10273 réponses à ce sujet

[StodgyFrost98]

I recommend to Bioware that each Romance love scene is as sexy and vibrant as it was in ME1. The romance scene in ME1 with Liara attracted a lot of attention and was excellent in every way. I also suggest that the Romance scenes aren't cheap scenes. For example, the romance scene between female shepard and garrus wasn't romantic and just showed them putting their heads against each other. Bioware ignore Fox news, I mean what's the worst that can happen. If the kids get their hands on the game its by illegal means or its by their parents or another adult buying it for them. So basically its the parents fault or adult that they bought the game for the child and that they experienced the content not you Bioware.  Its also the parents fault that the parents don't monitor what their child plays.  And even if they have the game they still have to build a relationship with that love interest and have to make the right choices depending on the personality of the love interest.  In essence if they make one wrong choice then they mess up the entire relationship. Also about the adolescenes having  viewer access to romance scenes in a movie or a game is restricted on youtube.  The only kind of nudity youtube has is pieces of artwork and medical models of the human body which most kids aren't interested in unless they are pursuing a profession in that sort of area.

Modifié par StodgyFrost98, 08 juin 2010 - 04:44 .

[Some Geth]

Kalfear wrote...

oh goodie, trollordsithexarkun came to bottom out the thread even more!

yahhh for gang mentality!!

Btw, I should point out, I no longer read any posts by Sithlordexarkun, Alan9, and Sheppardwrex but if you 3 want to keep attacking me with nonsence, feel free, Im not reading it.

so troll away, all the power to you, I think everyone knows what you are and I have more then enough people talking topics with me that your not missed in any way!

So lie, cheat, steal, and troll your way to cyber fanhood if you think you can. Personally I think more folks have already and will continue to just tune you out like Im doing!

As for other people (Kalos) pickingup the Prove it mantle. Maybe its just me (actually I know its not) but I havent seen you or yours prove a single statement you made either so why the double standard? Why myself and everyone else you disagree with have to prove everything but you and yours prove nothing?

Maybe you should sit back and think on that for a change rather then pass off stupid one liners that mix up with the above mentioned trolls.

If you dont like being associated to them as trolls, quit acting like them and engage in real discussion and thought provoking conversation!

1 liners are for twitter and other word challenged persons

LOL, I will say one thing, I learned my lesson today about posting just after school hours let out (normally im not even awke then). From now on ill wait till the 11 pm bed time hour passes before posting to avoid upsetting the kiddies.

You know I think the Sonic fandom is for you dude you make me think of them .

[SithLordExarKun]

Pocketgb wrote...

SithLordExarKun wrote...

Fair enough, ill stop

Good work. I know how you feel, too: it's pretty tempting.

Yeah no point beating a dead and broken horse.

[AlanC9]

KotOREffecT wrote...
But then there is only so much nit picking and trashing some can do, and even elitist bullying. I mostly see the hardcore rpgers on the attack most of the time, like they have something to prove. I also think they think that they are somehow the "majorty" at times, and thats not really the case.

I don't think the argument is that the "hardcore RPGers"  are a majority of ME2 buyers, but that they represent a majority of ME1 fans and Bioware turned away from them to bring in shooter fans.

Even in this limited sense it isn't true. Looking at GameSpot user reviews, ME1 fans who strongly favored the changes in ME2 outnumber ME1 fans who didn't like the changes by at least 3:1. Disappointed ME1 fans seem to be only maybe 1/6 of the total, actually, since a lot of ME fans thought that the changes were a wash.

I put quotes above because I consider myself as hardcore an RPGer as there is, and I'm obviously not on that side of the issue.

[KalosCast]

Kalfear wrote...

As for other people (Kalos) pickingup the Prove it mantle. Maybe its just me (actually I know its not) but I havent seen you or yours prove a single statement you made either so why the double standard? Why myself and everyone else you disagree with have to prove everything but you and yours prove nothing?

If you'd bothered to read my posts, you would have noticed that (1) I try to avoid making outrageous unprovable statements about the game and community as a whole and (2) support the ones I make. You, on the other hand, simply resort to name-calling. A simple facet of both debate and science as a whole is the idea that if you're bringing a new (and especially contradictary) point forward, you have to support it with something other than insults, which you repeatedly (and hilariously) fail to do.

