Aww thats cute, we all know that if an RPG isn't slow as fuck, has bad combat, a 50 hour long inventory and skill system then the hardcore RPGers will complain because Bioware changed the demographicBebus said:Oh, and can we please set this straight, right now. HAVING GOOD COMBAT DOES NOT MAKE A GAME ANY LESS OF AN RPG.
Oh God I know, I mean I know next to nothing about this game but, really, making games lots of people want to buy a play? Who does that anymore? When are developers going learn money is, like, evil or something.CosmicCommander said:And so we see what was once a promising and intelligent franchise descend into populism and stupidity. All for the "awesome", of course.
So, I agree with you mostly. But ME1 was definitely paced a bit differently. I could see how it could appear more intelligent to someone because there's a significant amount of mystery that is slowly revealed over the course of the game. ME2 is smart and well written, in my opinion, but it's lighter on the mystery and heavier on the action.rsvp42 said:Odd. The game wasn't any smarter in the first installment than in the second (or apparently the third from what we know). I see this a lot though. I really want to know what was so appealing about a clunky and overburdened inventory system that makes people say this. Because that and the Mako were the only parts that were really dropped in ME2.CosmicCommander said:And so we see what was once a promising and intelligent franchise descend into populism and stupidity. All for the "awesome", of course.
Meh...BlueSinbad said:Meh....I played the first two, but meh, I'll probably play this one, but meh...I'm losing interest in a LOT of games...'tis a sad say.
Must have been a typo. EA took my god damn money for the PC version of Mass Effect 3, and they still have a release date. Originally, though, it was supposed to be released in December 2011...why the push forward, and what's going to be cut?God said:Way to only say 360 and PS3. Let's forget about us folks who prefer our Mass Effect on the PC.
you sir get one free internet because of that quote.ZeroMachine said:Will there be Space Ducks? Can we go to Space Australia?
(Go Space Broncos!)
.
Hadn't really considered it from a story standpoint, though I can see that to a certain degree.Labcoat Samurai said:So, I agree with you mostly. But ME1 was definitely paced a bit differently. I could see how it could appear more intelligent to someone because there's a significant amount of mystery that is slowly revealed over the course of the game. ME2 is smart and well written, in my opinion, but it's lighter on the mystery and heavier on the action.rsvp42 said:Odd. The game wasn't any smarter in the first installment than in the second (or apparently the third from what we know). I see this a lot though. I really want to know what was so appealing about a clunky and overburdened inventory system that makes people say this. Because that and the Mako were the only parts that were really dropped in ME2.CosmicCommander said:And so we see what was once a promising and intelligent franchise descend into populism and stupidity. All for the "awesome", of course.
ME1 asks why the Geth have returned, who the Reapers are, why the Protheans disappeared, and what the Protheans were trying to tell us with the beacon (and those are just the big mysteries). ME2 asks what the collectors are and why they are taking human colonies. In terms of plot, it's more straightforward, but the character work is great, and that's always the main thing that draws me into a story.