Also, for better or worse, I think it's important for everyone to remember that Mass Effect 3's initial release date was postponed for more development time - so to me it's more logical to assume that the writing involved in the game wasn't a product of laziness or whatever skeptics seem to be projecting onto the writers. Bioware supposedly had a hell of a lot of time to work on this game, so in the end the majority of things people take issue with are probably purposeful, calculated design choices.
OT - Like Daystar, I'm going to just play the game and enjoy the hell out of it, regardless of any faults. I'm sure I'll be called a corporate tool by some whiny little tossers but I really don't care.
Technically, that's not what they said. Blunderboy complains about the fact that everybody who indicates that they like the game are being discredited as being "bioware fanboys", "corporate tools", etc. The ones you quote did not imply that people who dislike the game are doing it to be cool. And seriously, can you blame them for calling you guys "whiny little tossers"? Some people've been constantly trying to force their opinion of the game on other people. (As proven by the last phrase I quoted.)
Please accept that some people like the game the way it is, because opinions are, quite frankly, subjective. So is yours.
On another note: no, I will not read your spoilers. I liked ME2, despite it's flaws, and I enjoyed DA II (though some parts of it made me cringe, because I really preferred DA:O), so I'll most likely enjoy ME3 as well. I haven't played the game yet, so it's quite possible that I'll be disappointed, but I'd rather give the game a try myself than read your spoilers.
EDIT: Minor change in wording, to make it less general.
I am annoyed... not at your post in particular but by the stupid assumption by many people (not just on this site) that a game they don't like getting a good review means someone was bought off.
This seems especially stupid when you remember it's the final chapter of one of the most critically acclaimed series of all time. OF COURSE it was going to get good reviews. It's an incredible experience for most people who play it, despite its flaws.
Well if the reviewers fail to catch the fuck-ups or just outright ignore them, it's logical to conclude that either the reviewer was bought off or is just incompetent. Can we expect perfect analysis? No, but from what I've seen and read, (I won't get ME3 because I refuse to have Origin on my system) Susan was wrong about the game being the "ending the series deserved" because of the actual endings. Her opinion? Sure, but it seems to be one of a very small minority that praised the endings.
When people are willing to pay to see the game unfucked, you know the developer did something wrong.
I didn't like the actual ending of the game, but think that what leads up to it is so satisfying that I can forgive the last ten minutes. If you can't, fine. That's a difference of opinion, not evidence I'm dishonest or incompetent. I think the journey is more important than the destination. I'm not going to trash 35 hours of excellent entertainment because the last ten minutes are a letdown.
I am annoyed... not at your post in particular but by the stupid assumption by many people (not just on this site) that a game they don't like getting a good review means someone was bought off.
This seems especially stupid when you remember it's the final chapter of one of the most critically acclaimed series of all time. OF COURSE it was going to get good reviews. It's an incredible experience for most people who play it, despite its flaws.
Well if the reviewers fail to catch the fuck-ups or just outright ignore them, it's logical to conclude that either the reviewer was bought off or is just incompetent. Can we expect perfect analysis? No, but from what I've seen and read, (I won't get ME3 because I refuse to have Origin on my system) Susan was wrong about the game being the "ending the series deserved" because of the actual endings. Her opinion? Sure, but it seems to be one of a very small minority that praised the endings.
When people are willing to pay to see the game unfucked, you know the developer did something wrong.
I didn't like the actual ending of the game, but think that what leads up to it is so satisfying that I can forgive the last ten minutes. If you can't, fine. That's a difference of opinion, not evidence I'm dishonest or incompetent. I think the journey is more important than the destination. I'm not going to trash 35 hours of excellent entertainment because the last ten minutes are a letdown.
I've seen some genuinely tragic posts about how people loved the bejesus out of the series up till now, played the third and loved it. Then at the end, they feel dead and betrayed as their Shepard is invalidated by some bullshit choose your own deus ex. I read someone saying that the journey is irrelevant if the destination you end up at isn't where you wanted to be.
I am annoyed... not at your post in particular but by the stupid assumption by many people (not just on this site) that a game they don't like getting a good review means someone was bought off.
This seems especially stupid when you remember it's the final chapter of one of the most critically acclaimed series of all time. OF COURSE it was going to get good reviews. It's an incredible experience for most people who play it, despite its flaws.