[KalosCast]

AlanC9 wrote...
I don't think the argument is that the "hardcore RPGers"  are a majority of ME2 buyers, but that they represent a majority of ME1 fans and Bioware turned away from them to bring in shooter fans.

Even in this limited sense it isn't true. Looking at GameSpot user reviews, ME1 fans who strongly favored the changes in ME2 outnumber ME1 fans who didn't like the changes by at least 3:1. Disappointed ME1 fans seem to be only maybe 1/6 of the total, actually, since a lot of ME fans thought that the changes were a wash.

I put quotes above because I consider myself as hardcore an RPGer as there is, and I'm obviously not on that side of the issue.

Bah, everybody knows that when given an open means to voice an opinion on a matter, there will be a natural bias that the people who have any sort of negative opinion are significantly much more likely to utilize that open means than people who have a positive opinion, and much further over those who have a relatively neutral reaction. That's High School statistics.

[AlanC9]

Or Message Boards 101. Yeah, I know, but I feel obligated to at least try to look at evidence.

[KalosCast]

AlanC9 wrote...

Or Message Boards 101. Yeah, I know, but I feel obligated to at least try to look at evidence.

Misleading evidence is worse than blind speculation.

[Terror_K]

The majority aren't always right. After all, most of the biggest sellers these days are generally shallow action-oriented titles.

[AlanC9]

KalosCast wrote...
Misleading evidence is worse than blind speculation.

Sure, but in this case the bias would be in favor of Kalfear, SkullandBonesMember, etc., so I don't figure it matters. Even with data skewed in favor of complainers, the ME2 changes are overwhelmingly popular. We don't particularly need to know how big the skew is, since that ends the "sell out" and "not a proper sequel" arguments right there. 

That still leaves us with the discussion of whether the changes were good, of course.

Modifié par AlanC9, 08 juin 2010 - 06:41 .

[KalosCast]

AlanC9 wrote...

KalosCast wrote...
Misleading evidence is worse than blind speculation.

Sure, but in this case the bias would be in favor of Kalfear, SkullandBonesMember, etc., so I don't figure it matters. Even with data skewed in favor of complainers, the ME2 changes are overwhelmingly popular. We don't particularly need to know how big the skew is, since that ends the "sell out" and "not a proper sequel" arguments right there. 

That still leaves us with the discussion of whether the changes were good, of course.

Yeah, but even if you point out that ME2 was received favorably, hell, even if you utilize a nationally-respected survey team and they prove that ME2 was received better than the first game, whiners will still say it's because of Bungie and Infinity Ward bribing EA to make ME2 appeal to their established fanbases.

Overall, I'd say (in my opinion in case someone can't figure that out) the infantry combat was improved, just not improved enough to really stand up with the removal of the other action-bits. The writing, character development and world building I felt were roughly on par with what we were given in ME1 though. That is, pulpy and unrealistic, but ultimately satisfying.

[Pocketgb]

Terror_K wrote...

The majority aren't always right. After all, most of the biggest sellers these days are generally shallow action-oriented titles.

What's more is that no matter how good something is, there will *always* be someone to nitpick it.

And no, this is *not* to say that people who disagree with what's happened with ME2 have "bad taste."

Edit: "*%#ing forums, how do they work!?"

Modifié par Pocketgb, 08 juin 2010 - 06:59 .

[Terror_K]

AlanC9 wrote...

Sure, but in this case the bias would be in favor of Kalfear, SkullandBonesMember, etc., so I don't figure it matters. Even with data skewed in favor of complainers, the ME2 changes are overwhelmingly popular. We don't particularly need to know how big the skew is, since that ends the "sell out" and "not a proper sequel" arguments right there. 

That still leaves us with the discussion of whether the changes were good, of course.

Some of them were, some of them weren't. Some of them would have been if they hadn't been taken too far. Others are pretty bad ideas in the first place. ME1 tended to have good ideas with bad execution, while ME2 tended to just have bad ideas, or at least bad ideas regarding an RPG; in a pure shooter they may work, but in an RPG, even a hybrid one, not so much.

I actually personally have more problems with the apparent mindset of the devs and the direction they seemed to want to take ME2 overall than I do with the individual changes themselves.

[Pocketgb]

AlanC9 wrote...

That still leaves us with the discussion of whether the changes were good, of course.

And that discussion would probably be twice the size of this thread!

[CroGamer002]

What I established in this thread.

