Heres the ending for those who dont care about spoilers

  • 77 results
  • 1
  • 2
#51 Edited by NTM (7263 posts) -

While it wasn't the greatest thing, I wasn't disappointed in the ending, and I didn't think it was 'dumb'. It was certainly better than say... Assassin's Creed 3's. That one was bad. Furthermore, Isaac isn't some kind of chosen one to do these things, he was just a guy in the place, and since he had experience and a past with all of this, that's why he's there, pretty much. I disagree with anyone that says Dead Space doesn't have a good story; when compared to many games, that's just BS.

#52 Edited by SuperCycle (332 posts) -

@Brad: Well, they kind of killed him in the first game too, only to say that Nicole jumping out at him was all a hallucination in the second game, so it never has been stellar storytelling. I really enjoyed Dead Space 3, more than you did, and I don't really see it being as polarizing as the Mass Effect 3 ending. I've always enjoyed the overarching story of the Dead Space games but never once thought they were horror games. I always thought they were third person action games with heavy atmosphere, so the move into heavier action seemed like a natural progression to me. I'm just happy to be killing lots of Necromorphs.

Edit: Just FYI they actually also did the same thing in 2. Isaac sat down accepting his death, credits roll... Then part way through he gets saved.

#53 Posted by Quarters (1628 posts) -

Just beat the game a few minutes ago.

*shrug*

I thought the ending was fine. Overall, it was a great addition to the franchise.

#54 Posted by AiurFlux (901 posts) -

@Brad said:

@JazGalaxy said:

@AiurFlux said:

I'm kind of baffled how people are shocked that Isaac is still alive. It's EA. They've already said they have no plan to make new IP's and intend to rehash the fuck out of everything. If Isaac died there wouldn't be a reason for a lot of people to keep playing Dead Space. Sad but true. People are fucking retarded.

I can't wait to see their stupid decision backfire. I already got my popcorn ready to go. They're bleeding money left and right when it comes to stock prices and they think that cutting out creativity is the answer? What a pile of fucking buffoons.

I don't think anybody is shocked tha Isaac is alive. I think people are just annoyed at how bad the storytelling is. Why "kill him" if he's going to by shown to be alive in the next 5 minutes. It's like modern comic books where they make a big event out of a character death and then don't even pretend that he's going to stay dead for more than a few issues. It makes the whole thing seem cheap and poorly conceived.

Yeah, I found that post-credit bit to be especially pandering. If you're going to have your protagonist sacrifice himself for the greater good, just fucking do it. Kill him. Don't throw in some bullshit fan service "well he MIGHT still be alive!" tease at the end.

That was bad. But the bit after Isaac shoots Norton and tells Ellie was worse. First she's pissed off beyond belief that her partner who essentially abandoned her killed her new partner, but apparently all the time you need to heal a wound like that is the time it takes to rappel up a cliffside and turn on a few elevators. Then Santos dies and it was just a massive, "Meh. This sucks," moment.

The second that all happened I was out. That was the exact moment that the story went from, "Well it's not quite as good as the previous ones, but it's not terrible," to, "Okay. I'm fucking out. Done. Finished. Adios." I've never really had something disconnect me from a story like that bit did. Maybe that's why when I saw the moon and Isaac's heroic resurrection after 5 minutes I didn't care as much.

#55 Posted by Liquidus (946 posts) -

Seems really dumb and uninspired but there's definitely worst endings out there.

#56 Posted by Abendlaender (2761 posts) -

Without context this video is pretty much useless. All I see is that Isaac and that other guy do something to blow something up. Then he "dies" (because protagonists need to die for dramatic reasons) but actually doesn't, big shock. Seems like a pretty standard ending. But when I hear phrases like "giant necromorph moon" I guess there is a little bit more to it

#57 Edited by seannao (223 posts) -

@yinstarrunner:

I actually was interested in the world of Dead Space, especially after Dead Space 2! Part of why humanity was making Markers was because some element of the alien device was solving an energy crisis that threatened to throw human civilization into the dark ages, that even the super-destructive planet cracker mining efforts weren't enough to sustain the story-world's high tech civilization.

