949 réponses à ce sujet

[Apollexander]

If TW3 were released also at the end of last year, I doubt it would be as good as DAI. Considering the optimization of TW3 is so poor and the bugs are no less than those in DAI, what would it be like if TW3 had 6 months less for development? It would be probably like the Assassin's Creed Unity.

And what if DAI were released in this month? It would be probably much better. Everything would get polished and the big areas would be more interesting (take the Frostback Basin in JoH as an example).

It's funny to see the double-standard. When guys talk about the 2014 GOTY and they say it was a poor year but when refering to the sales no one remembers that how many games were released at the day when DAI came out. And they said this year would be one of the most competitive year for video games but now TW3 seems to have already won the GOTY in their mind. And how many rivals are there on sales right now?

Anyway, I congratulate the success of TW3 and it is a great game. But I dislike the actions by CDP. And I cannot understand the hate to Bioware. If somebody can, then he/she should also understand the hate to CDP.

[giveamanafish...]

I think the generous development extension for DA:I had less to do with Bioware and more to do with EA being in crisis mode after a string of humiliating releases, including Mass Effect 3 and SimCity 2013, which is one of the reasons it was so painfully obvious that the Sims 4 was released as a sad shell of a game because the majority of its development time had been focused on it being an always online experience, the very last thing the fanbase wanted, just like with SimCity 2013 which failed miserably.

 

EA has a long, rich history of ignoring requests and feedback from its fanbases because there's this belief that gamers in general are stupid and will buy anything. Now with the advent of crowdfunding and indie game releases, EA can no longer be so smugly confident that their fans will buy whatever they dish out and they're reacting accordingly.  It's about damn time too, IMO.

About ME3. I think EA may be laughing at your comment. Never mind sales figures and announced plans, have people not looked at the number of replies column in the Bioware Forum listing. At present Me3 sits at the top with more than 7 million replies, about 3 million in x-player - ie mostly postive or neutral comments. DAI second at 2,4 million. Largest component scuttlebutt, second Story, Characters... with mostly positive stuff. Not a lot in x-player tho, which may be an indicator that DAI tho holding the Bioware record for highest unit sales at launch, may not be as successful as EA/Bioware wanted,

 

Life warning: the fact that you may not like something that a 'corporation' did, may not translate into that company's humiliation.

(Qualifier to above. I am the sole shareholder of a limited company which may mean I am two steps from being one with the devil myself, and that my comment should be understood as inherently evill and devious. Not gonna do a IPO tho, laughable idea for my company.)

[In Exile]

About ME3. I think EA may be laughing at your comment. Never mind sales figures and announced plans, have people not looked at the number of replies column in the Bioware Forum listing. At present Me3 sits at the top with more than 7 million replies, about 3 million in x-player - ie mostly postive or neutral comments. DAI second at 2,4 million. Largest component scuttlebutt, second Story, Characters... with mostly positive stuff. Not a lot in x-player tho, which may be an indicator that DAI tho holding the Bioware record for highest unit sales at launch, may not be as successful as EA/Bioware wanted,

 

Life warning: the fact that you may not like something that a 'corporation' did, may not translate into that company's humiliation.

(Qualifier to above. I am the sole shareholder of a limited company which may mean I am two steps from being one with the devil myself, and that my comment should be understood as inherently evill and devious. Not gonna do a IPO tho, laughable idea for my company.)

 

Two questions: 1) what is x-player? and 2) shouldn't we also account for how much longer ME3 has been released and the fact a bunch of posts came in the ending debacle?

[giveamanafish...]

Two questions: 1) what is x-player? and 2) shouldn't we also account for how much longer ME3 has been released and the fact a bunch of posts came in the ending debacle?

1) Multi-player;

 

2) 3.9 million replies in multi-player for ME3 probably not connected to 'ending debacle'. 

[Kresa]

If TW3 were released also at the end of last year, I doubt it would be as good as DAI. Considering the optimization of TW3 is so poor and the bugs are no less than those in DAI, what would it be like if TW3 had 6 months less for development? It would be probably like the Assassin's Creed Unity.

And what if DAI were released in this month? It would be probably much better. Everything would get polished and the big areas would be more interesting (take the Frostback Basin in JoH as an example).

It's funny to see the double-standard. When guys talk about the 2014 GOTY and they say it was a poor year but when refering to the sales no one remembers that how many games were released at the day when DAI came out. And they said this year would be one of the most competitive year for video games but now TW3 seems to have already won the GOTY in their mind. And how many rivals are there on sales right now?