ME2 sucks cause story isn't better from ME1.
ME2 sucks because is TPS.
ME2 isn't RPG.
ME2's Shep has no personality.
ME2's characters suck since... eh... Liara lost her personality?

Modifié par Mesina2, 08 juin 2010 - 07:38 .

[Christmas Ape]

Mesina2 wrote...

ME2 isn't RPG.

Right, I established that earlier, because you draw your "attacks available" from concrete numbers instead of a time-sensitive gauge, you don't have a Bag of Holding that you can fill with the useless crap you strip off every corpse you make, and the cover-based combat system actually encourages using cover instead of ability spam (oh boy, another Colossus - Immunity, Overload, Overload, Sabotage, circle-strafe without generating any weapon heat, done, that was sure a scary war machine...).

[Jebel Krong]

Terror_K wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Sure, but in this case the bias would be in favor of Kalfear, SkullandBonesMember, etc., so I don't figure it matters. Even with data skewed in favor of complainers, the ME2 changes are overwhelmingly popular. We don't particularly need to know how big the skew is, since that ends the "sell out" and "not a proper sequel" arguments right there. 

That still leaves us with the discussion of whether the changes were good, of course.

Some of them were, some of them weren't. Some of them would have been if they hadn't been taken too far. Others are pretty bad ideas in the first place. ME1 tended to have good ideas with bad execution, while ME2 tended to just have bad ideas, or at least bad ideas regarding an RPG; in a pure shooter they may work, but in an RPG, even a hybrid one, not so much.

I actually personally have more problems with the apparent mindset of the devs and the direction they seemed to want to take ME2 overall than I do with the individual changes themselves.

and i'm sure the same will be the case for me3 - some will like the inevitable changes, some won't.

[Jebel Krong]

ShakeZoohla wrote...

Kalfear wrote...

I gave it a fair and reasonable 6.7 ranking outta 10 and stated many times over and over (of course you didnt read any of those....right?) that if ME2 had simply been made its own IP and not the follow up of ME1 (a ground breaking action RPG game) it would be a 8.5 game. But it was made as a follow up and fell short because of its removal of RPG elements and weak story!

But hey, dont let the FACTS get in your way BB

I actually think its pretty universally agreed upon that ME2 failed at being a proper sequel, whether some people are willing to admit it or not.  There are just too many people who loved the first game and are now disapointed by the second to make a valid argument otherwise.

actually that's not agreed or "proved" at all. in fact, as people in this thread have proven many times, the vast majority are very happy with me2, both as a game in it's own right, and as a universe-expanding sequel, even if it's not perfect.

Modifié par Jebel Krong, 08 juin 2010 - 10:16 .

[Orchomene]

Could people try to remain civilized ? It's not that hard, you just have to accept that other people have the right to have an opinion different from yours.



To the topic, Elcael's arguments have been dismissed many times in this thread even if you failed to see where (which I can understand seeing the size of the thread).



What are those arguments ?

1. "ME2 and ME1 are similar games"

You can find a lot of arguments on differences in essence between both games but the most notable ones are the combat gameplay (RPG in ME1 with PC skill that influence efficiency of a shot, TPS in ME2 with player skill that influence efficiency of a shot) and the pace and space usage of the games (some exploration in ME1 and small corridors in ME2). Dismissing the differences by saying that the stories are linked is as valid as saying that Jedi Knight and Kotor are similar or that Super Mario Bros arcade game is similar to Super Mario Kart.

2. "ME2 is universally acclaimed, see metacritic score and comments".

First, Metacritic focuses a lot on US console reviews. In Europe and Russia, average score of ME2 is between 80% and 85%, lower than DAO. PC reviews are a bit lower than console one, but the difference are minor. Since game reviewed have an average around 80%, Europe and Russia think ME2 is a B or B+ game, which is not bad but not "universally acclaimed".

3. "Same amount of dialogue in both games, same number of quests, ..."

All these arguments are pretty easy to dismiss. For artistic creation, the amount has absolutely no value. You can have a book of 150 pages that is a true gem and a 800 page book that is awful. So ok, it seems "objective" or "serious" to add numbers in comparisons, it's not a good measure of quality. What is a serious or objective measure of quality in art ? This is a pretty good question and I think there is no final answer to this question. You may want to read some philosophical essays on art and aesthetic. But in the end, you may think, like many people concluded that art and aesthetic are the result of the confrontation between the creation and the one that perceive the creation. Hence, there is a strong irreducible subjective part in quality measure of an artistic creation.

