Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Awesome: 'Mass Effect 3: Welcome To Our Thread, Here Are Your Compli...' by Orikaeshigitae

2

Posts

  • tolragtolrag Registered User regular
    Thejakeman wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    Thejakeman wrote: »
    "Everything I've seen"

    I see, you work at Bioware and have access to internal memos?

    There's no need to speculate about internal memos. Take a look at the Final Hours app. It focuses entirely on two specific writers to the exclusion of... well, pretty much the rest of the writing team.

    Ah, so the two writers who had the time, patience, and energy to submit to a crazy journalistic experiment represent the "ego" here.

    It's pretty much a total hagiography of those two guys so yes.

  • Psycho Internet HawkPsycho Internet Hawk Registered User regular
    Thejakeman wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    Thejakeman wrote: »
    "Everything I've seen"

    I see, you work at Bioware and have access to internal memos?

    There's no need to speculate about internal memos. Take a look at the Final Hours app. It focuses entirely on two specific writers to the exclusion of... well, pretty much the rest of the writing team.

    Ah, so the two writers who had the time, patience, and energy to submit to a crazy journalistic experiment represent the "ego" here.

    Bioware publicly admitted prerelease that the two head writers wrote the ending entirely by themselves and kept it a complete secret from the rest of the staff with zero outside editing.

    I'm not sure if your post is supposed to just be "hahaha angry nerds" or what, but this is literally what Bioware themselves said. Maybe they're lying just to get people to hate them, who knows!

    ezek1t.jpg
  • ThejakemanThejakeman Registered User
    [citation needed]

  • CambiataCambiata I'm an alchemist and the beat is my base metal Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Thejakeman wrote: »
    [citation needed]

    Mass Effect 3: The Final Hours is available for $3.00 on apple devices.

    (Before some goose asks, no I am not shilling. I couldn't care less if you buy the app. I'm certainly not going to. I'm just replying to Thejakeman's request for a citation).

    Cambiata on
    -Tal wrote:
    If you don't develop Stockholm Syndrome, it's not a real RPG.
    Steam
    Origin ID: jazzmess
    Wishlist
  • CorellianAmericanCorellianAmerican Registered User
    Sorry if this is a little off topic, but I think it relates enough.

    Does anyone get the feeling that they never really planned the story ahead of time? I just got to Mars on my second playthrough a couple minutes ago and couldn't help but think, "Man, they've been making this series for 8 years! Did they plan on having this dumb superweapon and the Catalyst thing the whole time?" It occurred to me though, that maybe they really hadn't. I always thought they had a general, if not specific, idea or plan for the story of the trilogy, but when I think about it, it doesn't really seem like they did.

    I mean, Mass Effect 1 ends with Shepard saying they're going to find a way to stop the reapers. But then ME2 begins with the Normandy on boring Geth patrol. More than that, the entirety of ME2 seems sort of out of place with the rest of the story. It's all about stopping the collectors, not finding a way to defeat the reapers. I feel like the second game should have been all about finding a way to stop the Reapers, rather than a half hour mission at the beginning of ME3. It just feels sort of jumbled and unplanned. I really expected the trilogy to have more of a storyboarded plan for the whole thing, but in the light of the Catalyst it really doesn't seem like it was. Does anybody else feel the same? Or, alternatively, does anybody have any links of the staff saying things that directly confirm/deny this idea?

  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Harrisonburg, VARegistered User regular
    Yeah, that would have been a lot better. Shepard is essentially demoted in 2, and while taking down the Collectors is a good thing, it doesn't make that much difference when going after the Reapers.

  • CambiataCambiata I'm an alchemist and the beat is my base metal Registered User regular
    That seems to have been covered by the final hours app, as well as online comments by Drew Karpyshyn. They had general ideas about how things would go, but no set plans. Drew (or somebody) actually had an ending in mind that takes into account the whole 'dark energy' thing they kept bringing up in ME2 (which was the reason for the foreshadowing). But since Drew, or the writer who came up with it, is no longer with the company, they scrapped the idea.

