Ventilaator
Banned
I stopped playing the game a couple hours in because it was terrible. The "Game is amazing except for the last five minutes" crowd baffles me.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Mass Effect 3: Just a bad ending? (Spoilers)
- Thread starter Sojgat
- Start date
The ending's pretty naff and by the time they released the updated one I'd basically forgotten aspects of the original so I didn't get much satisfaction out of the changes. With that said, the game itself is fine. It's mechanically as sound as Mass Effect 2 and better than Mass Effect 1 (the shooting and all that), but both 1 and 2 were better with side quests and generally immersing you into the world. That puts the overall experience for 3 below 1 and 2 and makes it a bit disappointing but it's unfair to call it a bad game IMO because I did enjoy playing it.
Oh and multiplayer's much better than I think anyone expected it to be.
Oh and multiplayer's much better than I think anyone expected it to be.
Monocle
Member
A whirlwind of nitpicking has consumed ME3, even though the game might be better than ME2 overall. ME3 has great missions, a seriously great soundtrack, appealing environments, outstanding dialogue, fun gameplay, no weird mission structure, no lame scanning minigame, and so on. In particular, the Tuchanka section and the Legion mission are real highlights.
Two especially strong aspects of ME3 are its character building and side stories. You have Liara and her father, EDI's often hilarious development as a squadmate, Joker's sister (look it up, it's easy to miss), Thane's death, Shepard and Garrus's moment of solidarity on the Citadel, Garrus and Tali's engine room scene (one of the best things to come out of the whole series), a creepy and memorable mission that wraps up Samara's storyline, Mordin and the Genophage cure, the Geth and the Quarians, the gay technician guy on the Normandy, and lots more. All well written, all respectful to the history of the characters concerned. In fact, the main plot and even the ending is quite good up until the space wizard part. Shepard and Anderson's conversation on the Citadel is one of the highest points in all of Mass Effect.
I don't know how to account for the wildly overblown hatred directed toward this game except to suppose that the most outspoken people 1) blazed through the main story path without taking the time to listen to much of the dialogue, 2) have highly selective memories and simply tuned out everything that wasn't directly influenced by their choices in previous games, 3) had unrealistic expectations for the way their choices would be reflected in the resolutions of major plot points, or 4) made up their minds to despise the game before playing it based on all of the online vitriol.
It was good of Bioware to address fans' disappointment by releasing extended endings. What's less praiseworthy is the fan response that prompted that gesture: the embarrassing sense of entitlement, the outlandish hyperbole, and the laughable generalizations of people who said and continue to say stupid, untrue things like "the whole game is shit."
Two especially strong aspects of ME3 are its character building and side stories. You have Liara and her father, EDI's often hilarious development as a squadmate, Joker's sister (look it up, it's easy to miss), Thane's death, Shepard and Garrus's moment of solidarity on the Citadel, Garrus and Tali's engine room scene (one of the best things to come out of the whole series), a creepy and memorable mission that wraps up Samara's storyline, Mordin and the Genophage cure, the Geth and the Quarians, the gay technician guy on the Normandy, and lots more. All well written, all respectful to the history of the characters concerned. In fact, the main plot and even the ending is quite good up until the space wizard part. Shepard and Anderson's conversation on the Citadel is one of the highest points in all of Mass Effect.
I don't know how to account for the wildly overblown hatred directed toward this game except to suppose that the most outspoken people 1) blazed through the main story path without taking the time to listen to much of the dialogue, 2) have highly selective memories and simply tuned out everything that wasn't directly influenced by their choices in previous games, 3) had unrealistic expectations for the way their choices would be reflected in the resolutions of major plot points, or 4) made up their minds to despise the game before playing it based on all of the online vitriol.
It was good of Bioware to address fans' disappointment by releasing extended endings. What's less praiseworthy is the fan response that prompted that gesture: the embarrassing sense of entitlement, the outlandish hyperbole, and the laughable generalizations of people who said and continue to say stupid, untrue things like "the whole game is shit."
It needed another year in development and a different set of writers. It's linear, the dialogue choices and content are reduced, the story is complete drivel even compared to ME2 (Kai Leng looool), there is an utter lack of enemy variety, corners are cut everywhere ('overhearing' quests where you just have to scan a planet, Tali's face, Morinth), EDI's horrendous sexbot form, no holstering or film grain, Vega, Thane's laughable death plus an ending that the developers knew was so bad they had to totally lie about it before release.