4. "Pokemon is a better rpg than better than both ME games".

I'm taking this whole thread as ironic. I don't see anything proven here since I just see humour. Of course, sells ratio are not a valid measure of quality. You may discuss this with art specialist but can also see by yourself by examples that can be found in music, movies, literature,... And I've never heard about this game before so I can't say if this is a RPG game, but we can't say any game with a story and some gameplay is an rpg. That would make too much game in this kind of game. The only result with including a lot of games in the same genre is that you create sub-genres.

But then, it's everybody's taste to put a limit between what is an rpg and what is not an rpg. I can give you some examples : for many P&P rpgs I know, only games like NWN with gamemasters as a player are close to rpgs, for some known as "old school" rpg gamers, the limit is given by "this is the characters that handle the action and not the player" which is reflected by skill comparison with or without dice for combat resolution and quickness of attacks depending on the characters skills as opposed to "click-fests" and "headshot-fest", for others it may include action-rpg (Diablo, ...) or wargame-rpg (Spellforce, Ascension to the throne, Elven Legacy), for other people the sandbox concept is more important and for other people the heavy story driven concept is.

I can just say that for me, ME1 is an action-rpg and ME2 is a action-adventure. But other people will use different terms.

[Jebel Krong]

Orchomene wrote...

What are those arguments ?
1. "ME2 and ME1 are similar games"
You can find a lot of arguments on differences in essence between both games but the most notable ones are the combat gameplay (RPG in ME1 with PC skill that influence efficiency of a shot, TPS in ME2 with player skill that influence efficiency of a shot) and the pace and space usage of the games (some exploration in ME1 and small corridors in ME2). Dismissing the differences by saying that the stories are linked is as valid as saying that Jedi Knight and Kotor are similar or that Super Mario Bros arcade game is similar to Super Mario Kart.

can see you're biased: similarities include:
1. game structure.
2. story structure (though expanded in #2 with loyalty quests).
3. mission structure - talk, shoot, talk some more, end.
4. environment design.
5. combat mechanics (both are TPS shooters in that respect, with almost identical squad/power mechanisms).
6. character development.
7. character interaction - conversation system.
etc. just listing a few differences of your own, does not make a balanced viewpoint, as i've just illustrated.

Orchomene wrote...
2. "ME2 is universally acclaimed, see metacritic score and comments".
First, Metacritic focuses a lot on US console reviews. In Europe and Russia, average score of ME2 is between 80% and 85%, lower than DAO. PC reviews are a bit lower than console one, but the difference are minor. Since game reviewed have an average around 80%, Europe and Russia think ME2 is a B or B+ game, which is not bad but not "universally acclaimed".

really? because in the UK i bought/read all the magazine reviews and read all the UK online reviews and they were all in the 90s, and averaged well above either DA:O or me1.

Orchomene wrote...
3. "Same amount of dialogue in both games, same number of quests, ..."
All these arguments are pretty easy to dismiss. For artistic creation, the amount has absolutely no value. You can have a book of 150 pages that is a true gem and a 800 page book that is awful. So ok, it seems "objective" or "serious" to add numbers in comparisons, it's not a good measure of quality. What is a serious or objective measure of quality in art ? This is a pretty good question and I think there is no final answer to this question. You may want to read some philosophical essays on art and aesthetic. But in the end, you may think, like many people concluded that art and aesthetic are the result of the confrontation between the creation and the one that perceive the creation. Hence, there is a strong irreducible subjective part in quality measure of an artistic creation.

no there's not: there's more dialogue in me2 than me1, with at least equal character interaction/conversations/depth to almost all characters (depending on shepard's gender in the case of a select few), add in all the loyalty quests and there's far more depth to all of the characters than in me1, you can't argue that: it's part of the structure of the game.

[Christmas Ape]

Orchomene wrote...
"Pokemon is a better rpg than better than both ME games".
I'm taking this whole thread as ironic. I don't see anything proven here since I just see humour.

I'd recommend reading it more carefully. It addresses every complaint used to define ME2 as "not an RPG" compared to ME1, and points out that the Pokemon games did all of those things better* than both games.

* For values of "better", such as with the complaints about skill ranks and retextured weapons, equal to "more of them".