Anyway, I congratulate the success of TW3 and it is a great game. But I dislike the actions by CDP. And I cannot understand the hate to Bioware. If somebody can, then he/she should also understand the hate to CDP.

But its not about optimization, those kind of things are getting fixed anyhow overtime. The main issue was the lack of depth in the world, if they had extra 6 monthes or less in CDP case  it wouldnt change the fact that the world of W3 is rich with content while DA:I has lots of collectibale filler quests instead.

[Sanunes]

I think the generous development extension for DA:I had less to do with Bioware and more to do with EA being in crisis mode after a string of humiliating releases, including Mass Effect 3 and SimCity 2013, which is one of the reasons it was so painfully obvious that the Sims 4 was released as a sad shell of a game because the majority of its development time had been focused on it being an always online experience, the very last thing the fanbase wanted, just like with SimCity 2013 which failed miserably.

 

EA has a long, rich history of ignoring requests and feedback from its fanbases because there's this belief that gamers in general are stupid and will buy anything. Now with the advent of crowdfunding and indie game releases, EA can no longer be so smugly confident that their fans will buy whatever they dish out and they're reacting accordingly.  It's about damn time too, IMO.

 

I think you are inserting a lot of personal opinion into what EA is thinking.  If Mass Effect 3 and SimCity were both humiliating to EA why wasn't there any public closing of BioWare offices or any other indication of EA being emotional.  The reason for that is EA doesn't care emotions they care about copies sold and pleasing their shareholders which is why CDPR can do some of the things they are doing.

 

I don't get the whole "fan requests" thing, just because there might be a group of people proclaiming something must be done doesn't mean a company should do it or that they truly represent the entire playerbase. BioWare released the Extended Cut of the ending seems to also show that EA/BioWare do listen to what people are saying, it might not be what you specifically were saying, but after it was released these forums calmed down quite a bit so it had to be what people were asking for.  There were people asking for multiplayer in Mass Effect so they added that as well, again not everyone wants it and it might not have been implemented in the way that everyone likes, but there are enough people enjoying it to keep the servers up still.

[Sanunes]

But its not about optimization, those kind of things are getting fixed anyhow overtime. The main issue was the lack of depth in the world, if they had extra 6 monthes or less in CDP case  it wouldnt change the fact that the world of W3 is rich with content while DA:I has lots of collectibale filler quests instead.

 

I doubt it. Six months can't make that level of change you are talking about for it would be voice overs testing and cinematic moments to make sure it all works.  CDPR has several advantages and why I think it why it seems better with The Witcher over Inquisition.  The first is that TW3 has only one voice/character for Geralt, but Inquisition has eight, so every quest needs to be tested eight times for each race/gender combination.  Secondly, TW3 is only on the newer consoles and PC so they had less hardware limitations, remember the "really awesome stuff" that was cut from (I believe) GamesCon 2014 a lot of that was removed because of the older consoles according to a recent interview.  Thirdly is BioWare didn't expect us to focus on a zone before moving on which is something they have admitted in an interview as well, so I am pretty sure they would have kept everything the way it was because they didn't expect us to grind every zone.

Modifié par Sanunes, 29 mai 2015 - 12:59 .

[Shadeling]

About ME3. I think EA may be laughing at your comment. Never mind sales figures and announced plans, have people not looked at the number of replies column in the Bioware Forum listing. At present Me3 sits at the top with more than 7 million replies, about 3 million in x-player - ie mostly postive or neutral comments. DAI second at 2,4 million. Largest component scuttlebutt, second Story, Characters... with mostly positive stuff. Not a lot in x-player tho, which may be an indicator that DAI tho holding the Bioware record for highest unit sales at launch, may not be as successful as EA/Bioware wanted,

 

Life warning: the fact that you may not like something that a 'corporation' did, may not translate into that company's humiliation.

(Qualifier to above. I am the sole shareholder of a limited company which may mean I am two steps from being one with the devil myself, and that my comment should be understood as inherently evill and devious. Not gonna do a IPO tho, laughable idea for my company.)

 

I think you are inserting a lot of personal opinion into what EA is thinking.  If Mass Effect 3 and SimCity were both humiliating to EA why wasn't there any public closing of BioWare offices or any other indication of EA being emotional.  The reason for that is EA doesn't care emotions they care about copies sold and pleasing their shareholders which is why CDPR can do some of the things they are doing.