Dead Space 3's story turned to some kind of like. Universal Sci-Fi Culling story. Prey had a similar story of harvesting the universe for food, Mass Effect's Reapers wake for the harvest, and Allastair Reynolds' Revelation Space novel series has a similar story for civilization-ending culling (for reasons more similar to Mass Effect, galactic preservation).

So the whole mystery of ~if human civilization will be allowed to continue~ Markers or not, is a mystery. What is for sure, unless they retconned something or I missed something that occurred outside of the main 3 games, is that there are still dozens, if not hundreds of other Marker sites (the reason for which is explained in Dead Space 3), throughout the network of human civilization...

So is humanity still using Marker-based technology to keep from withering and dying? Who knows? It wasn't apparently important in the third game's story to show the Player any more of that information.

It was like: Gosh. If Isaac destroys the Markers, he destroys humanity, but if he doesn't destroy the Markers: Zombies cluster into a gross Evangelion Biomass and now it's just "blow up the head vampire and you solve the infection!"

#58 Edited by InvaderSkooj (59 posts) -

EarthGov, which was the body doing Marker experiments has collapsed and Unitologists are just unleashing the Markers on human colonies, that was totally explained in the first few minutes.

Anyway I just finished the game, I honestly don't see what Brad was talking about that was so bad. The Necromorph Moon concept makes sense within the fiction as Convergence and I didn't for a second think Isaac was actually dead. No body = no death.

Also I think GB's complaint about the hero being special is getting really silly and now they are just lobbying it around every single time the character in the setting becomes important. Most epic fiction revolves around the hero being unique or important and in the case of Isaac its built on stuff that was pretty core to DS2. I'm not even talking from a position of "oh this game is so brilliantly written" cause its really not, but saying its some kind of "all story" is pretty silly.

#59 Posted by Hailinel (23885 posts) -

Would someone kindly define what in the flying fuck an all-story is? Google is not helping.

#60 Posted by Scotto (1170 posts) -

@Hailinel said:

Would someone kindly define what in the flying fuck an all-story is? Google is not helping.

It's the name Giant Bomb came up with for the prototypical gaming plotline where your character is some sort of cosmically fated "chosen one" or Jesus analogue - though personally, I think they throw the label around a little haphazardly (Halo 4 being the most egregious recent example, if you understand the events of it's story).

Assassin's Creed 3's story is a great example of it, though. As are a disturbing number of games these days. They said they don't like character agency essentially being taken away, by your character essentially being "chosen to succeed" by fate, or some other forces.

#61 Posted by Scotto (1170 posts) -

@Ghostiet said:

Me neither. It suffered a lot from a short development cycle and the writers sometimes going for anvilicious means, but I enjoyed it - although I'd have to be paid to play through that game again from start to finish.

SPOILER FOR AN OLD GAME TO FOLLOW

I thought Dragon Age 2 was fine (though the reused environments and warp-in enemies were super fucking annoying) right up until Anders inexplicably blows up the fucking Chantry. Everything that happens past that point, is completely stupid and incomprehensible. And it's even worse when you realize "holy shit, this is seriously the end of the game?" because I had just kept assuming the story was going to go somewhere eventually.

But no - Anders blows up the chantry on his own after you spend countless conversations during the game where he has small revelations about his misguided prejudices towards the Templars and Chantry. Then the head mage inexplicably thinks his goals can be served by turning into a grotesque blood magic abomination, and ATTACKING THE PEOPLE WHO WERE HELPING HIM (I chose his side). Then the head templar lady inexplicably is able to control the idol that turned that dwarf Bartrand insane - or at least sometimes she's just fucking fine despite being in it's presence, and other times she isn't, depending on the game's whims. And not only control it, but refashion it into a weapon (who knows!). Oh, and did we mention the refashioned insane-making idol weapon also grants her crazy ass superpowers, like jumping 100 feet into the air, and bringing giant bronze statues to life? Because it totally does!

And your payoff for slogging through this stupid mindfuck? Oriana essentially says "and Hawke was never seen again". THE END. I figured at some point the game was going to catch up to "the present" (meaning Varric's interrogation), and proceed from there for a bit, but no.

I loved Dragon Age Origins. I beat it four times. I upgraded my PC in advance of DA2, because I wanted to have the perfect experience. I was even fine with the somewhat more "console-ized" controls and interface, unlike a lot of people. But as soon as the credits rolled, I was just stunned. I uninstalled the game the next day, and haven't touched any of the DLC. That game is an exercise in cut corners, small ambitions, absurd storytelling, and betraying a core fanbase, in order to try and sell an RPG to people who don't buy RPGs.