    The final hours thing talks about how they had all kinds of ending ideas in mind but kept scrapping them. Until Casey and Mac Walters locked themselves away and worked on draft after draft, keeping it separate from the other writers, so no peer review. No one else even saw the ending until the voices had been recorded and it was too late to change anything.

    -Tal wrote:
    If you don't develop Stockholm Syndrome, it's not a real RPG.
    Steam
    Origin ID: jazzmess
    Wishlist
  • CorellianAmericanCorellianAmerican Registered User
    That's...disappointing. I had hoped with all the talk of it being a trilogy from the very beginning they would have had a more concrete plan. It also seems a little (adjective) that just the two guys worked on the ending. Seems like involving everybody else would have helped. Not entirely sure what their motives were, don't want to suggest they thought their ideas were so far ahead of the rest of the team, but no peer review seems like a bad idea regardless.

  • AegeriAegeri Registered User regular
    They did have an ending planned, but it appears that Casey Hudson stepped in and basically rewrote a lot of it to "Add speculation" or some such nonsense. He did this without really consulting (or according to Final Hours, really caring it would seem) what the other writers thought of the situation. So the mess of the ending can be put down to two writers basically doing it themselves without anyone else involved. The motivation though was simple, they wanted a more ambiguous and "Mysterious" ending - instead of the longer and more detailed ending that was originally there.

  • I needed a gnome to post.I needed a gnome to post. gank so hard motherfuckers wanna find meRegistered User regular
    So basically Mass Effect 3 was a prolonged allegory of why editors and proofreaders are a good thing.

    YUNHcUz.jpg
  • RandomshotRandomshot Registered User
    edited March 2012
    Double post.

    Randomshot on
  • RandomshotRandomshot Registered User
    edited March 2012
    So basically Mass Effect 3 was a prolonged allegory of why editors and proofreaders are a good thing.

    "So, what do you guys think of the ending?"

    dialogue_wheel.jpg

    Randomshot on
  • override367override367 Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Pretty well articulated problems with the ending.

    Aegeri wrote: »
    They did have an ending planned, but it appears that Casey Hudson stepped in and basically rewrote a lot of it to "Add speculation" or some such nonsense. He did this without really consulting (or according to Final Hours, really caring it would seem) what the other writers thought of the situation. So the mess of the ending can be put down to two writers basically doing it themselves without anyone else involved. The motivation though was simple, they wanted a more ambiguous and "Mysterious" ending - instead of the longer and more detailed ending that was originally there.

    "LOTS OF SPECULATION FROM EVERYBODY" were his exact words for what he was aiming for, which is thematically inappropriate for Mass Effect. In the bulk of the games the cause and effect of events are mechanically understood (that ship went to that planet, that person fired that bullet and killed that person). There's no speculation as to the outcome of your actions.

    Getting the Thanix cannon lets you laser the collectors, getting the armor lets the collectors not laser you as much. In Mass Effect 3 introducing this extreme ambiguity out of nowhere is completely at odds with everything that came before.

    override367 on
    XBLIVE: Biggestoverride
    League of Legends: override367
  • OrikaeshigitaeOrikaeshigitae Registered User, ClubPA regular
    i'd argue the contrary - that the nature of the constant promise that your decisions will come back in future games, as well as in-universe gambits like the rachni decision, collector base, etc, all encourage fan speculation, and that in fact the game design focus on encouraging speculation (intentional or not) is a large contribution to the popularity of the series.

  • Viktor WaltersViktor Walters Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Speculation is not thematically inappropriate for anything to my knowledge outside of Realism, and even then speculation is inevitable. I don't think "oh no speculation" is the appropriate stance here.

    The appropriate stance is, if you don't mind me repeating my words from forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/22537482#Comment_22537482, they didn't listen to their editors. No real peer review or editing = hubris and the demise of all things good. This is why as a series goes on and gets more popular the books gets more sloppy- either they drag on forever (re: Harry Potter), involve ridiculous plot twists (re: Lost), or simply descend into incomprehensibility. Because the writers think they're doing well enough to not need any real editing, and because they have enough clout with their publishers/producers/whatever that they can get their wishes for the life unedited granted. Folly, pure folly.

