Mass Effect 3 Review

[BaronIveagh]

But as I've said before, you go ahead and believe what you like. You clearly have decided that because my opinion differs from yours, I was influenced in some nefarious or unethical way. People see what they want to see, and believing that someone is dishonest is more interesting than believing they're honest.

LOL

Nothing nefarious or unethical about it. It's how people's brains work. In the old days they called it being too close to the story. Science calls it the Uncertainty Principal. You influence people and events without ever knowing or realizing it, let alone deliberately setting out to do it.

 

[Susan Arendt]

But as I've said before, you go ahead and believe what you like. You clearly have decided that because my opinion differs from yours, I was influenced in some nefarious or unethical way. People see what they want to see, and believing that someone is dishonest is more interesting than believing they're honest.

LOL

Nothing nefarious or unethical about it. It's how people's brains work. In the old days they called it being too close to the story. Science calls it the Uncertainty Principal. You influence people and events without ever knowing or realizing it, let alone deliberately setting out to do it.

You've previously suggested it was at the behest of my employer, which would count as nefarious and unethical. You've offered different theories for why my review reads the way it does, discounting the most obvious one: It's how I actually feel about the game.

There's no conspiracy, no graft, no collusion. I just think it's a kick-ass game.

 

[Yureina]

Good review, though i'll admit I did wish that this game would suck so i'd feel slightly better about my refusal to buy it over principle. I don't care if EA will never know who I am: I will not be strongarmed.

As for the people here who are saying that Susan might have been bribed by EA to give this game a good review.... fuck off. Seriously. I may have wanted this game to fail for my own reasons, but I'm not going to ride the denial and bullshit train THAT far.

Maybe i'll get this game... someday... when it's not on Origin.

 

[deathbydeath]

i'm actually going to need a plot analysis before i throw down my money. I'm still paranoid after that shit they pulled in ME2

Its the same game. Right down to the planet scanning

Oh joy. Can't wait for the Spoiler Warning season, then.

 

[deathbydeath]

But as I've said before, you go ahead and believe what you like. You clearly have decided that because my opinion differs from yours, I was influenced in some nefarious or unethical way. People see what they want to see, and believing that someone is dishonest is more interesting than believing they're honest.

LOL

Nothing nefarious or unethical about it. It's how people's brains work. In the old days they called it being too close to the story. Science calls it the Uncertainty Principal. You influence people and events without ever knowing or realizing it, let alone deliberately setting out to do it.

You've previously suggested it was at the behest of my employer, which would count as nefarious and unethical. You've offered different theories for why my review reads the way it does, discounting the most obvious one: It's how I actually feel about the game.

There's no conspiracy, no graft, no collusion. I just think it's a kick-ass game.

Aww, what's wrong with conspiracies?

 

[The Wooster]

Susan, the problem is that I've been told what to write by my bosses about more then one EA release. DA2 was a 'GOTY' and a '9 out of 10' before they ever let me see it, because EA was dumping more advertising dollars on us then God. Then I got to play it and it sucked.

Which publication do you work for?

 

[drednoahl]

If a game gets a really high score and I disagree with that score A LOT, I feel cheated because I work damn hard for my money. Squad doing a bunk all the time and characters doing a bunk from cut scenes in a game where story immersion is so important = 4.5stars. Really? It sounds like another AAA game released unfinished to me.

 

[Susan Arendt]

But as I've said before, you go ahead and believe what you like. You clearly have decided that because my opinion differs from yours, I was influenced in some nefarious or unethical way. People see what they want to see, and believing that someone is dishonest is more interesting than believing they're honest.

LOL

Nothing nefarious or unethical about it. It's how people's brains work. In the old days they called it being too close to the story. Science calls it the Uncertainty Principal. You influence people and events without ever knowing or realizing it, let alone deliberately setting out to do it.

You've previously suggested it was at the behest of my employer, which would count as nefarious and unethical. You've offered different theories for why my review reads the way it does, discounting the most obvious one: It's how I actually feel about the game.

There's no conspiracy, no graft, no collusion. I just think it's a kick-ass game.

Aww, what's wrong with conspiracies?

They have really crappy health care. Seriously, the copay is outrageous and there's no dental coverage to speak of. I mean, I realize it's tough to have a good HR department when, you know, nobody's really allowed to talk to each other, but still!

 

[deathbydeath]

But as I've said before, you go ahead and believe what you like. You clearly have decided that because my opinion differs from yours, I was influenced in some nefarious or unethical way. People see what they want to see, and believing that someone is dishonest is more interesting than believing they're honest.

LOL

Nothing nefarious or unethical about it. It's how people's brains work. In the old days they called it being too close to the story. Science calls it the Uncertainty Principal. You influence people and events without ever knowing or realizing it, let alone deliberately setting out to do it.

You've previously suggested it was at the behest of my employer, which would count as nefarious and unethical. You've offered different theories for why my review reads the way it does, discounting the most obvious one: It's how I actually feel about the game.

There's no conspiracy, no graft, no collusion. I just think it's a kick-ass game.

Aww, what's wrong with conspiracies?

They have really crappy health care. Seriously, the copay is outrageous and there's no dental coverage to speak of. I mean, I realize it's tough to have a good HR department when, you know, nobody's really allowed to talk to each other, but still!

Man, I had the Deus Ex theme in my head and everything...

