No problem. I didn't think you were being snotty, and I personally agree with what you said, however knowing what goes into the creative process (even if the results might seem objectively bad), it's hard for me not to consider bad art as something that's still art.

I found it quite entertaining for considerably longer than 30 minutes, and if after almost two years it's starting to feel stale, then I'd say good job for not being stale for almost two years.

I was over here once.

It depends on who you're asking.

That's like saying some movies are art but most aren't, or some books are literature, but most aren't.

Maybe the always-online reports for booting games is specifically for the Durango—the actual dev kits. It would be one way to make sure the kits can't be used by people who shouldn't have them.

Mix up the gameplay. Sure, there could be some shoot outs, but as the author of the post suggested, why not throw in puzzles that involve the use of the powers, dialogue options, actual detective work?

Now compare the population sizes of both countries and then figure out the average number of gun related deaths. You'll see that they're close.

The Ninth Amendement is what fills in the gaps.

We need more domestic realism games.

M16s don't have wood parts. More than likely, it's supposed to be the Chinese version of the AK-47.

EDIT: Nevermind. You wrote the same thing I just wrote. Dummy (meaning: me) needs to read, not scan, before posting. :)

Yeah, that's how it seems so far. And yes, you get in-game credits towards packs. You can earn enough credits in one Gold match to get a Spectre pack.

Your option B) is like what they do with The Elder Scrolls. Each one is set so far into the future that it doesn't really matter what you did in the last one.

No. Those Tom Clancy games have the voice recognition written into the games, and the games use system resources, such as memory and processing power, to translate the .wav file into a binary command the game can recognize and use.

That sounds SO much better than the ending we got.

I agree with your assessment about decisions in the ME series. Choice was always window dressing to the experience, but it was clear, especially after ME2 came out, that the plot wasn't going to completely change based on what you did in the previous titles.

No, they said that Shepards story IS a trilogy, hence ME3 being the last.

We'll probably see most, if not all, of the MP DLC for ME3 free since they're probably making enough from the sort of freemium model they have for the reinforcement packs. I'd image they're probably making enough to cover the cost to host the DLC on PSN and XBL as well as turn a profit.

Other than the Normandy stuff at the end (which doesn't make any logic sense no matter how anyone tries to explain it to me), I have to say that you're the first person that logically defended the ending and got me to think that it sort of makes sense.]