    As for the post, it is indeed awesome. It amuses me to see a fellow Story Asshole do his thing. It further amuses me to see the author five posts later arguing semantics- HOW TYPICAL.

    Viktor Walters on
    I'm designing a print and play tabletop game system! Follow the Quicksilver Engine updates here.
    3DS FC: 3609-1288-7086 -- The tumbs
  • CambiataCambiata I'm an alchemist and the beat is my base metal Registered User regular
    I'd actually agree to that to an extent. In fact, I think they never should have explained the reapers at all. Plenty of 'speculation' to be had forever on that topic. Just resolve Shepard's story in an emotionally satisfying way and I'd have had no complaints about the ending.

    -Tal wrote:
    If you don't develop Stockholm Syndrome, it's not a real RPG.
    Steam
    Origin ID: jazzmess
    Wishlist
  • DedwrekkaDedwrekka What Would Nyarlathotep Do? Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    epic doesn't mean the same thing as meaningful, and Bioware didn't ruin anything

    I'd actually like to hear more about this. I'm not looking for an argument just generally intrigued to know more about your position on this.
    Spoiler:

    Dedwrekka on
  • override367override367 Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    i'd argue the contrary - that the nature of the constant promise that your decisions will come back in future games, as well as in-universe gambits like the rachni decision, collector base, etc, all encourage fan speculation, and that in fact the game design focus on encouraging speculation (intentional or not) is a large contribution to the popularity of the series.

    Let me clarify. In the ending to Mass Effect 3, we don't even get a picture of the immediate outcome of what the hell happened. We're not even left with a foundation upon which to speculate, leading to fans having to make up all the details out of whole cloth re: the fate of every single character in the game.

    ME 1/2/3(pre ending) style speculation: I saved the krogan, they've pledged not to go on a murder spree. What will this mean for the galaxy? Is this a new era for them or have I just caused another war in the future? We know our bro Wrex is happy!

    LOTS OF SPECULATION FROM EVERYONE: Flan from the extradimensional bread consortium has appeared and told me that his bread can save the universe, shepard agrees that this is the only hope and ravenously takes a bite, happy music plays, all of the volus in the galaxy explode, we see liara smile and the camera cuts to black.

    In the former I know all of the people involved, there's no speculation regarding who anyone is, or why shepard made the decisions she did. In the latter I don't know what the fuck is going on, and my speculation has less to do with "What does this mean for the characters" than "What the fuck just happened". I'm not given enough information to adequately guess on what happened to anything or anybody. Mass Effect is about characters, not speculation, and we don't know what happened to the characters.

    I defy anyone to even assemble a list of who, exactly, survived Mass Effect 3

    override367 on
    XBLIVE: Biggestoverride
    League of Legends: override367
  • CambiataCambiata I'm an alchemist and the beat is my base metal Registered User regular
    i'd argue the contrary - that the nature of the constant promise that your decisions will come back in future games, as well as in-universe gambits like the rachni decision, collector base, etc, all encourage fan speculation, and that in fact the game design focus on encouraging speculation (intentional or not) is a large contribution to the popularity of the series.

    Let me clarify. In the ending to Mass Effect 3, we don't even get a picture of the immediate outcome of what the hell happened. We're not even left with a foundation upon which to speculate, leading to fans having to make up all the details out of whole cloth re: the fate of every single character in the game.

    ME 1/2/3(pre ending) style speculation: I saved the krogan, they've pledged not to go on a murder spree. What will this mean for the galaxy? Is this a new era for them or have I just caused another war in the future? We know our bro Wrex is happy!

    LOTS OF SPECULATION FROM EVERYONE: Flan from the extradimensional bread consortium has appeared and told me that his bread can save the universe, shepard agrees that this is the only hope and ravenously takes a bite, happy music plays, all of the volus in the galaxy explode, we see liara smile and the camera cuts to black.

    In the former I know all of the people involved, there's no speculation regarding who anyone is, or why shepard made the decisions she did. In the latter I don't know what the fuck is going on, and my speculation has less to do with "What does this mean for the characters" than "What the fuck just happened". I'm not given enough information to adequately guess on what happened to anything or anybody. Mass Effect is about characters, not speculation, and we don't know what happened to the characters.