 

[Snotnarok]

My problem with the game is the price and what you spend and what you get:

To compare:

Mass Effect 2 Collectors: Game, Metal Tin, making of DVD, a small cool fold out thing containing: Art book, small comic book, DLC codes
60USD(PC)

Mass Effect 3 Special Edition: Game, metal tin, small comic book, art book, post card "lithograph", N7 velcro patch (with no opposite end to stick), DLC code for armor, Day1 DLC mission that people are angry that it didn't come with the game in the first place, digital soundtrack.
80USD(PC)

But that's not so much about the game as it is pricing and content, I'm about to start my game up now actually.

 

[BlueInkAlchemist]

But as I've said before, you go ahead and believe what you like. You clearly have decided that because my opinion differs from yours, I was influenced in some nefarious or unethical way. People see what they want to see, and believing that someone is dishonest is more interesting than believing they're honest.

LOL

Nothing nefarious or unethical about it. It's how people's brains work. In the old days they called it being too close to the story. Science calls it the Uncertainty Principal. You influence people and events without ever knowing or realizing it, let alone deliberately setting out to do it.

You've previously suggested it was at the behest of my employer, which would count as nefarious and unethical. You've offered different theories for why my review reads the way it does, discounting the most obvious one: It's how I actually feel about the game.

There's no conspiracy, no graft, no collusion. I just think it's a kick-ass game.

Aww, what's wrong with conspiracies?

They have really crappy health care. Seriously, the copay is outrageous and there's no dental coverage to speak of. I mean, I realize it's tough to have a good HR department when, you know, nobody's really allowed to talk to each other, but still!

Have you talked to Mr. Page Bob? He seems to know what's up. Nice guy, too, at least from the conversations I've had with him.

 

[Andy Chalk]

Even when it is not justified, you should take it.

Is that some kind of joke?

 

[PingoBlack]

Is that some kind of joke?

No, it wasn't. Even out of context like you quoted, it was not a joke. I was talking about reactions. The yellow named peoples reactions.

 

[Susan Arendt]

If a game gets a really high score and I disagree with that score A LOT, I feel cheated because I work damn hard for my money. Squad doing a bunk all the time and characters doing a bunk from cut scenes in a game where story immersion is so important = 4.5stars. Really? It sounds like another AAA game released unfinished to me.

It's not all the time, but it does happen. Characters went missing from cutscenes twice, total, in my 35 hour playthrough. Not omnipresent, but something that needed to be mentioned.

There are definitely technical issues in the game, which is why it's not a 5.

 

[Andy Chalk]

Andy's review of one of the last trailers positively gushed with enthusiasm. I don't begrudge him that, but the problem is that it came through in his article.

Of course it came through. It was meant to come through. It was an awesome trailer.

Seriously, who comes to a videogame site without the desire to share enthusiasm and excitement? Why would you bother?

 

[BaronIveagh]

You've previously suggested it was at the behest of my employer, which would count as nefarious and unethical. You've offered different theories for why my review reads the way it does, discounting the most obvious one: It's how I actually feel about the game.

There's no conspiracy, no graft, no collusion. I just think it's a kick-ass game.

And since you argued against it, I was willing to concede the point, but you seem to have missed that. However, my other point still stands, do you think it's a kick ass game because it is, or because the opinions of others have colored your own opinion?

For example, I know my own opinion was tainted before I played the game, and it cast it in a much more negative light.

Which publication do you work for?

Currently I don't work for a publication, (unless you count Dark Reign).

Which one this particular one was I'd have to actually go look, and frankly an argument on a forum isn't worth the effort of digging through 24 filing cabinets. If I remember right it was down in PA or Western New York, but that doesn't really narrow it down. I do remember they are out of business, because I remember thinking 'good riddance'.

 

[The Wooster]

Andy's review of one of the last trailers positively gushed with enthusiasm. I don't begrudge him that, but the problem is that it came through in his article.

That's ridiculous, Andy isn't capable of enthusiasm. Or gushing. Or any other human emotion for that matter.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

I'm enjoying the game so far, sadly the multiplayer is a little broken right now.
Some people (myself included) are experiencing lost weapons/characters; and there are some problems with setting certain match choices. A bioware employee on their forums said they were looking into it hopefully they'll figure it out soon, I'm unfortunately stuck with having my Quarian Infiltrator locked out to me.

Do you mean lost weapons and characters that you got from the demo multiplayer? Because, the word was that stuff from the demo multiplayer wouldn't transfer to the actual multiplayer.

 

[Erttheking]

The Escapist gave this game 4 & 1/2 stars and said that the ending was epic...the ESCAPIST this incredibly hard to please website, founded on the basis of giving straight up reviews, says that this game is awesome...all fears that I had about this game being bad have officially been obliterated. Oh, and I think my DLC just finished downloading. Time to take Earth back.

 

[Susan Arendt]

You've previously suggested it was at the behest of my employer, which would count as nefarious and unethical. You've offered different theories for why my review reads the way it does, discounting the most obvious one: It's how I actually feel about the game.

There's no conspiracy, no graft, no collusion. I just think it's a kick-ass game.

And since you argued against it, I was willing to concede the point, but you seem to have missed that. However, my other point still stands, do you think it's a kick ass game because it is, or because the opinions of others have colored your own opinion?

I did miss that, yes. Point me to it.

Not sure what opinions of others I was meant to have been exposed to, or why you assume I'm so unprofessional that I'd just let others' unfounded experiences impact what I told readers who trust me.

The Escapist gave this game 4 & 1/2 stars and said that the ending was epic...the ESCAPIST this incredibly hard to please website, founded on the basis of giving straight up reviews, says that this game is awesome...all fears that I had about this game being bad have officially been obliterated. Oh, and I think my DLC just finished downloading. Time to take Earth back.

Just to be clear, I didn't reference the ending of the game at all. I said that it's a great ending to the Mass Effect trilogy of games.