Well if the reviewers fail to catch the fuck-ups or just outright ignore them, it's logical to conclude that either the reviewer was bought off or is just incompetent. Can we expect perfect analysis? No, but from what I've seen and read, (I won't get ME3 because I refuse to have Origin on my system) Susan was wrong about the game being the "ending the series deserved" because of the actual endings. Her opinion? Sure, but it seems to be one of a very small minority that praised the endings.
When people are willing to pay to see the game unfucked, you know the developer did something wrong.
I didn't like the actual ending of the game, but think that what leads up to it is so satisfying that I can forgive the last ten minutes. If you can't, fine. That's a difference of opinion, not evidence I'm dishonest or incompetent. I think the journey is more important than the destination. I'm not going to trash 35 hours of excellent entertainment because the last ten minutes are a letdown.
I've seen some genuinely tragic posts about how people loved the bejesus out of the series up till now, played the third and loved it. Then at the end, they feel dead and betrayed as their Shepard is invalidated by some bullshit choose your own deus ex. I read someone saying that the journey is irrelevant if the destination you end up at isn't where you wanted to be.
"Life is a journey, not a destination..." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson
Seriously, sure, the last 10 minutes are pretty bad, but there's 30+ hours of great game ahead of it. That's 1800+ good minutes, and 10 bad ones.
The gameplay is great, the dialog is great, the side quests are..there..but people missed them in ME2 so they're there, the weapon customization is great, the set pieces are great, the build up is great, the characters are great.
Saying that ME3 should get a low score just because of the ending is like saying you should fail a test because you got the very last question wrong.
Mmmm... Part of me agrees with what you're saying, but GODDAMMN if the ending didn't make me walk out of there angry!! Everything that's great about Mass Effect 3 should be praised; but I'm surprised that not one of the reviewers on metacritic are calling out the bullshit in the last 10 minutes.
I mean I've been going through a million other endings in my head that are more satisfying than this.
Most trilogies are messed up in the last chapter, not the last 10 minutes.
Seriously, I know I've been saying this a lot but WTF happened?!
Mmmm... Part of me agrees with what you're saying, but GODDAMMN if the ending didn't make me walk out of there angry!! Everything that's great about Mass Effect 3 should be praised; but I'm surprised that not one of the reviewers on metacritic are calling out the bullshit in the last 10 minutes.
I mean I've been going through a million other endings in my head that are more satisfying than this.
Most trilogies are messed up in the last chapter, not the last 10 minutes.
Seriously, I know I've been saying this a lot but WTF happened?!
"Life is a journey, not a destination..." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson
Seriously, sure, the last 10 minutes are pretty bad, but there's 30+ hours of great game ahead of it. That's 1800+ good minutes, and 10 bad ones.
The gameplay is great, the dialog is great, the side quests are..there..but people missed them in ME2 so they're there, the weapon customization is great, the set pieces are great, the build up is great, the characters are great.
Saying that ME3 should get a low score just because of the ending is like saying you should fail a test because you got the very last question wrong.
When the destination invalidates the journey, you're going to basically regret everything you've done. That's not just me talking, that's the testimony of a thousand posts on the Bioware forums.
Your analogy is rather poor. Mass Effect is more like sex than a test. The first was good foreplay, the second was good... fuck it, thrust, and at the last second before climax, you get a cramp, stop moving and the whole experience gets eaten by your muscles painfully tensing.
And I didn't say it should get a low score, you did. The glowing praise it's getting from the "professionals" is just as bad as the vote bombing because the reviews declare it perfect/near-perfect and there's an absolute shitstorm going on over the endings, Tali's face and the wallpaper thing. Edge, Giantbomb and Destructoid gave the best reviews because they better quantified the problems.
Even the fucking biodrones are pissed off at this shit.
When the destination invalidates the journey, you're going to basically regret everything you've done. That's not just me talking, that's the testimony of a thousand posts on the Bioware forums.
Your analogy is rather poor. Mass Effect is more like sex than a test. The first was good foreplay, the second was good... fuck it, thrust, and at the last second before climax, you get a cramp, stop moving and the whole experience gets eaten by your muscles painfully tensing.