    I defy anyone to even assemble a list of who, exactly, survived Mass Effect 3

    This is a trick question! No one survived! At least, that's how it goes in the good (read: low assets) ending!

    -Tal wrote:
    If you don't develop Stockholm Syndrome, it's not a real RPG.
    Steam
    Origin ID: jazzmess
    Wishlist
  • override367override367 Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    If there was an ending to tell Helios to fuck off and watch the universe fall to the Illuminati I would have taken it just so Shepard was still the decision maker

    Because to me, simply surviving isn't enough. I'd rather everyone die than suddenly be able to reproduce with their ipads.

    override367 on
    XBLIVE: Biggestoverride
    League of Legends: override367
  • Fixer40000Fixer40000 Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Spoiler:

    Fixer40000 on
    Have left PA forums.
    If this community believes that hating someone based soley upon their gender is acceptable and understandable, I have no interest in being a part of it.
  • DedwrekkaDedwrekka What Would Nyarlathotep Do? Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    i'd argue the contrary - that the nature of the constant promise that your decisions will come back in future games, as well as in-universe gambits like the rachni decision, collector base, etc, all encourage fan speculation, and that in fact the game design focus on encouraging speculation (intentional or not) is a large contribution to the popularity of the series.

    Let me clarify. In the ending to Mass Effect 3, we don't even get a picture of the immediate outcome of what the hell happened. We're not even left with a foundation upon which to speculate, leading to fans having to make up all the details out of whole cloth re: the fate of every single character in the game.

    ME 1/2/3(pre ending) style speculation: I saved the krogan, they've pledged not to go on a murder spree. What will this mean for the galaxy? Is this a new era for them or have I just caused another war in the future? We know our bro Wrex is happy!

    LOTS OF SPECULATION FROM EVERYONE: Flan from the extradimensional bread consortium has appeared and told me that his bread can save the universe, shepard agrees that this is the only hope and ravenously takes a bite, happy music plays, all of the volus in the galaxy explode, we see liara smile and the camera cuts to black.

    In the former I know all of the people involved, there's no speculation regarding who anyone is, or why shepard made the decisions she did. In the latter I don't know what the fuck is going on, and my speculation has less to do with "What does this mean for the characters" than "What the fuck just happened". I'm not given enough information to adequately guess on what happened to anything or anybody. Mass Effect is about characters, not speculation, and we don't know what happened to the characters.

    I defy anyone to even assemble a list of who, exactly, survived Mass Effect 3
    Spoiler:

    Dedwrekka on
  • CambiataCambiata I'm an alchemist and the beat is my base metal Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Dedwrekka wrote: »
    i'd argue the contrary - that the nature of the constant promise that your decisions will come back in future games, as well as in-universe gambits like the rachni decision, collector base, etc, all encourage fan speculation, and that in fact the game design focus on encouraging speculation (intentional or not) is a large contribution to the popularity of the series.

    Let me clarify. In the ending to Mass Effect 3, we don't even get a picture of the immediate outcome of what the hell happened. We're not even left with a foundation upon which to speculate, leading to fans having to make up all the details out of whole cloth re: the fate of every single character in the game.

    ME 1/2/3(pre ending) style speculation: I saved the krogan, they've pledged not to go on a murder spree. What will this mean for the galaxy? Is this a new era for them or have I just caused another war in the future? We know our bro Wrex is happy!

    LOTS OF SPECULATION FROM EVERYONE: Flan from the extradimensional bread consortium has appeared and told me that his bread can save the universe, shepard agrees that this is the only hope and ravenously takes a bite, happy music plays, all of the volus in the galaxy explode, we see liara smile and the camera cuts to black.

    In the former I know all of the people involved, there's no speculation regarding who anyone is, or why shepard made the decisions she did. In the latter I don't know what the fuck is going on, and my speculation has less to do with "What does this mean for the characters" than "What the fuck just happened". I'm not given enough information to adequately guess on what happened to anything or anybody. Mass Effect is about characters, not speculation, and we don't know what happened to the characters.