Modifié par Christmas Ape, 08 juin 2010 - 10:28 .

[SithLordExarKun]

Orchomene wrote...

Could people try to remain civilized ? It's not that hard, you just have to accept that other people have the right to have an opinion different from yours.

With members like skullsandbonesmember and kalfear, its nearly impossible to be civilized.

Orchomene wrote...
To the topic, Elcael's arguments have been dismissed many times in this thread even if you failed to see where (which I can understand seeing the size of the thread).

Dismissed? As in disproven? A few individuals who voiced out why they disagree with ecael is far from actually destroying and disproving ecaels claims.

Orchomene wrote...
2. "ME2 is universally acclaimed, see metacritic score and comments".
First, Metacritic focuses a lot on US console reviews. In Europe and Russia, average score of ME2 is between 80% and 85%, lower than DAO. PC reviews are a bit lower than console one, but the difference are minor. Since game reviewed have an average around 80%, Europe and Russia think ME2 is a B or B+ game, which is not bad but not "universally acclaimed".

I really love ME1 fanboys in denial who constantly argue like broken records, you DO know that ameria is a far larger market for video games than both russia and europe? You DO know there are literally dozens of other websites where users actually show their praise for ME2?

How many people gave their score in russia and europe as opposed to america? How do you know that the number of ME2 players eclipse those of that in russia and europe? How do you know that russia and europe is the majority?

So yes, do a little reading and ME2 DID get alot of praise. Whether you like the game or not, its time to deal with the cold fact that many people DO prefer ME2 over ME1.

Orchomene wrote...
4. "Pokemon is a better rpg than better than both ME games".
I'm taking this whole thread as ironic. I don't see anything proven here since I just see humour.

First off i cut your entire post out because you didn't actually debunk ecaels claim, secondly you don't see anything proven because you don't want it to be proven hence the little thing called denial gets manifested.

[bjdbwea]

Terror_K wrote...

The majority aren't always right. After all, most of the biggest sellers these days are generally shallow action-oriented titles.

That is true. A big part - maybe perhaps indeed a majority - of players seems content with cool graphics and being able to shoot stuff. It is therefore entirely unsurprising that catering to this group of players will sell games. And since it's a rather uncritical audience, exaggerated scores are not at all surprising either. But like in politics, just because a majority thinks something or someone is cool and the right idea, doesn't automatically make it so. That's why "but it sold well" is no argument whatsoever as far as the actual quality of the game is concerned, even though it is of course true that sales numbers are always very important too.

That said, those sales numbers for ME 2 that were floating around here, if true, surely weren't spectacular. I for one suspect that the pursuit of the shooter market wasn't as successful as they hoped, probably because there's still so much of all that boring talking, plus the shooting part of course just doesn't work as good as in a real shooter. And on the other hand, I guess a number of RPG fans didn't buy ME 2 either, though they might still do once the price drops. But most of these people who didn't buy the game in the first place, will neither give the game a review, nor will they be around the forums.

BioWare should be thankful to everyone who cares enough to let them know why exactly they were disappointed in the game, for that is the only chance to improve the next part. Forums full of people shouting down anyone who dares criticize the game, would be of no help in this.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 08 juin 2010 - 11:08 .

[Xeranx]

SithLordExarKun wrote...

Orchomene wrote...

Could people try to remain civilized ? It's not that hard, you just have to accept that other people have the right to have an opinion different from yours.

With members like skullsandbonesmember and kalfear, its nearly impossible to be civilized.

Orchomene wrote...
2. "ME2 is universally acclaimed, see metacritic score and comments".
First, Metacritic focuses a lot on US console reviews. In Europe and Russia, average score of ME2 is between 80% and 85%, lower than DAO. PC reviews are a bit lower than console one, but the difference are minor. Since game reviewed have an average around 80%, Europe and Russia think ME2 is a B or B+ game, which is not bad but not "universally acclaimed".

I really love ME1 fanboys in denial who constantly argue like broken records, you DO know that ameria is a far larger market for video games than both russia and europe? You DO know there are literally dozens of other websites where users actually show their praise for ME2?

How many people gave their score in russia and europe as opposed to america? How do you know that the number of ME2 players eclipse those of that in russia and europe? How do you know that russia and europe is the majority?