And I didn't say it should get a low score, you did. The glowing praise it's getting from the "professionals" is just as bad as the vote bombing because the reviews declare it perfect/near-perfect and there's an absolute shitstorm going on over the endings, Tali's face and the wallpaper thing. Edge, Giantbomb and Destructoid gave the best reviews because they better quantified the problems.
Even the fucking biodrones are pissed off at this shit.
But I don't feel like the ending does invalidate the journey. The ending I chose may not have been ideal, but I certainly didn't feel like it negated my efforts up until that point.
When the destination invalidates the journey, you're going to basically regret everything you've done. That's not just me talking, that's the testimony of a thousand posts on the Bioware forums.
Your analogy is rather poor. Mass Effect is more like sex than a test. The first was good foreplay, the second was good... fuck it, thrust, and at the last second before climax, you get a cramp, stop moving and the whole experience gets eaten by your muscles painfully tensing.
And I didn't say it should get a low score, you did. The glowing praise it's getting from the "professionals" is just as bad as the vote bombing because the reviews declare it perfect/near-perfect and there's an absolute shitstorm going on over the endings, Tali's face and the wallpaper thing. Edge, Giantbomb and Destructoid gave the best reviews because they better quantified the problems.
Even the fucking biodrones are pissed off at this shit.
But I don't feel like the ending does invalidate the journey. The ending I chose may not have been ideal, but I certainly didn't feel like it negated my efforts up until that point.
That makes you like one of five people though. Everyone else is over here [http://social.bioware.com/forum/Mass-Effect-3/Mass-Effect-3-Gameplay-Discussion-Spoilers-allowed/So-we-can039t-get-the-ending-we-want-after-all-9512916-1.html].
Lemme ask something. Did you restart from the save point or cross-reference with someone else that got a different ending?
When the destination invalidates the journey, you're going to basically regret everything you've done. That's not just me talking, that's the testimony of a thousand posts on the Bioware forums.
Your analogy is rather poor. Mass Effect is more like sex than a test. The first was good foreplay, the second was good... fuck it, thrust, and at the last second before climax, you get a cramp, stop moving and the whole experience gets eaten by your muscles painfully tensing.
And I didn't say it should get a low score, you did. The glowing praise it's getting from the "professionals" is just as bad as the vote bombing because the reviews declare it perfect/near-perfect and there's an absolute shitstorm going on over the endings, Tali's face and the wallpaper thing. Edge, Giantbomb and Destructoid gave the best reviews because they better quantified the problems.
Even the fucking biodrones are pissed off at this shit.
But I don't feel like the ending does invalidate the journey. The ending I chose may not have been ideal, but I certainly didn't feel like it negated my efforts up until that point.
That makes you like one of five people though. Everyone else is over here [http://social.bioware.com/forum/Mass-Effect-3/Mass-Effect-3-Gameplay-Discussion-Spoilers-allowed/So-we-can039t-get-the-ending-we-want-after-all-9512916-1.html].
Lemme ask something. Did you restart from the save point or cross-reference with someone else that got a different ending?
Huh? I'm sorry, I don't understand your question. I just played straight through and made my selection from the three options available to me at the end point.
When the destination invalidates the journey, you're going to basically regret everything you've done. That's not just me talking, that's the testimony of a thousand posts on the Bioware forums.
Your analogy is rather poor. Mass Effect is more like sex than a test. The first was good foreplay, the second was good... fuck it, thrust, and at the last second before climax, you get a cramp, stop moving and the whole experience gets eaten by your muscles painfully tensing.
And I didn't say it should get a low score, you did. The glowing praise it's getting from the "professionals" is just as bad as the vote bombing because the reviews declare it perfect/near-perfect and there's an absolute shitstorm going on over the endings, Tali's face and the wallpaper thing. Edge, Giantbomb and Destructoid gave the best reviews because they better quantified the problems.
Even the fucking biodrones are pissed off at this shit.
But I don't feel like the ending does invalidate the journey. The ending I chose may not have been ideal, but I certainly didn't feel like it negated my efforts up until that point.
That makes you like one of five people though. Everyone else is over here [http://social.bioware.com/forum/Mass-Effect-3/Mass-Effect-3-Gameplay-Discussion-Spoilers-allowed/So-we-can039t-get-the-ending-we-want-after-all-9512916-1.html].
Lemme ask something. Did you restart from the save point or cross-reference with someone else that got a different ending?
Huh? I'm sorry, I don't understand your question. I just played straight through and made my selection from the three options available to me at the end point.