 

I don't get the whole "fan requests" thing, just because there might be a group of people proclaiming something must be done doesn't mean a company should do it or that they truly represent the entire playerbase. BioWare released the Extended Cut of the ending seems to also show that EA/BioWare do listen to what people are saying, it might not be what you specifically were saying, but after it was released these forums calmed down quite a bit so it had to be what people were asking for.  There were people asking for multiplayer in Mass Effect so they added that as well, again not everyone wants it and it might not have been implemented in the way that everyone likes, but there are enough people enjoying it to keep the servers up still.

 

I'm wasn't talking about sales figures or the like but if you can tell me with a straight face that the releases of those two games was not humiliating for EA, then we may as well just stop talking right here because your memory of history is much different than mine.  And if that was not the case, then EA would not have so obviously switched the Sims 4 from being constantly online to the offline experience its fans desired.  They SCRAMBLED to make that happen in order to save The Sims 4 from a similar humiliating fate.

 

Like it or not, EA is in damage control right now.  And yes, this is my personal opinion, go figure.

[Apollexander]

But its not about optimization, those kind of things are getting fixed anyhow overtime. The main issue was the lack of depth in the world, if they had extra 6 monthes or less in CDP case  it wouldnt change the fact that the world of W3 is rich with content while DA:I has lots of collectibale filler quests instead.

The thing is: the less time you have for development, the more you have to cut out, and the less depth in the world. If TW3 had 6 less months they had to cut out many. If DAI had 6 more months they can keep more.

[Sanunes]

The thing is: the less time you have for development, the more you have to cut out, and the less depth in the world. If TW3 had 6 less months they had to cut out many. If DAI had 6 more months they can keep more.

 

Yes there might have been more, but I am not sure if the depth of the quests would have changed.

[Sanunes]

I'm wasn't talking about sales figures or the like but if you can tell me with a straight face that the releases of those two games was not humiliating for EA, then we may as well just stop talking right here because your memory of history is much different than mine.  And if that was not the case, then EA would not have so obviously switched the Sims 4 from being constantly online to the offline experience its fans desired.  They SCRAMBLED to make that happen in order to save The Sims 4 from a similar humiliating fate.

 

Like it or not, EA is in damage control right now.  And yes, this is my personal opinion, go figure.

 

I really don't think humiliated is the right term, I really don't.  I won't say that those releases were all good for them, but at the same time I think it was always more of a "how do we fix this" then anything else.  If they were truly humiliated by what happened to those games I just can't see them doing what they did to shine a stronger spotlight with The Extended Cut in Mass Effect 3 and nine months after release removing the online components to SimCity.  Since when they released those updates people refocused on those issues within the game and nothing else.

[Apollexander]

Yes there might have been more, but I am not sure if the depth of the quests would have changed.

I guess at least the main questline would be longer.

[Sanunes]

I guess at least the main questline would be longer.

 

Again I am not sure, they wanted the game to be available to everyone and marketed it on the idea of 15 to 100 hours of gameplay.  Just like The Witcher 3 can be finished in 15 to 20 hours for they are marketing it on 20 to 200 hours of gameplay.

[Shadeling]

I really don't think humiliated is the right term, I really don't.  I won't say that those releases were all good for them, but at the same time I think it was always more of a "how do we fix this" then anything else.  If they were truly humiliated by what happened to those games I just can't see them doing what they did to shine a stronger spotlight with The Extended Cut in Mass Effect 3 and nine months after release removing the online components to SimCity.  Since when they released those updates people refocused on those issues within the game and nothing else.

 

That's called damage control.  Even when humiliated, a corporation will do whatever it can to save their brand.  

[Sanunes]

That's called damage control.  Even when humiliated, a corporation will do whatever it can to save their brand.  

 

Right and I won't say they weren't doing damage control.  Its just that I don't think its as big of a deal to them now as it was back then, many gamers have a really short term memory and I think all companies rely too much on that especially Ubisoft, but that is another debate for another time.

[Apollexander]

Again I am not sure, they wanted the game to be available to everyone and marketed it on the idea of 15 to 100 hours of gameplay.  Just like The Witcher 3 can be finished in 15 to 20 hours for they are marketing it on 20 to 200 hours of gameplay.