Even more ridiculous, when Skyrim then came along, and demonstrated that it's possible to make a financially successful RPG, while still remaining faithful to your fanbase.

For me, Dragon Age 2 was the first sign that something was changing at Bioware.

#62 Posted by Quarters (1628 posts) -

I don't agree with the connotation that Isaac is a "chosen one". The only reason he is the one to stop this stuff is a chain reaction of events that started with the first one. If he hadn't kept his wits and survived the first game, it wouldn't have went against destiny or anything. He didn't live because he was destined to, he just did because of his pre-existing abilities. Like others have said, you can't just claim that every story where the main character is important to the world is an "all-story". That's just being overly critical. I don't think Mass Effect falls under the chosen one archetype either. Shepard is only in that position because he survived, and just showed a will and an ability to survive that others haven't. No one foretold of his coming or anything like that.

#63 Posted by Oldirtybearon (4594 posts) -

@Scotto said:

@Ghostiet said:

Me neither. It suffered a lot from a short development cycle and the writers sometimes going for anvilicious means, but I enjoyed it - although I'd have to be paid to play through that game again from start to finish.

SPOILER FOR AN OLD GAME TO FOLLOW

I thought Dragon Age 2 was fine (though the reused environments and warp-in enemies were super fucking annoying) right up until Anders inexplicably blows up the fucking Chantry. Everything that happens past that point, is completely stupid and incomprehensible. And it's even worse when you realize "holy shit, this is seriously the end of the game?" because I had just kept assuming the story was going to go somewhere eventually.

But no - Anders blows up the chantry on his own after you spend countless conversations during the game where he has small revelations about his misguided prejudices towards the Templars and Chantry. Then the head mage inexplicably thinks his goals can be served by turning into a grotesque blood magic abomination, and ATTACKING THE PEOPLE WHO WERE HELPING HIM (I chose his side). Then the head templar lady inexplicably is able to control the idol that turned that dwarf Bartrand insane - or at least sometimes she's just fucking fine despite being in it's presence, and other times she isn't, depending on the game's whims. And not only control it, but refashion it into a weapon (who knows!). Oh, and did we mention the refashioned insane-making idol weapon also grants her crazy ass superpowers, like jumping 100 feet into the air, and bringing giant bronze statues to life? Because it totally does!

And your payoff for slogging through this stupid mindfuck? Oriana essentially says "and Hawke was never seen again". THE END. I figured at some point the game was going to catch up to "the present" (meaning Varric's interrogation), and proceed from there for a bit, but no.

I loved Dragon Age Origins. I beat it four times. I upgraded my PC in advance of DA2, because I wanted to have the perfect experience. I was even fine with the somewhat more "console-ized" controls and interface, unlike a lot of people. But as soon as the credits rolled, I was just stunned. I uninstalled the game the next day, and haven't touched any of the DLC. That game is an exercise in cut corners, small ambitions, absurd storytelling, and betraying a core fanbase, in order to try and sell an RPG to people who don't buy RPGs.

Even more ridiculous, when Skyrim then came along, and demonstrated that it's possible to make a financially successful RPG, while still remaining faithful to your fanbase.

For me, Dragon Age 2 was the first sign that something was changing at Bioware.

Good post but I want to make one slight correction:

First Enchanter Orsino didn't become the Harvester because he thought it'd solve his problems, he saw there was no means of victory or escape and that everyone he knew and cared for (his students, the mages) were going to be slaughtered without mercy. He had a moment of Then Let Me Be Evil and decided to go down swinging hard on every Templar motherfucker who came at him.

Yeah it ultimately proved Meredith's point but I kinda liked that about Dragon Age 2's finale. Despite the fact it doesn't make a whole lot of sense, it's got a strong "wow everything is fucked and everyone sucks" vibe that's usually only reserved for hard fantasy like The Witcher or Song of Ice and Fire. I rather liked that the finale involved me trying desperately to keep the pieces of Kirkwall together but no matter how hard I tried, it just all fell to shit.

Man now I wish that Dragon Age 2 expansion didn't die.