When the destination invalidates the journey, you're going to basically regret everything you've done. That's not just me talking, that's the testimony of a thousand posts on the Bioware forums.
Your analogy is rather poor. Mass Effect is more like sex than a test. The first was good foreplay, the second was good... fuck it, thrust, and at the last second before climax, you get a cramp, stop moving and the whole experience gets eaten by your muscles painfully tensing.
And I didn't say it should get a low score, you did. The glowing praise it's getting from the "professionals" is just as bad as the vote bombing because the reviews declare it perfect/near-perfect and there's an absolute shitstorm going on over the endings, Tali's face and the wallpaper thing. Edge, Giantbomb and Destructoid gave the best reviews because they better quantified the problems.
Even the fucking biodrones are pissed off at this shit.
But I don't feel like the ending does invalidate the journey. The ending I chose may not have been ideal, but I certainly didn't feel like it negated my efforts up until that point.
That makes you like one of five people though. Everyone else is over here [http://social.bioware.com/forum/Mass-Effect-3/Mass-Effect-3-Gameplay-Discussion-Spoilers-allowed/So-we-can039t-get-the-ending-we-want-after-all-9512916-1.html].
Lemme ask something. Did you restart from the save point or cross-reference with someone else that got a different ending?
Huh? I'm sorry, I don't understand your question. I just played straight through and made my selection from the three options available to me at the end point.
When the destination invalidates the journey, you're going to basically regret everything you've done. That's not just me talking, that's the testimony of a thousand posts on the Bioware forums.
Your analogy is rather poor. Mass Effect is more like sex than a test. The first was good foreplay, the second was good... fuck it, thrust, and at the last second before climax, you get a cramp, stop moving and the whole experience gets eaten by your muscles painfully tensing.
And I didn't say it should get a low score, you did. The glowing praise it's getting from the "professionals" is just as bad as the vote bombing because the reviews declare it perfect/near-perfect and there's an absolute shitstorm going on over the endings, Tali's face and the wallpaper thing. Edge, Giantbomb and Destructoid gave the best reviews because they better quantified the problems.
Even the fucking biodrones are pissed off at this shit.
But I don't feel like the ending does invalidate the journey. The ending I chose may not have been ideal, but I certainly didn't feel like it negated my efforts up until that point.
That makes you like one of five people though. Everyone else is over here [http://social.bioware.com/forum/Mass-Effect-3/Mass-Effect-3-Gameplay-Discussion-Spoilers-allowed/So-we-can039t-get-the-ending-we-want-after-all-9512916-1.html].
Lemme ask something. Did you restart from the save point or cross-reference with someone else that got a different ending?
Huh? I'm sorry, I don't understand your question. I just played straight through and made my selection from the three options available to me at the end point.
I believe it would have been very wise to reload the game and choose a different ending to ascertain the impact of the endings. It should have been a pretty big indication of something going amiss if the game let you choose different endings (a la Human Revolution) without regarding anything but your input at that point. Yeah, the EMS thing and squadmate choices change the tone of the ending but...
Everyone is still fucked and the only tangible differences in the ending cutscenes are alterations in the relay colors.
There's rumors that there is a "best" ending, (but everyone is still screwed) but the dedicated people, the ones that did everything right (peace, scanning, paragon options) still couldn't get it.
It's more important that people hear about the straight up facts than personal experience. It's fine that you enjoyed it, but as a reviewer, you should have gone back to get an idea about the alternate endings if they were readily available. You're not obligated to play the game 50 times, but something as simple as a quickload falls more under professional obligation for two reasons:
A. Because it would have taken about 20 minutes and given you a lot of foresight as to why everybody's so pissed off.
2. Because you probably knew people would want to play through multiple times.
I challenge the review because it would have been obvious how serious it is that Bioware copy-pasted the cutscene with minimal inklings as to what actually happened (again, other than everyone is screwed.) People on the Bioware soc forums are clamoring for closure which they felt they didn't get. Hell, even /v/ is pissed off about that one thing in particular.
Also, it was probably worth discussing the multiplayer. Probably should have played the demo multiplayer (which was separate from the single player, I believe) because there's a metric fuckton of confusion on what EMS and GRR are and how Bioware either outright lied about not needing to play the multi or skirting the issue and making it nigh impossible (at least without an online guide or DLC, the former being immersion breaking and the latter being greed). Either way, it was a really bad design choice that should have been addressed.