In a horrible final insult the multiplayer ended up being the best part of the game.
In a horrible final insult the multiplayer ended up being the best part of the game.
greendomo's ghost
Member
Mechanically the gameplay is the best of the series.
In terms of emotional satisfaction on a story level it's the worst.
It has its flaws, but I was willing to overlook them. Until the ending. The ending didn't work for me on a number of levels, logically it didn't make much sense, structurally it felt cheap introducing a major new plot point at the eleventh hour...but I think I could've even ignored those as well, if I'd felt emotionally satisfied. And I did. Up until 10 minutes before the end.
At that point, they gave me some choices. Choices my character would not make, or settle for. Choices my character had fought against throughout the entire series. He had been told time and time again, "This is how it works", and every time he had fought against fate, or found another solution that no one else could see.
But here, at the end he was mute. He'd given up. He blindly accepted what he was told. He did not fight for his beliefs. He had to compromise one of them.
This is the main reason why ME3 was so disappointing to me.
In terms of emotional satisfaction on a story level it's the worst.
It has its flaws, but I was willing to overlook them. Until the ending. The ending didn't work for me on a number of levels, logically it didn't make much sense, structurally it felt cheap introducing a major new plot point at the eleventh hour...but I think I could've even ignored those as well, if I'd felt emotionally satisfied. And I did. Up until 10 minutes before the end.
At that point, they gave me some choices. Choices my character would not make, or settle for. Choices my character had fought against throughout the entire series. He had been told time and time again, "This is how it works", and every time he had fought against fate, or found another solution that no one else could see.
But here, at the end he was mute. He'd given up. He blindly accepted what he was told. He did not fight for his beliefs. He had to compromise one of them.
This is the main reason why ME3 was so disappointing to me.
yankeehater
Member
If is the GotG for me. The mp is amazing and Bioware keeps releasing free DLC for it.
I can understand that you think the game is disappointing after the awesomeness that was ME2, but 'terrible'? I don't get this logic.
Let's take the opening 20 minutes for example. Horrendous writing, hilarious running animations, and that forced scene with the kid in the vents (who lots of people's Shepherd's wouldn't give a single shit about). It did just about everything wrong and that's just the opening.
Compare that to the opening of the first game.
BurnOutBrighter
Banned
Oh man. So true. Even with the awful pay2win slot machine, the multiplayer was actually better than my expectations.
Monocle
Member
If you're frightened by the idea of enjoying nerdy entertainment, video games probably aren't for you. Also, steer clear of books. Someone might see you reading and confuse you for a nerd.
Choose your own adventure was the name of the game.
eot
Banned
I'm with you all the way. For all the complaints about the ending and mechanical problems with the game, the biggest reason I didn't enjoy it as much was frankly because most missions were uninspired. The priority missions were usually alright because they focused on something you cared about and involved characters you cared about. The stuff you did around them though, which made up the bulk of the game, was just so bland. Defusing an ancient Turian bomb on Tuchanka could be interesting, but the main character of that subplot is some random Turian with as much depth as a shopkeeper. Story wise it's less interesting than some of ME2's side missions that just told their stories through text. It felt so disjointed. So many of the missions have absolutely no setup, you just go somewhere not knowing what to expect, and then you find Reapers / Cerberus and get a tiny bit of story that never ties back into anything. ME2's missions were also quite self contained but they had way more story than most ME3 missions (just pick any recruitment or loyalty mission) and they revolved around characters that had a lot more depth than some Quarian general you talk to for 10 seconds and will never care about.
I think people acknowledge that there were some good character moments, some of the best in the series even, but they don't make up the bulk of the game.
It's all been said before but it's on my mind right now:
-Botched the opening as well as the ending, both left an equally negative impression on me
-Dream sequences fell flat, almost laughable attempt at empathy
-Conversation wheel felt like it was on autopilot. Exhaust questions, then up or down depending on paragon or renegade to move things forward. If there's a blue or red option you always pick it, a trigger you pull it. It's the system they've established but it felt especially restrictive and thoughtless here, perhaps due to other titles improving on the formula since ME1.
-Offputting pandering to the primary male audience (EDI gets a sexbot outfit, Jessica Chobot joins your crew so you can flirt with her and maybe do news?)