#64 Posted by Ghostiet (5224 posts) -

@Scotto: I understand your beef with those parts, but my biggest problem with DA2's plot is the lyrium idol - it's something completely dumb and avilicious and it figures into the plot way too hard. This is especially egregious since there is a perfectly okay explanation in the Codex, since if you get all the "special" entries, it's revealed that ages ago, Tevinter completely fucked the barrier between the real world and the Fade and now demons are basically leaking through. It explains why Justice turned into Vengeance, why Meredith is so crazy and why there's such a huge concentration of abominations in the Circle. But they needed a physical reason, so they created a crazy-inducing artifact.

Anders is also a can of worms, mostly because the mission "Justice" is relegated to a side quest. It shouldn't. It plays such an important part of the plot that it's bad design.

Oriana? You mean Cassandra? To me it was really obvious that the finale of Varric's story is the finale of the game. Hawke's disappearance was also openly stated in the very beginning. I figured an extended epilogue would be nice, but that wasn't something I was mad about at all.

I think it's a good game overall. It's tedious and blatantly unfinished, by I liked it. It did some brave things plot- and gameplay-wise by going even further on the theme of "a single person can't fix everything" and turning the combat into something else than the boring, completely imbalanced slog that Origins had. The game's biggest fault, I think, is that it blundered these two things by cutting corners. I'm pretty sure that if DA2 got a few months more, it wouldn't be as polarizing. It doesn't change the fact that I enjoyed it a lot, lot more than Mass Effect 3 in probably every regard.

@Oldirtybearon said:

Man now I wish that Dragon Age 2 expansion didn't die.

Exactly. The DLC for DA2 was pretty good and it fixed most of the problems of the original game, especially the jacked combat. I'm fucking pissed that the rabid fanbase essentially killed The Exalted March. They've accomplished absolutely nothing, apart from the fact that DA3's plot is probably going to be as rushed and squished at ME3's was. Unless they HOPEFULLY aren't planning to make it a trilogy.
#65 Posted by JeanLuc (3572 posts) -

Just beat the game and I assume this is the talk about the ending thread. Now, maybe its just because I was bracing for something terrible, but I don't really mind the Necromorph Moon. I don't think its good, but its certainly not the worst thing ever. Honestly though I was never super invested in the story in the same way I was/am with something like Mass Effect. I do think that ending after credits line was a bit lame though. I like Isaac, but I was ok with him dying and doing that ending sting felt cheap.

I think I ended up liking the game more then Brad did but I don't think its as good as Dead Space 1 and 2.

#66 Posted by JeanLuc (3572 posts) -

Just beat the game and I assume this is the talk about the ending thread. Now, maybe its just because I was bracing for something terrible, but I don't really mind the Necromorph Moon. I don't think its good, but its certainly not the worst thing ever. Honestly though I was never super invested in the story in the same way I was/am with something like Mass Effect. I do think that ending after credits line was a bit lame though. I like Isaac, but I was ok with him dying and doing that ending sting felt cheap.

I think I ended up liking the game more then Brad did but I don't think its as good as Dead Space 1 and 2.

#67 Posted by MurderBunny (50 posts) -

@jeanluc said:

Just beat the game and I assume this is the talk about the ending thread. Now, maybe its just because I was bracing for something terrible, but I don't really mind the Necromorph Moon. I don't think its good, but its certainly not the worst thing ever. Honestly though I was never super invested in the story in the same way I was/am with something like Mass Effect. I do think that ending after credits line was a bit lame though. I like Isaac, but I was ok with him dying and doing that ending sting felt cheap.

I think I ended up liking the game more then Brad did but I don't think its as good as Dead Space 1 and 2.

I also beat it and i do not mind the moon. It was stupid, but no worse then a lot of other things. My issues is more every thing leading up to the moon and the entire story after they flee from earth.

Every thing goes moronic after that.