    I defy anyone to even assemble a list of who, exactly, survived Mass Effect 3
    Spoiler:
    Spoiler:

    Cambiata on
    -Tal wrote:
    If you don't develop Stockholm Syndrome, it's not a real RPG.
    Steam
    Origin ID: jazzmess
    Wishlist
  • OrikaeshigitaeOrikaeshigitae Registered User, ClubPA regular
  • OrikaeshigitaeOrikaeshigitae Registered User, ClubPA regular
    For the curious, my review of Mass Effect 3 is up on Medium Difficulty.

  • CambiataCambiata I'm an alchemist and the beat is my base metal Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    For the curious, my review of Mass Effect 3 is up on Medium Difficulty.

    That.. that was a good review, although my fangirl instinct is always "You're being too haaaaaarsh!" After that ending, though, I'm actually able to accept criticism of Bioware in a more reasonable light that I would have before. So I can see your points, and even agree with them.

    Cambiata on
    -Tal wrote:
    If you don't develop Stockholm Syndrome, it's not a real RPG.
    Steam
    Origin ID: jazzmess
    Wishlist
  • override367override367 Registered User regular
    I agree with all the criticisms in that review, but I could overlook all of them if the ending was more satisfying

    XBLIVE: Biggestoverride
    League of Legends: override367
  • CambiataCambiata I'm an alchemist and the beat is my base metal Registered User regular
    I agree with all the criticisms in that review, but I could overlook all of them if the ending was more satisfying

    This is also true.

    -Tal wrote:
    If you don't develop Stockholm Syndrome, it's not a real RPG.
    Steam
    Origin ID: jazzmess
    Wishlist
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    For the curious, my review of Mass Effect 3 is up on Medium Difficulty.

    I agree pretty well with this. A lot of the writing is great, but a lot of it is also ham-fisted.

    optimusighsig.png
    Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
  • theSquidtheSquid Sydney, AustraliaRegistered User regular
    I like how people have used the Awesome Posts forum as an excuse to make 8 threads about the Mass Effect ending.

    I had sex with the Ecumenical Patriarch and he infected me with syphilis
  • OrikaeshigitaeOrikaeshigitae Registered User, ClubPA regular
    Cambiata wrote: »
    I agree with all the criticisms in that review, but I could overlook all of them if the ending was more satisfying

    This is also true.

    How? They are real, basic problems with the fundamental nature of the game as it stands. They don't go away with a different final ten minutes.

  • CambiataCambiata I'm an alchemist and the beat is my base metal Registered User regular
    Cambiata wrote: »
    I agree with all the criticisms in that review, but I could overlook all of them if the ending was more satisfying

    This is also true.

    How? They are real, basic problems with the fundamental nature of the game as it stands. They don't go away with a different final ten minutes.

    You're asking me why a triumphant and cathartic ending can make you forget the parts of a narrative that are bad? I'm not really sure I can. I'm not, like you, a "trained story asshole", I can't really answer for why an uplifting ending (even a sad uplifting ending, like, say, the ending of the film Central Station) makes weaknesses in the narrative somehow more forgivable. I only know that for me, on an emotional level, they do.

    -Tal wrote:
    If you don't develop Stockholm Syndrome, it's not a real RPG.
    Steam
    Origin ID: jazzmess
    Wishlist
  • DedwrekkaDedwrekka What Would Nyarlathotep Do? Registered User regular
    Cambiata wrote: »
    I agree with all the criticisms in that review, but I could overlook all of them if the ending was more satisfying

    This is also true.

    How? They are real, basic problems with the fundamental nature of the game as it stands. They don't go away with a different final ten minutes.

    For the same reason one might reminisce fondly about the times in their life that they hated when they were living them. It isn't that it makes the poorly written areas less so, it makes them stand out less. I hope I'm not over-stepping myself, but you seem more inclined to view the game by it's constituent pieces and rank the merit of the whole based off of the sum of it's parts. I find it's less the case with the average gamer for who sections of the game can be tedious or poorly written, but the entire game can still be enjoyable. Neither is necessarily the wrong way to play, though your method is more likely to advance the medium.