It was implied some of the main quests were cut out. Of course you can be unsure for anything since it is not the real case. But you can sitll infer what they would do for 6 extra months.

[Cobra's_back]

Since I think its terrible I'm afraid for the future of the franchise

 

They only changed things because DA2 flopped (sadly, it was a good game but needed more time)
 

Anyone know any numbers? Will we be getting DA:I 2 at this rate? (pls no)

 

I actually think the game is excellent. 

 

 

 

Dragon Age: Inquisition Wins GOTY at Game Awards

 

Per link: http://www.gamespot....s/1100-6424005/

 

"The Game Awards 2014 are now over. BioWare's Dragon Age: Inquisition won overall Game of the Year, while Shovel Knight took home a trophy for best independent game. All winners, broken down by category, are listed below. Did voters get it right? Let us know in the comments below!"

 

Ign had this posted:

 

"Dragon Age Inquistion Best Overall Game 3.9k

2014 was home to remarkable gaming achievements across every genre and platform imaginable. Whether you wanted an 8-bit throwback to classic NES games, or meaty, gorgeous role-playing adventures, this year had you covered. Here are the 10 experiences that epitomized excellence in gaming."

 

http://www.ign.com/l...latform/overall

 

Sounds like they have excellent ratings.

[Majestic Jazz]

But its not about optimization, those kind of things are getting fixed anyhow overtime. The main issue was the lack of depth in the world, if they had extra 6 monthes or less in CDP case it wouldnt change the fact that the world of W3 is rich with content while DA:I has lots of collectibale filler quests instead.

Exactly!

At the end of the day, TW3 would have still been better cause the foundation is better than DAI.

As for DAI being in a slow year, well, it was! Only big hitters was Destiny and Watchdogs. Destiny stumbled out of the gate and Watchdogs goy bad PR pre release with #resolutiongate. DAI just happened to be the only decent game and cause some game had to be GOTY, it might as well have been DAI. And if DAI released this year, I doubt it would win out over TW3, Halo 5, and Arkham Knight. 2015 is just too strong. Hell MGS5 might even have a strong push.

Hell, even the Metacritic score for DAI is less than that of TW3.

[correctamundo]

Are you seriously saying that CDPR have been sitting around fiddling their thumbs for six months?

[Realmzmaster]

I do not think CD ProjektRED would have missed releasing TW3 during the Holiday season if it was ready. TW3 simply was not ready for release in November or early December 2014. Very few companies want to miss one of the biggest gift giving times of the year.

 

Detractors like to point out 2014 was a weak year, which basically only matters to the detractors. It like saying 2014-15 basketball champions would be no competition for Micheal Jordan's Bull team of 1995-96.

 

It is interesting to try to compare, but unless the two games were released at the same time the comparison is moot. 

[Sanunes]

Exactly!

At the end of the day, TW3 would have still been better cause the foundation is better than DAI.

As for DAI being in a slow year, well, it was! Only big hitters was Destiny and Watchdogs. Destiny stumbled out of the gate and Watchdogs goy bad PR pre release with #resolutiongate. DAI just happened to be the only decent game and cause some game had to be GOTY, it might as well have been DAI. And if DAI released this year, I doubt it would win out over TW3, Halo 5, and Arkham Knight. 2015 is just too strong. Hell MGS5 might even have a strong push.

Hell, even the Metacritic score for DAI is less than that of TW3.

 

You are forgetting some games such as Shadow of Mordor, Farcry 4, and Alien: Isolation which hit big as well. Nintendo released some highly liked game as well with Super Smash Bros, Bayonetta, and Hyrule Warriors too.  Then a few smaller games hit well such as The Banner Saga.

 

I would exactly call 2014 slow with a list of games like that.  For before they were released there were plenty of games that were considered great and then they were released to being lackluster, which can happen to any of the games for 2015 that hasn't been released yet. So who knows The Witcher 3 might only win because 2015 is an equally slow year.

 

Edit:

 

I wouldn't discount Watch Dogs because of its resolution issue for The Witcher 3 is having the exact same issue, its just people aren't raising the same level of frustration towards CDPR as they did with Ubisoft.

Modifié par Sanunes, 31 mai 2015 - 03:56 .

[LinksOcarina]

I'm wasn't talking about sales figures or the like but if you can tell me with a straight face that the releases of those two games was not humiliating for EA, then we may as well just stop talking right here because your memory of history is much different than mine.  And if that was not the case, then EA would not have so obviously switched the Sims 4 from being constantly online to the offline experience its fans desired.  They SCRAMBLED to make that happen in order to save The Sims 4 from a similar humiliating fate.