So yes, do a little reading and ME2 DID get alot of praise. Whether you like the game or not, its time to deal with the cold fact that many people DO prefer ME2 over ME1.

Orchomene wrote...
4. "Pokemon is a better rpg than better than both ME games".
I'm taking this whole thread as ironic. I don't see anything proven here since I just see humour.

First off i cut your entire post out because you didn't actually debunk ecaels claim, secondly you don't see anything proven because you don't want it to be proven hence the little thing called denial gets manifested.

You have hurt your cause.  On the last page you made it out to look like you were being reactionary.  That the things that you were saying to others was in direct response to what was said to you.  However, you've gone against that just with this post.  

Orchomene's opening line shows no animosity and says a lot of what Drago wanted which is to go back to having a civilized discussion.  Later you respond the way you did in the part I bolded calling him a fanboy (which never goes over well that I've seen) and saying that he has nothing to say so there's not point in him saying anything (broken-record).  I'm not saying this so people can gang up on you or try and smack you down.  I'm saying this because I think you're getting in your own way here and you will actually have the opposite effect of what you are possibly going for in trying to change other people's minds.

[Orchomene]

First, I'm not a ME1 fan. I think this game is not bad, but I'd rather play DAO, NWN 1/2, KOTOR 1/2, Risen, Gothic 2, The Witcher, Planescape, BG 1/2, Fallout 3.



About similarities

Jebel Krong wrote...

can see you're biased: similarities include:

1. game structure.

2. story structure (though expanded in #2 with loyalty quests).

3. mission structure - talk, shoot, talk some more, end.

4. environment design.

5. combat mechanics (both are TPS shooters in that respect, with almost identical squad/power mechanisms).

6. character development.

7. character interaction - conversation system.

etc. just listing a few differences of your own, does not make a balanced viewpoint, as i've just illustrated.

1. What do you call "game structure" ? It's not really evident to answer if I don't understand your point, sorry.

2. Story structure ? There is no such thing as a story structure in a character driven game as opposed to a story driven game. If you wanted to sum up the story of ME2 it would be something like "After being resurrected, Shepard follows the plan of TIM to fight against the threat against the human colonies. Doing this, he recruits a dozen of persons as a preparation for a suicide mission against the collectors." The structure of the story is divided in 20% of finding a way to fight against the collectors (finding elements in Horizon, exploring a ship, get an IFF to use the omega 4 relay) and 80 to prepare the team. This is not really the same structure as in ME1. Or if yes, this would also be the case of most of the BW games (collecting elements in 3 or 4 places and then a fight against the main threat is pretty common in their games).

3. Do I need to answer this ? What RPG does not have such structure of alternating talk/investigation and fight ?

4. This is the same world, so yes, the environment is pretty consistent, even if it seems there are a lot more boxes that are put everywhere in ME2 for cover (joke). But Jedi Knight and Kotor would be similar in this case. or Warcraft and WoW. Or any forgotten realms d&d game. Are NWN and BG similar ? I don't think so.

5. Not really, the character skills for weapons change the precision and the damage of the weapons in ME1 as opposed to ME2. On the other hand, the ME1 mods have been converted into powers in ME2. This is not a minor difference. But well, you can say it's the same if you want, but this would thus say that any game with a gun is similar to another.

6. Character development ? technically, as in efficiency-wise, the character do level in both games. But the scale is not at all the same. The evolution of power from begining to end in both games are pretty different. In ME1, you begin as inexperienced and end very powerful. There is not much difference from beginning to end in ME2 and no real sense of efficiency evolution in ME2 since the differences between level 1 and level 30 are minor in ME2. About character evolution in terms of personality, it' pretty flat in ME2. Shepard does not really react and choices are almost the same. More than that, the opposition paragon/renegade feel very different in both games.

7. Conversation system ? Well, there is the add of a good idea in ME2 with the interrupt which is a difference. Otherwise, conversation is a multiple answer response type as in many games. The only difference is cosmetic : on a wheel instead of rows. It's not as original as in Morrowind, by example. So, you can argue that conversation system is almost the same in both games, but that's just because it's for the most part a standard in gaming.



About dialogues.

Dismiss is still valid, you are talking about quantity and not quality. There is no possible objective way to answer this question. It's a matter of subjective perception. One person can see a lot of depth in those dialogues, some can think the dialogues are just whinners that have a "daddy issue".



About reviews, I'll answer in an other post.