-Ashley/Kaiden and Vega were uninteresting as characters and crew members
-Eavesdropping for busywork sidequests, N7 multiplayer map "missions"
-Making a major crew memeber and exposition that directly sets up the ending of the game paid DLC
-Character animation is all over the place, plenty of uncanny valley moments
ME3 also did a lot of things right - there's scenes and conversations large and small that flesh out the conflict, some of the character reunions were cool with nice payoffs/sendoffs, skyboxes and locations are quite nice to look at and the shooting is as good as it's ever been for the series. Didn't have a huge problem with the way they dealt with earlier choices in my playthrough, though I can see it being more glaring if I'd done some things differently. I don't even mind the hokey, action movie writing since I've always felt Mass Effect has been silly that way (especially Shepard). Overall it's a pretty good game - not the epic conclusion I had build up in my head, not better than ME2, which was a GOTY contender in my opinion, and not the best RPG of 2012. But pretty damn good.
-Botched the opening as well as the ending, both left an equally negative impression on me
-Dream sequences fell flat, almost laughable attempt at empathy
-Conversation wheel felt like it was on autopilot. Exhaust questions, then up or down depending on paragon or renegade to move things forward. If there's a blue or red option you always pick it, a trigger you pull it. It's the system they've established but it felt especially restrictive and thoughtless here, perhaps due to other titles improving on the formula since ME1.
-Offputting pandering to the primary male audience (EDI gets a sexbot outfit, Jessica Chobot joins your crew so you can flirt with her and maybe do news?)
-Ashley/Kaiden and Vega were uninteresting as characters and crew members
-Eavesdropping for busywork sidequests, N7 multiplayer map "missions"
-Making a major crew memeber and exposition that directly sets up the ending of the game paid DLC
-Character animation is all over the place, plenty of uncanny valley moments
ME3 also did a lot of things right - there's scenes and conversations large and small that flesh out the conflict, some of the character reunions were cool with nice payoffs/sendoffs, skyboxes and locations are quite nice to look at and the shooting is as good as it's ever been for the series. Didn't have a huge problem with the way they dealt with earlier choices in my playthrough, though I can see it being more glaring if I'd done some things differently. I don't even mind the hokey, action movie writing since I've always felt Mass Effect has been silly that way (especially Shepard). Overall it's a pretty good game - not the epic conclusion I had build up in my head, not better than ME2, which was a GOTY contender in my opinion, and not the best RPG of 2012. But pretty damn good.
It's funny because my friend just brought up this game the other day in conversation and we both agreed that this game was really enjoyable despite all of the bad criticism it got.
I thoroughly enjoyed this game in the same way that I liked Dragon Age 2. There were some obvious plot points that could have been handled better, but the world felt like it didn't entirely revolve around Shepard like every single other game in the series led me to believe. Sure, I felt the influence Shepard was able to bring to the table, but not once did I feel like the world would stop if Shepard did.
Mostly, what I think the story and characters did well were bringing back old decisions. They weren't glaringly obvious, but your decisions really did make subtle differences in the game. Talking to my friends about any specific point in the game, we all had different experiences and they all tied into how we played the previous games. That was something that just amazed me to no end.
The gameplay wasn't the deepest or most rewarding I've played, but I felt like it did just enough to make me want to maximize my potential. After that point, I learned where specific actions were most effective and just went from there.
The ending certainly let me down, but somewhere deep down I still try and cling to the indoctrination theory because it was a much better plot fulfillment. I've played through the story once, but that is only because I'm determined to play through with another different character stemming from the first game. I've already experienced new changes going through the second game and look forward to how my experience changes even further in.
Now the game in itself was pretty good by my standards, but the multiplayer puts it over the edge. I love every aspect of it, and think it is a really well done addition to the game. No class has seemed too overpowered, and it has just been a real blast to play.
I thoroughly enjoyed this game in the same way that I liked Dragon Age 2. There were some obvious plot points that could have been handled better, but the world felt like it didn't entirely revolve around Shepard like every single other game in the series led me to believe. Sure, I felt the influence Shepard was able to bring to the table, but not once did I feel like the world would stop if Shepard did.
Mostly, what I think the story and characters did well were bringing back old decisions. They weren't glaringly obvious, but your decisions really did make subtle differences in the game. Talking to my friends about any specific point in the game, we all had different experiences and they all tied into how we played the previous games. That was something that just amazed me to no end.
