

Show me proof, then I'll agree with you.

Until then stfu. 

You want proof?  Jessica Chobit.  So eat a d1ck, queer.

So you have none. Glad we could sort this out. 

You should become a politician.  You're so good at dodging facts and evidence.

[Constipator369]

Alex Arterius wrote...

Constipator369 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Constipator369 wrote...

Alex Arterius wrote...

I do find it highly suspicious that the vast amount of the fan base dislike the game where as the vast amount of video game journalists love the game, I mean, how do you explain that?

Maybe because the journalists actually stop to think for a while, instead of hating the endings for no logical reason?

Or maybe it's that:

A) They have no sense of proper story writing.

They have no taste and can't tell crap from gold.

C) They have to write at least something, regardless of its content to keep the site running with all the advertising.

D) All of the above.

Well, then point out at least one logical reason the ndings were bad.

There was no sense of scale or epicness and no real culmination to the games prior events (war assests etc) 
The Suicide Mission from ME2 got this right

Well, in the suicide mission your squadmates had an offscreen moment of epicness while you fight a reaper Arnold. In ME3 your forces do a partially offscreen moment of epicness, while you have a battle with villain unique in that he uses brain, not body. The suicide mission ends either with an explosion that destroys the base or with an explosion which kills life on the station. ME3 ends with either an explosion which destroys the station and synthetic life, with an explosion that changes the reapers' leader, with an explosion which changes all life in the galaxy or with a failure of the united forces. 

ME3 beats ME2 in both scale and epicness.

[Eterna]

Ryoten wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Ryoten wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Ryoten wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

"IGN disagrees with me, they're money grabbing EA ****s!"

You guys are fun.

Well, when people pay you off, you dont exactly become an un-bias party.

Show me proof, then I'll agree with you.

Until then stfu. 

You want proof?  Jessica Chobit.  So eat a d1ck, queer.

So you have none. Glad we could sort this out. 

You should become a politician.  You're so good at dodging facts and evidence.

What evidence? What facts? You have provided none. 

[LinksOcarina]

Ryoten wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Ryoten wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

"IGN disagrees with me, they're money grabbing EA ****s!"

You guys are fun.

Well, when people pay you off, you dont exactly become an un-bias party.

Show me proof, then I'll agree with you.

Until then stfu. 

You want proof?  Jessica Chobit.  So eat a d1ck, queer.

Someone needs to grow up a bit...

Both of you, actually. In the end, there is no proof, but there is suspision that is not helped by the fact that Chobot was involved in the game, however small her presence was. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 05 décembre 2012 - 09:00 .

[Ledgend1221]

dreman9999 wrote...

Alex Arterius wrote...

Constipator369 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Constipator369 wrote...

Alex Arterius wrote...

I do find it highly suspicious that the vast amount of the fan base dislike the game where as the vast amount of video game journalists love the game, I mean, how do you explain that?

Maybe because the journalists actually stop to think for a while, instead of hating the endings for no logical reason?

Or maybe it's that:

A) They have no sense of proper story writing.

They have no taste and can't tell crap from gold.

C) They have to write at least something, regardless of its content to keep the site running with all the advertising.

D) All of the above.

Well, then point out at least one logical reason the ndings were bad.

There was no sense of scale or epicness and no real culmination to the games prior events (war assests etc) 
The Suicide Mission from ME2 got this right

That's an issue with Priority earth, not the ending.

The ending introduces a major plot-hole in ME1.
Two actually.
Plus they are stupid as hell and give no real sense of victory or feeling good in any way.
They only scream "You lost lol."

[RogueMumei]

Arcian wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

 [sarcasm]This is a twist right out of one of M. Night. Schmamadan's movies.[/sarcasm]

*How in the hell did his name not get autocorrected when I purposefully misspelled it?

Because even your phone thinks he's a joke.

Oh damn LOL 

[Robhuzz]

TheTrueObelus wrote...

Alex Arterius wrote...

I do find it highly suspicious that the vast amount of the fan base dislike the game where as the vast amount of video game journalists love the game, I mean, how do you explain that?

In a number interviews I saw of reporters talking about ME3 a week or so after release you could tell they have a hard time remembering any of the details. Again it had only been a week. It was clear the IGN reporters basically breezed through the game. They enjoyed the pew pew and the side boob but the story barely registered with them.

I also have a sneaking suspicion that alot of game journalists who wrote glowing reviews about the game did so before finishing it. Something they wouldn't want to admit later...

And let's not forget, a lot of their websites actually get revenue from advertising for big publishers. Their reviews are just some more of that... advertising to secure future revenue.
They're not unbiased in the slightest, and it shows in their glowing reviews.

[dreman9999]

Alex Arterius wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Alex Arterius wrote...

Constipator369 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Constipator369 wrote...

Alex Arterius wrote...

I do find it highly suspicious that the vast amount of the fan base dislike the game where as the vast amount of video game journalists love the game, I mean, how do you explain that?

Maybe because the journalists actually stop to think for a while, instead of hating the endings for no logical reason?

Or maybe it's that:

A) They have no sense of proper story writing.

They have no taste and can't tell crap from gold.

C) They have to write at least something, regardless of its content to keep the site running with all the advertising.

D) All of the above.

Well, then point out at least one logical reason the ndings were bad.