When the destination invalidates the journey, you're going to basically regret everything you've done. That's not just me talking, that's the testimony of a thousand posts on the Bioware forums.
Your analogy is rather poor. Mass Effect is more like sex than a test. The first was good foreplay, the second was good... fuck it, thrust, and at the last second before climax, you get a cramp, stop moving and the whole experience gets eaten by your muscles painfully tensing.
And I didn't say it should get a low score, you did. The glowing praise it's getting from the "professionals" is just as bad as the vote bombing because the reviews declare it perfect/near-perfect and there's an absolute shitstorm going on over the endings, Tali's face and the wallpaper thing. Edge, Giantbomb and Destructoid gave the best reviews because they better quantified the problems.
Even the fucking biodrones are pissed off at this shit.
But I don't feel like the ending does invalidate the journey. The ending I chose may not have been ideal, but I certainly didn't feel like it negated my efforts up until that point.
That makes you like one of five people though. Everyone else is over here [http://social.bioware.com/forum/Mass-Effect-3/Mass-Effect-3-Gameplay-Discussion-Spoilers-allowed/So-we-can039t-get-the-ending-we-want-after-all-9512916-1.html].
Lemme ask something. Did you restart from the save point or cross-reference with someone else that got a different ending?
Huh? I'm sorry, I don't understand your question. I just played straight through and made my selection from the three options available to me at the end point.
I believe it would have been very wise to reload the game and choose a different ending to ascertain the impact of the endings. It should have been a pretty big indication of something going amiss if the game let you choose different endings (a la Human Revolution) without regarding anything but your input at that point. Yeah, the EMS thing and squadmate choices change the tone of the ending but...
Everyone is still fucked and the only tangible differences in the ending cutscenes are alterations in the relay colors.
There's rumors that there is a "best" ending, (but everyone is still screwed) but the dedicated people, the ones that did everything right (peace, scanning, paragon options) still couldn't get it.
It's more important that people hear about the straight up facts than personal experience. It's fine that you enjoyed it, but as a reviewer, you should have gone back to get an idea about the alternate endings if they were readily available. You're not obligated to play the game 50 times, but something as simple as a quickload falls more under professional obligation for two reasons:
A. Because it would have taken about 20 minutes and given you a lot of foresight as to why everybody's so pissed off.
2. Because you probably knew people would want to play through multiple times.
I challenge the review because it would have been obvious how serious it is that Bioware copy-pasted the cutscene with minimal inklings as to what actually happened (again, other than everyone is screwed.) People on the Bioware soc forums are clamoring for closure which they felt they didn't get. Hell, even /v/ is pissed off about that one thing in particular.
Also, it was probably worth discussing the multiplayer. Probably should have played the demo multiplayer (which was separate from the single player, I believe) because there's a metric fuckton of confusion on what EMS and GRR are and how Bioware either outright lied about not needing to play the multi or skirting the issue and making it nigh impossible (at least without an online guide or DLC, the former being immersion breaking and the latter being greed). Either way, it was a really bad design choice that should have been addressed.
With regard to the multiplayer, I didn't have access to the multiplayer that was part of the game, and couldn't in good conscience review the demo. I can't say to people "the multiplayer is a great part of the game" if I haven't actually played it, and I can't base my opinion of something in the retail copy of the game on something that isn't in the retail copy of the game.
With regard to the multiplayer, I didn't have access to the multiplayer that was part of the game, and couldn't in good conscience review the demo. I can't say to people "the multiplayer is a great part of the game" if I haven't actually played it, and I can't base my opinion of something in the retail copy of the game on something that isn't in the retail copy of the game.
You can't say the multiplayer was good if you didn't play it. You could have said that the multiplayer was whatever you thought it was in the demo and then given that as a base of reference for how it would probably function in retail while simultaneously excusing yourself on the tentativeness of your claim. At that point, you have informed the audience and preserved your journalistic integrity.
My primary concern with professional reviews is that they aren't comprehensive enough to actually be usable as guides for buyers and are more critical marketing than anything else.
I'm proud of the Escapist for not having jumped on the retard bandwagon and given a flawed game a perfect score (like a quarter of the professional morons did), but I also have to acknowledge that a website like Giant Bomb better articulated their review.