#68 Posted by itsVASH (172 posts) -

So I didnt play any of the co-op, and well when Carver's all like I'm a terrible person, my daughter, my wife blah blah blah... where the fuck did that come from, listen I'm all for having a good story but how am I supposed to feel any type of emotional connection or wait, HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO FOLLOW YOUR STORY WHEN IT DOESN'T EVEN EXPLAIN SHIT EVER AND JUST RANDOMLY THROWS RANDOM STORY IN THERE WITH THE EXPECTATION OF ME KNOWING IT... RRRRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH INTERNET....... no but seriously story I guess was ok... its the same story as mass effect, halo, assassins creed, etc. etc. so I mean I can really see the originality in their story telling, but the ending meh... as others said standard vidgeagame ending I mean I got an idea with the whole Isac saying Ellies name thing, here it is Dead Space 4, You play as Ellie, and Ellie figures out that she can bring back Isaac by building "the conduit" but Earth Gov. won't let you because there afraid that with the return of Isaac comes the return of necromorphs so you fight humans the entire game and finally build "the conduit" and when you do you realize you've been hallucinating the the whole time and just BUILD ANOTHER MARKER and boom continue the Dead Space franchise for another trilogy of Ellie fighting shit ton of necromorphs in 2 and redeeming herself in 3 by killing herself the same way Isaac did and have some other person take Ellies place, get a whole cyclical thing going. Anyways Dead Space 3 story real downer but I guess at this point like they all said in the podcast, I should start expecting games to really drop the ball by 3.

#69 Posted by HerbieBug (4212 posts) -

Pretty much. It's both really forced and incredibly flaccid.

That's certainly an unfortunate combination to have. -________-

#70 Posted by pbhawks45 (736 posts) -

Maybe I'm a total asshole, but I kinda like the idea of a necromorph moon.

#71 Edited by Mrsignerman44 (1100 posts) -

People flip out at the stupidest shit these days. I thought the ending was good, not great but I enjoyed it. In fact, the last hour (rebuilding the machine) was one of the highest points for the series. I think a lot of people just aren't letting go of this micro-transaction thing and just want to see this game fail. I say fuck 'em, bring on Dead Space 4!

#72 Posted by MurderBunny (50 posts) -

People flip out at the stupidest shit these days. I thought the ending was good, not great but I enjoyed it. In fact, the last hour (rebuilding the machine) was one of the highest points for the series. I think a lot of people just aren't letting go of this micro-transaction thing and just want to see this game fail. I say fuck 'em, bring on Dead Space 4!

Yes that is all what it is. Not the let down in combat, the over use of monster closets, the lack of any kind of tension, no horror elements, the forced drama, carver, the stupid whinny new boyfriend, the boring samey environment's, the complete lack of any story for 80% the game, the enemy's they spawn behind you, the fact that they only use jump scares, the optional missions are 90% filler with no point, useless antagonist, stupid antagonist, nonsensical antagonist, the enemy verity is non existent and the ending is to forced and have no challenge at all.

Nono my issues are only with the micro transactions. YUP!!! only reason.

#73 Posted by Teran (877 posts) -

Yes that is all what it is. Not the let down in combat, the over use of monster closets, the lack of any kind of tension, no horror elements, the forced drama, carver, the stupid whinny new boyfriend, the boring samey environment's, the complete lack of any story for 80% the game, the enemy's they spawn behind you, the fact that they only use jump scares, the optional missions are 90% filler with no point, useless antagonist, stupid antagonist, nonsensical antagonist, the enemy verity is non existent and the ending is to forced and have no challenge at all.

Nono my issues are only with the micro transactions. YUP!!! only reason.

1. What let down in combat?
2. Over use of monster closets...? Are you joking?
3. Would you like to explain how the game could have been more tense...? Or are you under the hilarious impression that more of what they did in the first two would somehow equate to tension?
4. Carver was fine.
5. You're not completely wrong about the rest of the characters sucking.
6. There was more environmental variety than any of the others had.
7. The entire series only uses jump scares, why complain about it now in the game that used the fewest.
8. The optional missions are the best in the game. Of course stating that the optional missions are 90% filler is just idiotic. They are 100% filler, that's why they are optional. The fact that they told more interesting stories than the rest of the game seems to have gone over your head and undermines the credibility of your opinion.
9. Enemy variety is about the same considering how redundant most of the enemies were in the previous games were. Reskinning a bunch of enemies that fulfill essentially the same function does not equal variety unless you're five years old.

#74 Posted by Mrsignerman44 (1100 posts) -

@mrsignerman44 said:

People flip out at the stupidest shit these days. I thought the ending was good, not great but I enjoyed it. In fact, the last hour (rebuilding the machine) was one of the highest points for the series. I think a lot of people just aren't letting go of this micro-transaction thing and just want to see this game fail. I say fuck 'em, bring on Dead Space 4!

