To throw just about everything (my) Shepard works for out the window in the final 1% of the story is lame.
I worked hard to unite every damn race in the game possible, hell even the Rachni were with me at the end. I felt that it was important. Throughout my play through the game repeatedly reminded me it was important. Shepard's death I am totally fine with, if all the means provided towards the end felt sufficiently worth it.
But the payoff at the end of the day is that all that effort and searching didn't really mean shit.
Probably that bugs me the most about it all. Sure there are other reasons, but that is the worst offender to me.
To sum up this post I will simplify it to... "Hey Bioware DM, I roll to disbelieve."
Seems to me Bioware's ending to the series has completely fulfilled and or exceeded what they intended it to do.
Look at how many of us are still talking about this game weeks after its release.
They could have gone with a tried and true "happy" ending, reapers destroyed, current cycle survives, and everyone would (mostly) be happy, myself included.
But as they say controversy creates cash, and just look at all the hype they have generated.
Personally, I enjoyed the hell out of both DA:O and Dragon Age 2.
DA:O Had a great game length, depth, graphics at the time of its release, and pretty much multiple everything's, (story lines, upgrade/skill paths, party combinations) and so much content it is impossible to see it all in a play through.
DA:2 Had even better character development, voice acting, even greater graphics (although limited to a lot fewer locations) and a story with a quality and development at least on par with DA:O. The game lacked length, options, and a good amount of freedom. But all in all it was a great experiance.
I can't speak for the console versions of of the game, but I bought it for PC at launch and feel got my money's worth. It was somewhat glitchy then, but the majority of that has been fixed at this point.
In my opinion New Vegas is the superior game in many ways. There are more storyline options, choices, weapons, the enemies are far superior, and that good ol' Fallout spirit and feel of the original Fallout 1&2 is captured with much better results in New Vegas.
Fallout 3 just gets more props because the game engine (bugs included) and revived fallout setting was fresh at its time of release so more was forgiven by the reviewers.
While its true Obsidian should have revamped and refined the game engine for New Vegas more than they did. (The true reason behind most of the apathy apparent in reviews when it was released.) Despite that, Obsidian did craft a damn good game.
Is this the same Stephen fry from the old British comedy variety show with Hugh Laurie? (A bit with Fry & Laurie) Great show BTW. I have a soft spot for British TV.
Log in to comment