There was no sense of scale or epicness and no real culmination to the games prior events (war assests etc) 
The Suicide Mission from ME2 got this right

That's an issue with Priority earth, not the ending.

You seem to have confused the series of events.
Priorty Earth is in fact the last mission of the game, therefore by deafult making it the ending of the game as it is effecitively the culmination of 3 games worth of content and chronologically last.

If bioware fixed priority earth, you honestly think people would suddenly like the ending? Priority earth  in it self id not even were the results of our choices is fully shown.

[Ryoten]

[quote]Eterna5 wrote...

[quote]Ryoten wrote...

[quote]Eterna5 wrote...

[quote]Ryoten wrote...

[quote]Eterna5 wrote...

[quote]Ryoten wrote...

[quote]Eterna5 wrote...

"IGN disagrees with me, they're money grabbing EA ****s!"

You guys are fun. [/quote]


Well, when people pay you off, you dont exactly become an un-bias party.

[/quote]

Show me proof, then I'll agree with you.

Until then stfu. 

[/quote]

You want proof?  Jessica Chobit.  So eat a d1ck, queer.

[/quote]

So you have none. Glad we could sort this out. 

[/quote]

You should become a politician.  You're so good at dodging facts and evidence.



The fact that someone who works at IGN got a prominant spot in a video game?  DUH!  This means that there was a conscious decision made by a party at BioWare and a party at IGN to put Chobit in the game.  You can denie it because thats how business negotiations and contracts work.  They could have gone for someone with more acting skill and potential (say someone with a name).  But they didn't.  They took no-name chobit from IGN.

So IGN gets recognition from one of their cast being in a BioWare game.  What does BioWare get?  Revenue from reviews and payoffs from IGN.  Trust me bub, ive been in the corporate world a lot longer than you.  I know how these things work.

Modifié par Ryoten, 05 décembre 2012 - 09:04 .

[dreman9999]

Ledgend1221 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Alex Arterius wrote...

Constipator369 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Constipator369 wrote...

Alex Arterius wrote...

I do find it highly suspicious that the vast amount of the fan base dislike the game where as the vast amount of video game journalists love the game, I mean, how do you explain that?

Maybe because the journalists actually stop to think for a while, instead of hating the endings for no logical reason?

Or maybe it's that:

A) They have no sense of proper story writing.

They have no taste and can't tell crap from gold.

C) They have to write at least something, regardless of its content to keep the site running with all the advertising.

D) All of the above.

Well, then point out at least one logical reason the ndings were bad.

There was no sense of scale or epicness and no real culmination to the games prior events (war assests etc) 
The Suicide Mission from ME2 got this right

That's an issue with Priority earth, not the ending.

The ending introduces a major plot-hole in ME1.
Two actually.
Plus they are stupid as hell and give no real sense of victory or feeling good in any way.
They only scream "You lost lol."

Plot hole? The catalyst was never directlyconnected to the citadel. It's connection is throught the reapers.

Also, the goal is stopping the reapers, not feeling victory.

[Constipator369]

Ledgend1221 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Alex Arterius wrote...

Constipator369 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Constipator369 wrote...

Alex Arterius wrote...

I do find it highly suspicious that the vast amount of the fan base dislike the game where as the vast amount of video game journalists love the game, I mean, how do you explain that?

Maybe because the journalists actually stop to think for a while, instead of hating the endings for no logical reason?

Or maybe it's that:

A) They have no sense of proper story writing.

They have no taste and can't tell crap from gold.

C) They have to write at least something, regardless of its content to keep the site running with all the advertising.

D) All of the above.

Well, then point out at least one logical reason the ndings were bad.

There was no sense of scale or epicness and no real culmination to the games prior events (war assests etc) 
The Suicide Mission from ME2 got this right

That's an issue with Priority earth, not the ending.

The ending introduces a major plot-hole in ME1.
Two actually.
Plus they are stupid as hell and give no real sense of victory or feeling good in any way.
They only scream "You lost lol."

Could you name the plothols?
And ask real life soldiers if the end of a war (any war) gave them a sense of victory. I think that they do not feel victorious, only glad that the hell called war is over. Not to mention it often screams "You lost" - they often lost friends, family if their country is where the war takes place.

That's the thing ME3 got right - end is not happy. Not sweet. Not even bittersweet. The only thing that is a little sweet is the fact it is the end.

[Someone With Mass]

Constipator369 wrote...

Well, then point out at least one logical reason the ndings were bad.

Well, for one, you really shouldn't introduce a new and important plot element when the story is starting to wrap up.

Second, I don't think they stopped and thought: "Why?" during the development, since there's really no rhyme or reason behind the Catalyst (or his creators, for that matter), who lets you destroy him and flush all of his work down the crapper, which isn't just a little counterproductive.

The Crucible's introduction was also very sloppy and came across as the most blatant plot device in the entire trilogy. Which also kills the suspense rather fast, since everyone knows it'll work one way or the other, despite of what the game is telling the player.

Did I mention that they changed the theme within the last fifteen minutes to something about how the created will always rebel against its creator? That's called a lack of consistency, which really isn't good for a story-driven game.

Not to mention that it creates the plot hole of the Reapers not using the Citadel to shut down the mass relay network, effectively winning the war like they've done in every other cycle. The last missions shouldn't have happened if the game had sticked close to its lore.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 05 décembre 2012 - 09:08 .

[Brovikk Rasputin]

Well deserved of course. It's an amazing game.