The gameplay wasn't the deepest or most rewarding I've played, but I felt like it did just enough to make me want to maximize my potential. After that point, I learned where specific actions were most effective and just went from there.
The ending certainly let me down, but somewhere deep down I still try and cling to the indoctrination theory because it was a much better plot fulfillment. I've played through the story once, but that is only because I'm determined to play through with another different character stemming from the first game. I've already experienced new changes going through the second game and look forward to how my experience changes even further in.
Now the game in itself was pretty good by my standards, but the multiplayer puts it over the edge. I love every aspect of it, and think it is a really well done addition to the game. No class has seemed too overpowered, and it has just been a real blast to play.
The opening and the ending are bad, but the rest of the game is fine.
This is more or less how I feel. The game IS diminished relative to the prior entries, even with a better ending this fact won't change, but it's still a pretty enjoyable game and worth checking out if you won't let a bad ending ruin an entire experience for you. But I do think that for GotY or even just RPGotY there's far better choices to be made, whereas ME2 was a very solid choice in 2010.
Man I'd forgotten about the skimmed dialogue "trees".
I seriously struggle to find good things about Mass Effect 3. I mean the soundtrack was great, and I thought the ending was almost perfect with Shepard dying and Anderson telling how proud of you he was, that was actually pretty neat, and a few things like helping the Krogan was kinda cool, but it's a game full of cheap design, cut corners and deeply creatively bankrupt.
Mass Effect 2 was mainstream as hell, but at least it wasn't trashy. I can't understand how they fucked the game up so bad.
...
Well, my theory is multiplayer.
I seriously struggle to find good things about Mass Effect 3. I mean the soundtrack was great, and I thought the ending was almost perfect with Shepard dying and Anderson telling how proud of you he was, that was actually pretty neat, and a few things like helping the Krogan was kinda cool, but it's a game full of cheap design, cut corners and deeply creatively bankrupt.
Mass Effect 2 was mainstream as hell, but at least it wasn't trashy. I can't understand how they fucked the game up so bad.
...
Well, my theory is multiplayer.
A separate company did that as I recall, but at least that may be to blame for the sidequests, given most of those that aren't tied to already established characters or the main mission tended to be either offline multiplayer maps, purely on Citadel things, or scanning planets.
I can, the exact same thing is happening right now with Dead Space and has already happened with Dragon Age.
To think I was excited to play ME3 at one time, but everything I've read makes me not want to play it. Mass Effect 1 is excellent, a little janky at times (Hello MAKO) and it sort of feels a lot like KotoR
"Hey, go to these 4 planets in any order you want so you can get this Starforge-Space-thing and then stop the evil bad guy" vs "Hey go to these 4 planets in any order you want so you can get to the this Conduit-Space Thing and then stop the bad evil guy"
But other than that it was pretty damn awesome.
Two was enjoyable too, throw-away story sure, but it fixed shit from the first, while it added some, sure. In a perfect world, ME3 would have been the perfect blend of 1 and 2. But nope.
Someone ought to make a spiritual sequel to the first ME game, because I'm totally in the market for a deep space-opera RPG done right ):
Which reminds me I haven't beaten KotoR yet!
"Hey, go to these 4 planets in any order you want so you can get this Starforge-Space-thing and then stop the evil bad guy" vs "Hey go to these 4 planets in any order you want so you can get to the this Conduit-Space Thing and then stop the bad evil guy"
But other than that it was pretty damn awesome.
Two was enjoyable too, throw-away story sure, but it fixed shit from the first, while it added some, sure. In a perfect world, ME3 would have been the perfect blend of 1 and 2. But nope.
Someone ought to make a spiritual sequel to the first ME game, because I'm totally in the market for a deep space-opera RPG done right ):
Which reminds me I haven't beaten KotoR yet!
Ventilaator
Banned
What I don't get is the logic that if a game runs and doesn't explode in your face then it can't be worse than mediocre.
It made me appreciate ME1 a lot more, I went back to it and did a lot of exploring after that ending. Even found missions not in my mission log, drove around every planet I could, talked to EVERYBODY, and remembered why I loved the universe so much. It's sad to think about what became of it. Straight from labor-of-love to just-put-enough-to-make-money.
I enjoyed some of ME3, and the music is still nice in all entries of the series.
I think ME2 was mostly finished by the time EA bought them though.
I enjoyed some of ME3, and the music is still nice in all entries of the series.
I think ME2 was mostly finished by the time EA bought them though.