As for the rest of my arguments? What Arendt you telling me?
With regard to the multiplayer, I didn't have access to the multiplayer that was part of the game, and couldn't in good conscience review the demo. I can't say to people "the multiplayer is a great part of the game" if I haven't actually played it, and I can't base my opinion of something in the retail copy of the game on something that isn't in the retail copy of the game.
You can't say the multiplayer was good if you didn't play it. You could have said that the multiplayer was whatever you thought it was in the demo and then given that as a base of reference for how it would probably function in retail while simultaneously excusing yourself on the tentativeness of your claim. At that point, you have informed the audience and preserved your journalistic integrity.
My primary concern with professional reviews is that they aren't comprehensive enough to actually be usable as guides for buyers and are more critical marketing than anything else.
I'm proud of the Escapist for not having jumped on the retard bandwagon and given a flawed game a perfect score (like a quarter of the professional morons did), but I also have to acknowledge that a website like Giant Bomb better articulated their review.
As for the rest of my arguments? What Arendt you telling me?
I'm not going to theorize in an official review about how something may or may not function based on a demo. That's irresponsible. I informed the audience that I didn't have the opportunity to try it, and therefore didn't have an opinion. That was the correct thing to do.
As for the replaying the endings, you're free to disagree, but I feel no responsibility to have played through them all before doing the review. I didn't explore a number of options that happen in the game - certain players are having an experience with Tali that I did not, for example.
I don't feel like the ending I got, even though I don't like it, negates the positive experience I had during the the 35 hours that led up to it. If other people feel like they wasted 35 hours of playtime because of how things wrapped up, I understand their point of view, but do not share it.
I do think that the game was a bit rushed, it's buggier and has more oversights and cut corners than the last two, from what I've encountered so far (typos, glitchy graphics, people not appearing in dialogue, broken animations, etc.) but that only tells me that the developers were under a lot of stress and deadlines, so they focused on the important parts. And that shows - I can easily get over a volus speaking with his head glitched into his suit if it means that the actual game content is superb!
The same thing obviously applies to DA2 as well, given its absurdly short development cycle, though I thought its cut corners were a little more crippling. Nothing that you couldn't get over if you immersed yourself, but the flaws prevented a lot of people from doing so. Still, "art from adversity," and I think both titles, DA2 and ME3, take more narrative risks than their predecessors.
Could I ask Ms. Arendt what exactly prevented the game from a full-five-stars rating? I agree with it, since I felt (mind you, I'm only a few hours into it) that the combat is a bit poorly optimized in comparison to ME2 - cover became less important, with enemy grenades, melee attackers, advancing troops with shields, attacks from 2 or even 3 sides and weapon penetration. But the game doesn't seem to give the player more shields to compensate, and dispatching enemies now seems a bit... grindy. Also, the cover/roll/sprint/use controls often interfere with one another.
On the narrative front, I find it just... sublime. I had no idea BW would incorporate so many choices from previous games, and it doesn't stop to amaze me how long-forgotten ME1 sidequests that I did in 2008 come back to affect the War Effort in ME3. Plus, interactions with squadmates and love interests seem more organic than ever, which I really appreciate since ME2's felt like periodical dialogue-dispensers. The choices I had to make so far were both challenging and introspective, as well as having unforeseeable consequences, wholly independent of the paragon/renegade axis. By now I already have a lot of regrets in hindsight, which makes for a bittersweet experience, in line with the idea that "you won't save the galaxy without blood on your hands." I also really like the cracks appearing in Shepard; I get the feeling that he won't survive this war intact, if he even makes it.
Could I ask Ms. Arendt what exactly prevented the game from a full-five-stars rating? I agree with it, since I felt (mind you, I'm only a few hours into it) that the combat is a bit poorly optimized in comparison to ME2 - cover became less important, with enemy grenades, melee attackers, advancing troops with shields, attacks from 2 or even 3 sides and weapon penetration. But the game doesn't seem to give the player more shields to compensate, and dispatching enemies now seems a bit... grindy. Also, the cover/roll/sprint/use controls often interfere with one another.
Iffy controls in combat (not terrible, but not silky, either), problematic AI during combat, and graphical glitches. I could live with the glitches, but the AI actually made the game harder in places and less fun to play.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