 

Like it or not, EA is in damage control right now.  And yes, this is my personal opinion, go figure.

 

Considering Mass Effect 3 was a successful release at launch (some $200 million in sales across four platforms) I think the only revisionist thing going on here is the accusations that the title was humiliating.

 

Attitudes after the fact are a wholly different thing, and have no bearing on the fact that the game made money, and continued to do so for a year as content was released. Simcity, big mistake with that one, and as for Sims 4, well it always had online content since Sims 2, not to mention was a mess because of the glut of content found in Sims 3 by the end. I had friends tell me they couldn't even play Sims 3 anymore because there was too much stuff in the way.

 

I don't know, I am just not seeing the damage control right now. Truth be told, the damage control would be the moves done during the games to improve them. Otherwise, why would EA care when they have been paid already? 

 

But hey, opinions. Not like any of our opinions really matter in the grand scheme of things to begin with. 

 

 

Exactly!

At the end of the day, TW3 would have still been better cause the foundation is better than DAI.

As for DAI being in a slow year, well, it was! Only big hitters was Destiny and Watchdogs. Destiny stumbled out of the gate and Watchdogs goy bad PR pre release with #resolutiongate. DAI just happened to be the only decent game and cause some game had to be GOTY, it might as well have been DAI. And if DAI released this year, I doubt it would win out over TW3, Halo 5, and Arkham Knight. 2015 is just too strong. Hell MGS5 might even have a strong push.

Hell, even the Metacritic score for DAI is less than that of TW3.

 

Ok, 2014 had a lot of good games out for it. Shadow of Mordor, Super Smash Bros, Dark Souls 2 for PC, Mario Kart 8, The rest of The Wolf Among us and The Walking Dead Season 2, Wolfenstein, and Divinity: Original Sin (which I didn't like personally but others do) to name a few.

 

That's not a strong year?

 

Oh wait, forgot, opinions again. This just makes it a pointless debate. 

[Majestic Jazz]

Considering Mass Effect 3 was a successful release at launch (some $200 million in sales across four platforms) I think the only revisionist thing going on here is the accusations that the title was humiliating.

Attitudes after the fact are a wholly different thing, and have no bearing on the fact that the game made money, and continued to do so for a year as content was released. Simcity, big mistake with that one, and as for Sims 4, well it always had online content since Sims 2, not to mention was a mess because of the glut of content found in Sims 3 by the end. I had friends tell me they couldn't even play Sims 3 anymore because there was too much stuff in the way.

I don't know, I am just not seeing the damage control right now. Truth be told, the damage control would be the moves done during the games to improve them. Otherwise, why would EA care when they have been paid already?

But hey, opinions. Not like any of our opinions really matter in the grand scheme of things to begin with.



Ok, 2014 had a lot of good games out for it. Shadow of Mordor, Super Smash Bros, Dark Souls 2 for PC, Mario Kart 8, The rest of The Wolf Among us and The Walking Dead Season 2, Wolfenstein, and Divinity: Original Sin (which I didn't like personally but others do) to name a few.

That's not a strong year?

Oh wait, forgot, opinions again. This just makes it a pointless debate.

Yes, 2014 WAS a slow year in gaming, especially when you compare what we got in 2013:

Grand Theft Auto 5
The Last of Us
Bioshock Infinate
Tomb Raider

....DAI would not have swept the GOTY awards in 2013.

Then compare that to what we are getting in 2015:

The Witcher 3
Batman Arkham Knight
Halo 5
No Man's Sky
Bloodborne
MGS5

.....I doubt DAI would sweep this year as well, especially considering how well recieved TW3 is and Rocksteady games never dissapoints so Akrham Knight will be great. It is also fair to note that both of these games were originally supposed to release in fall 2014 alongside DAI but delayed to this year, which was really good for EA/Bioware, especially TW3 being delayed. I remember a big internet debate back in summer 2014 about which game to buy 1st, DAI or TW3 since they are coming out around the same time. But all that ended when TW3 moved to 2015.

