A bit too soon to tell I think. I love the concept but it feels like one of the games that may stay stuck in mediocrity for doing things we've seen a dozen times before.
Your first describtion actually had me thinking about Xcom: Enemy Unknown. You can create a full squad of characters in that game but of course it isn't a shooter.
But that's not the point. Something like Mass Effect is all about the singleplayer and the story, and all the budget and development time should go into that. A tacked-on MP like this, even if fun, will never be as good as a game with MP as its focus.
And you couldn't even ignore it, you had to play it to make the ending better which is a horrible design choice.
This indeed. The ME3 multiplayer was mildly enjoying for couple of hours but that's it. If they'd only spend the time and resources adding more content to the single player part of the game. Same pretty much goes for the more recent Dragon Age Inquisition. It feels like EA telling Bioware, you need multiplayer otherwise we lose out on a potential 2,5% buyers...
As a player I do feel slightly cheated with all the DLC and especially the future DLC plans. Things like skins don't have a real bearing on the gameplay but different characters definitely do. You pay the initial (hefty) price for a game that starts to feel like a money making platform for the developers who lock any new/additional content behind the proverbial DLC paywall. It's not that I am against DLC altogether but Turtle Rock has states in several instances that "Evolve was built from the ground up to support DLC". With the expansive DLC catalogue at launch this only adds to the feeling of using the game, for which you paid in the first place, as a means to make more and more money. Personally I'd prefer if developers go back to old school expansions, adding a large amount of content to a game for what used to be 30 to 40 dollars/euro, but I guess given the relative succes of DLC that isn't going to happen.
DA2 is a lot different from origins as you've obviously already gathered. It's in no way an improvement over the original but not a bad game in its own right. I have to admit that I liked the more personal storyline focus of DA2.
It's quite possible that they'd announce a new Elder Scrolls game. 5 years between Oblivion and Skyrim, so an announcement this year would be spot on. I am still having loads of fun with Skyrim but hey a new installment in the Elder Scrolls series would be awesome.
lol that's just silly. Take something that's popular and put it in a totally unrelated game. I can't imagine this drawing any ME3 to FF or the other way around.
[QUOTE="IndianaJones414"]The ending was not bad, it was just to over complicated, and i think they put to much effort into it. The game itself was great, but to me the they have put more effort on the battle on Earth and less on the actual ending. KeredsBlaze
I didn't love the ending, but it doesn't bug me that much either, so it is left open to interpretation, big deal. This is still probably the best game I have ever played
I've finally managed to finish the game for the first time just now. I think you quote sums it up nicely Indiana, the ending isn't necessarily bad... it's just way too convoluted. I saw some new about Bioware perhaps planning to change the ending or write an alternate ending. Despite the fact that this isn't the perfect ending I had in mind I hope they don't. They made the choice to end the game like this and they should stick with it. Changing the ending would ruin any of their credibility.
Log in to comment