I wonder if budget didn't scale properly for multiplayer or something like that, so they ended up having instead to share, say, 50 million between SP and MP, instead of having it for singleplayer only.
I dunno, I mean, Dragon Age 2 was mostly very short development time, but Mass Effect 2 at least showed that Bioware is capable of delivering a high quality game, even if it's washed down for the mainstream and streamlined to hell and back. Mass Effect 3 is just Dragon Age 2 quality, and it surprises me because I would've guessed EA placed a pretty large bet on the franchise.
Which is...?
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
Those aren't the criteria we're using. We aren't saying "well, it runs, so it's good!" If that's what you think, you may be an idiot.
astroturfing
Member
overall i liked the game, including the ending i got. the sub-plots were especially great, characters were interesting, audiovisually it was pretty good, combat was occasionally really fun etc etc.
my biggest problem were the pointless fetch quests, which were IMO the worst i've ever experienced. i mean they didn't even involve any real gameplay besides walking up to a character to give them the item they wanted, after wandering around the galaxy map and clicking the right planet.. it was beyond pointless to be honest.
oh yeah and the Reapers chasing you on the galaxy map was silly and useless too.
and the game was way too linear, pretty much no sense of exploration or adventure.
my biggest problem were the pointless fetch quests, which were IMO the worst i've ever experienced. i mean they didn't even involve any real gameplay besides walking up to a character to give them the item they wanted, after wandering around the galaxy map and clicking the right planet.. it was beyond pointless to be honest.
oh yeah and the Reapers chasing you on the galaxy map was silly and useless too.
and the game was way too linear, pretty much no sense of exploration or adventure.
EA is making them shit.
TacticalFox88
Banned
Peter Bazooka
Banned
Must be using those Dragon Age DLC assets since I don't recall a forest being one of the three maps in DA2.
Ventilaator
Banned
You aren't literally saying that, but I often see this attitude that "terrible" should only be used for games that are agressively broken.
I find that weird.
I think the logic is that if a game will work as intended then there's always the possibility of someone liking it. At the same time though that sort of thinking can in reverse block 10 rated games as "no game is perfect", so I don't think they should sweat that too much in reviewing something.
eot
Banned
EA published the PC version of ME1 in 2008, so no
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
At the same time though, Bioware is an influential faction inside E.A. They have significant autonomy, although that's something that might change after the TOR debacle. I recall reading that Bioware was spearheading the "Project 10 dollar" stuff, and was enthusiastic for Day One DLC and so on. I'm never one who bought into the "everything good comes from the developer, everything bad comes from the publisher" stuff, and I'm willing to believe that Bioware itself, rather than influence from E.A., was responsible for many of the decisions that people don't like in these games.
And... yeah, just looking into Bioware's history shows this really isn't something that's wholly new and came from EA (and what DA:O and ME2 did was before "online passes" became standard). It does sound like gradually EA sinks in deeper and deeper, or at least that was the case with Origin, but they had LE-exclusive DLC with BGII, DLC as we'd know it with Neverwinter Nights, and even the pre-order version that had extra in-game content with Jade Empire. Yeah, if they weren't bought by EA they'd undoubtedly be doing much of this crap anyway.
The game is somewhere between brilliant "RPG of the year" and awful. Again, Neogaf posters generally have a hard time with a middle ground.
The game fails on some very basic levels. Mass Effects I and II had holstering for Shephard's weapons. There is no excuse for the feature not being in III and it's a big distraction to have your guns drawn when you're trying to explore.
Mass Effect III's quest system is broken. Again, this is an example of how Mass Effects I and II got something simple correctly and III did not. The game made no effort to track a quest's progress and instead of interacting with characters to receive missions, you had to play creeper and pick up what you needed to do by listening in to others' conversations.
Missions were often poorly designed, relying far too heavily on the "hold out until help arrives" mechanic. The sense of urgency all but disappears in the game as Shephard has time to dance on the Citadel while Earth burns. And the game had a great new character in Javik, but only if you paid for him. The character you got for free, James, was a dud.
There's no denying the ending is a turd, too. Even the patched ending is more of the same, only yappier. Mass Effect III had a great ending with Shephard and Anderson bleeding out on the dais, but said F-you to that and instead gave us Space Jesus and some barely coherent video game recreation of the speeches of God and Elihu from the Book of Job.