Like someone said before, DAI sweeping the awards was like people bringing a squash to a watermelon contest and the watermelon winning by default because all the other said watermelons sat out of this contest and insteat entered into another one where the field was more competitive

Again, defend DAI all you want but DAI's massive success in terms of GOTY was circumstantial. Someone had to win GOTY and DAI was the only decent AAA game that didnt have any stumbles like Destiny and WatchDogs.

Also the games you mention were games that were never meant to be massive killers. Their hype was much tame in comparison to DAI, Watchdogs, Titanfall, and Destiny.

Again, DAI would not win this year and would not have one in 2013. Also TW3 has a higher metacritic score than DAI if that means something to you BOTH the user score and "professional" scores for TW3 are 9.0 or higher on the PC, PS4, and X1. DAI on those same platforms fails to get above 8.9 snd the user scores ranges from 5.8 on the PC to 6.9 on the X1 and 7.4 on the PS4. Ignore that all you want but where ever there is smoke, there is fire

Fact is, the honeymoon for DAI is over and now that TW3 is out, people can easily see the many faults in DAI that they may not have seen previously. Outside of these forums, the chatter about DAI isnt all that positive and is actually more of a 50/50 split which was not the same for Last of Us and GTA5 where those two games continue to be overwhelming positive. Letd see where TW3 is 6 months from now when all the free dlc is released and the 1st expansion is out.

In the end, DAI was an INITIAL superstorm of success. However, the post release debate for DAI does not match its initial success in the same way Last of Us did back in 2013 when that game sweep the GOTY awards. I still find it odd how EA still does not want to tell us what DAI sales numbers were. They "tell" us that DAI was Bioware's most successful launch but we see not quantitiative data to back this up. We are left to just take EA's word snd this is EA we are talking about so they will do anything to twist words around to make investors feel more secure after the release of their AAA title. We know the sales numbers for all previous Bioware titles, so why the big secret for DAI? I mean, if it was this best launch for Bioware as they claim, why not show us the numbers to back this up?

Remember EA is big on investor support so they will do like all corporations do and twist words around in their favor. Remember, DAI is the first Bioware game to launch on 5 platforms so perhaps that is what EA meant when they say most successful. I mean, I would not be surprised if DAI has not sold more than ME3 and to avoid embarrasment, they twist things around in a way that favors DAI and at the end of the day, ME3 only released on 3 platforms, not 5 so in EA's world, selling well on 5 platforms trumps that of just 3.

Who knows, EA doesnt want to release numbers and that is very weird considering they did it with DA2, DAO and all the ME games as well as KOTOR and JE.

Remember, EA NEVER said DAI is Bioware's best selling game.....just that it is Bioware's biggest launch. Remember that.

Until I see numbers, Mass Effect 3 is Bioware's best selling game.

[Shadeling]

Considering Mass Effect 3 was a successful release at launch (some $200 million in sales across four platforms) I think the only revisionist thing going on here is the accusations that the title was humiliating.

 

Attitudes after the fact are a wholly different thing, and have no bearing on the fact that the game made money, and continued to do so for a year as content was released. Simcity, big mistake with that one, and as for Sims 4, well it always had online content since Sims 2, not to mention was a mess because of the glut of content found in Sims 3 by the end. I had friends tell me they couldn't even play Sims 3 anymore because there was too much stuff in the way.

 

I don't know, I am just not seeing the damage control right now. Truth be told, the damage control would be the moves done during the games to improve them. Otherwise, why would EA care when they have been paid already? 

 

But hey, opinions. Not like any of our opinions really matter in the grand scheme of things to begin with. 

 

 

Again, not talking about sales figures but let's not forget that the release of Mass Effect 3 and the internet uproar over the A-B-C ending precipitated the resignations of the two doctors.  It was not a good time for EA, to put it mildly.

 

And in regards to The Sims franchise, you need to read up a little bit more on it because you're very misinformed in regards to its online functionality. I'm not going to go into it here but suffice it to say that the reason Sims 4 was missing over 100 key features is because of its development doing a sharp 180 from it being The Sims Online redux it was originally intended to be.

[Elhanan]

And I am still replaying ME3; found it had a great storyline. While I am no fan of Star children (eg; 'V' mini-series), still was pleased that my decisions lead to the creation of a Galactic force to oppose the Reapers. The colors of the conclusion did not spoil anything for me, as I had witnessed my choices made from the first two games echo in the third rather clearly.

And I believe the next EA shareholder report is released soon in June. Of course facts mean little to some people; hate is easier. Probably why the good doctors chose to move along elsewhere.