You know, Sony wouldn't have these problems if they just allowed the public to buy SDK capability for themselves with the systems. It could be a PS+ subscription feature. Then, the legit programmers that resort to hacking could be registered, giving Sony money, and not have the motivation to illegitimately hack the…

Ok, that makes sense. They aren't getting paid vacation, or get hugely reduced pay for non-work time.

Haha, thanks. Think about "Tee-Dus". Does that really sound better? It's just a preference, and I hate to say this, but Tee-Dus doesn't sound manly. Then again, the character isn't all that manly in concept, in my opinion.

The party class compositions you speak of, are those requirements? Like the game restricts party composition to those requirements, or those just tended to be preferred compositions in order to play the game efficiently?

I understand my thoughts didn't quite communicate properly after reading your replies.

I find it's more of a disadvantage to have so much knowledge about a single subject. I love video games and I know about them then anything else. This might seem sad to some, but really it's my hobby and it keeps me entertained in my daily life. I don't harm anyone with the interest, so I feel it's all good.

What is the point in the game of having the larger team split into smaller groups?

I did mince my words a little. I'm looking for "higher than 4" multiplayer standard.

Video games could use more of this crazy design sense. Silliness for the sake of it is less common in games these days. I know digital-only is bringing back some of that silliness, so I look forward to the future bringing balance.

I was just using 7 as an example of an odd number of people that lots of games don't support. I'm not so much asking for specific numbers, but those groups that go beyond 4 people. This is more an issue on consoles than on PC, as large scale server or custom server support is more common.

I really don't mind failure in a game. Seeing Game Over and coming back to try again is fine with me, and I have been playing video games for almost two decades.

Went through a phase where I pronounced Sephiroth's name as "Spear-roth". Yeah. Tifa was "Tiff-fa" for the longest time until someone explained the long "eye" sound to me.

Really cool. It's great to see that level of detail. I still can't get past the failure of a better camera control system for land battles. That is why I will not purchase it.

I'm all for a series trying to branch out into other genres. I just want the quality to be there as well. I would be surprised if this game received a sequel.

I'm of the mind that Bioware doesn't have to change the endings. I would like them to, but I'm not going to demand a change. I prefer constructive criticism because I know the Mass Effect Universe will continue and I want it to. I would have expected things done differently, but I can't hate Bioware for not meeting…

Literally the most practical outfit Final Fantasy protagonists have ever worn. While I would totally buy this DLC for the game, I shall not spend more than a $1.00 for aesthetics.

His official response still doesn't seem to be addressing the main complaint of the endings not taking your previous choices into consideration in a significant way. I feel there would have been a simple way of making those choices matter with the same ending sequences.

Finally, I've beaten the game and chose my ending. Then this pops up so I can conveniently see what else could happen and why people have been talking about it for a week. The game has barely been out longer than a week, and spoilers seemed unavoidable. I'll try to AVOID spoilers in my reply.

A game that can make you care about how you play it, and care about it when you're not playing is the sign of a well designed game.

Maybe if more of the games with character creators were less serious affairs, then I'd indulge in more "creative" designs. Saints Row is a great series for just going goofy.