Yes that is all what it is. Not the let down in combat, the over use of monster closets, the lack of any kind of tension, no horror elements, the forced drama, carver, the stupid whinny new boyfriend, the boring samey environment's, the complete lack of any story for 80% the game, the enemy's they spawn behind you, the fact that they only use jump scares, the optional missions are 90% filler with no point, useless antagonist, stupid antagonist, nonsensical antagonist, the enemy verity is non existent and the ending is to forced and have no challenge at all.

Nono my issues are only with the micro transactions. YUP!!! only reason.

It's not solely the micro transactions, it's just what exaggerated everyone's opinions so greatly. Dead Space 3 isn't better than Dead Space 2 but it's not a let down at all. A lot of your complaints aren't even valid to be honest.

  • The combat is the best it's been in the series with smoother dodge rolls and great weapon variety
  • There were way less monster closets than there were in dead space 2
  • There were plenty of tense moments, fighting 3 regenerators and having to open a door while dozens of creepy skeletal necromorphs are about to kill you were incredibly tense moments
  • There were optional missions that were oozing with horror elements(The 136 reaper mission had the creepiest logs and scenery in a dead space game)
  • The drama was a little forced at times, especially with norton's character so I'll give you that
  • Carver was a great character, the problem is that a lot of his missions are co-op only
  • Norton was whiny but he at least filled the antagonist role better than Danik did
  • Boring environments? This game finally took you out of space and into many outstanding new areas(especially in the third act)
  • If you read the objectives and logs on the way, you'd be more into the story. It's mostly about science but I loved it.
  • Wouldn't enemies spawning behind you make things tenser? I don't understand what you want.
  • Dead Space 1 and 2 were riddled with jump scares
  • The optional missions have some of the best moments of the game
  • I'll just couple the last three into one category but yes, Danik is a bad antagonist.
  • The enemy variety was pretty great this time around, there were a lot of new necromorphs including some really deadly new ones(Alien Necromorphs)
  • The ending was not forced at all, it's not a deus ex machina or anything, it's what the game was leading up to the whole time. They frequently tell you how it's going to end and what you need to do
  • I had no problems with the difficulty, it got a little easy near the end when I became overpowered but that's because I held on to all of my resources for dear life.
#75 Posted by itsVASH (172 posts) -

@mrsignerman44 said:

People flip out at the stupidest shit these days. I thought the ending was good, not great but I enjoyed it. In fact, the last hour (rebuilding the machine) was one of the highest points for the series. I think a lot of people just aren't letting go of this micro-transaction thing and just want to see this game fail. I say fuck 'em, bring on Dead Space 4!

Yes that is all what it is. Not the let down in combat, the over use of monster closets, the lack of any kind of tension, no horror elements, the forced drama, carver, the stupid whinny new boyfriend, the boring samey environment's, the complete lack of any story for 80% the game, the enemy's they spawn behind you, the fact that they only use jump scares, the optional missions are 90% filler with no point, useless antagonist, stupid antagonist, nonsensical antagonist, the enemy verity is non existent and the ending is to forced and have no challenge at all.

Nono my issues are only with the micro transactions. YUP!!! only reason.

What he said

#76 Posted by Fistfulofmetal (678 posts) -

I didn't find the necromorph moon to be bad. it's dumb but so is a lot of stuff from this series.

#77 Edited by Deathpooky (1374 posts) -

I can't believe no one mentioned my problem with the ending. What the fuck Ellie? They saved your life multiple times, Carver almost sacrificed all of humanity to keep you from getting shot, they sent you away as they prepared to take down Necro Moon. And you can't stick around for half an hour to see if they're still alive, or maybe try to search / scan for them? It also sure was convenient that Carver's moronic decision was a reversible action.

Plus beyond them throwing in tons of random exposition that turned the creepy markers into another All Story of evil ancient race eating species and only Isaac can stop them, I was still left rather confused about what the result of all that was. Despite Isaac hanging out having the time of his life, humanity seemed pretty fucked already when they left. And maybe it was just me not paying close enough attention as it got ridiculous, but I could never keep straight the different marker types, what they represented, or what turning off this "signal" would do.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.