Now I can understand liking the game. But it's not great, and it's certainly not the RPG of the year for any year.
The game fails on some very basic levels. Mass Effects I and II had holstering for Shephard's weapons. There is no excuse for the feature not being in III and it's a big distraction to have your guns drawn when you're trying to explore.
Mass Effect III's quest system is broken. Again, this is an example of how Mass Effects I and II got something simple correctly and III did not. The game made no effort to track a quest's progress and instead of interacting with characters to receive missions, you had to play creeper and pick up what you needed to do by listening in to others' conversations.
Missions were often poorly designed, relying far too heavily on the "hold out until help arrives" mechanic. The sense of urgency all but disappears in the game as Shephard has time to dance on the Citadel while Earth burns. And the game had a great new character in Javik, but only if you paid for him. The character you got for free, James, was a dud.
There's no denying the ending is a turd, too. Even the patched ending is more of the same, only yappier. Mass Effect III had a great ending with Shephard and Anderson bleeding out on the dais, but said F-you to that and instead gave us Space Jesus and some barely coherent video game recreation of the speeches of God and Elihu from the Book of Job.
Now I can understand liking the game. But it's not great, and it's certainly not the RPG of the year for any year.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
They apparently were so strapped for memory on consoles (I have a feeling this was more PS3 than 360, but no evidence to back that up) that they decided to free up some space in memory by only storing one set of animations at a time, rather than both (different movement animations exist based on whether you're holstered or not). Ergo, a short load necessary to transition.
What they actually have no excuse for is why they couldn't separate the run, use and take cover buttons. How hard would it have been to to hard-code it all as the same button, you fucking idiots? L2Programme
The fact of the matter is if this was any other game then people would have really enjoyed it. Unfortunately, since it was part of a long running franchise, people had an unrealistic amount of expectations. Sure, the ending didn't display every outcome of every character in the universe upon completion but did you really expect an animated ending for every single outcome that could have taken place? There would have been an extra disc dedicated primarily to "End game animations". Not to mention the amount of development time needed to necessitate all of those endings. To have multiple unique ending they would have had to approach it the way fallout does; a slide show with audio narration. This game is an absolute delight to play. Don't buy this game because you like Mass Effect. Instead, buy this game because you like good games.
Monocle
Member
I think this is a fair summary of the game's ups and downs. Good post.
Duallusion
Member
It's a solid 7/10 game, OP. Plus/minus one point can still be justified, depending where you stand. Plus/minus two points if you're being a bit unreasonable/passionate. Plus/minus three points if you're a wacko.
Simples.
Simples.
Sapphire Dreams
Member
After all that been said in this thread, the thing that pisses me off the most is still Jessica Chobot
I'll never see Bioware as the same developers again for this move, I mean why ?!
I'll never see Bioware as the same developers again for this move, I mean why ?!
Tony Redgrave
Member
Game has pros and cons, I love how people lists their complains endlessly but never ever care to mention the improvements. Better visuals, combat, set pieces, character interaction, adds (good) multiplayer, better RPG elements etc...
The game is far from ideal and a testament of how hard it is to produce something as ambitious as a trilogy involving player choice in an industry based on interactive entertainment. It might be disappointing on many levels, but I don't know how anyone can say it's downright bad with a straight face.
The game is far from ideal and a testament of how hard it is to produce something as ambitious as a trilogy involving player choice in an industry based on interactive entertainment. It might be disappointing on many levels, but I don't know how anyone can say it's downright bad with a straight face.
Phat Michael
Banned
Fantastic game and the multiplayer keeps it going and going. I love how salty everyone gets over the ending and how it retroactively made the first 2 games worse (somehow, dont see how that's even possible).
Good community on the 360 still playing it and the first 2 DLCs have been pretty good so far.
Aside from some glitches and a few nerfs/balancing issues its the game ive played most this year and the best game to come out in ages.
Good community on the 360 still playing it and the first 2 DLCs have been pretty good so far.
Aside from some glitches and a few nerfs/balancing issues its the game ive played most this year and the best game to come out in ages.
Phat Michael
Banned
To be honest though, maybe you should go back to school instead of playing so many games.
Both ME3 and Alan Wake were fantastic games.
Duallusion
Member
Well, it did kill interest in replaying through the whole trilogy, but a lot of that has to do with seeing how much your choices actually change, and the rest of the game is more damning there. But those first two are still great and the third is still pretty good, so yeah.