    However, I'm not sure the ending will ever be resolved or people will ever be happy with it, but since it's the last area of the game many experience, it's an issue all the same. I'm interested in going back into the game and experiencing many of the things I missed by playing the cookie-cutter ending. I'm forming the opinion that a lot of the issues with the ending was because, when a lot of people are comparing their playthroughs, it's all coming up the same except for the ending due to the influence of forums, wikis and such that mean a not-insignificant number of players make the same choices and end up with the same game. My hypothesis is that if I play the game differently or without the benefit of previous saves, I can have a lot of sway in how the ending feels and the emotions it evokes.

  • Viktor WaltersViktor Walters Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Dedwrekka wrote: »
    Neither is necessarily the wrong way to play, though your method is more likely to advance the medium.

    Of course, there's no wrong way to enjoy a game. I don't think Orikaeshigitae was writing as a "gamer", he was writing as a critic. It's strongly evident that he enjoyed the game. That's even more of a reason not to overlook the flaws. If you like a friend, but that friend is kind of a douchebag and maybe has a bit of a drinking problem, sometimes you just deal with him being a douchebag. If you love that friend and really care for him, you call him out on his bullshit. Same deal here.

    Bioware, we do this because we love you. Put down the bottle, etc.

    Viktor Walters on
    I'm designing a print and play tabletop game system! Follow the Quicksilver Engine updates here.
    3DS FC: 3609-1288-7086 -- The tumbs
  • CambiataCambiata I'm an alchemist and the beat is my base metal Registered User regular
    Dedwrekka wrote: »
    Neither is necessarily the wrong way to play, though your method is more likely to advance the medium.

    Of course, there's no wrong way to enjoy a game. I don't think Orikaeshigitae was writing as a "gamer", he was writing as a critic. It's strongly evident that he enjoyed the game. That's even more of a reason not to overlook the flaws. If you like a friend, but that friend is kind of a douchebag and maybe has a bit of a drinking problem, sometimes you just deal with him being a douchebag. If you love that friend and really care for him, you call him out on his bullshit. Same deal here.

    Bioware, we do this because we love you. Put down the bottle, etc.

    Yeah, I actually think Orikaeshigitae is going about games reviewing in the right way... instead of spouting a bunch of buzzwords and gushing about the game, he's actually trying to be honest about the things that are wrong with the game (and the medium). I think we could use more reviewers like that, and fewer fanboys dressed up as reviewers. Honest criticism of art is important to art.

    -Tal wrote:
    If you don't develop Stockholm Syndrome, it's not a real RPG.
    Steam
    Origin ID: jazzmess
    Wishlist
  • Viktor WaltersViktor Walters Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Further proof that he indeed deserves a residence in the "Awesome Posts" forum. Hurrah for integrity!

    edit: God I really need to get off Orikaeshigitae's nuts. I'm starting to sound like the worst kind of sockpuppet.

    edit2: pun intended.

    Viktor Walters on
    I'm designing a print and play tabletop game system! Follow the Quicksilver Engine updates here.
    3DS FC: 3609-1288-7086 -- The tumbs
  • Twisted and meanTwisted and mean Registered User
    edited March 2012
    Spoiler:

    Twisted and mean on
  • Centipede DamascusCentipede Damascus ha ha just kidding I'm Frog ManRegistered User regular
    You, uh, might want to add some spoiler tags to that post, dude.

  • The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Cambiata wrote: »
    I agree with all the criticisms in that review, but I could overlook all of them if the ending was more satisfying

    This is also true.

    How? They are real, basic problems with the fundamental nature of the game as it stands. They don't go away with a different final ten minutes.

    Well that's exactly what happened with Mass Effect 1. A solid ending can easily make you forget a difficult first two acts. Even if the problems are mechanical, not thematic.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak-end_rule

    People are very forgiving of 'filler content' and 'sloppy gameplay' as long as they get satisfaction at the end. It's also why I think it's entirely reasonable for someone to say the last five minutes ruined the entire franchise. That's not a crazy, hyperbolic sentiment. It's perfectly reasonable (though not one I share).


    edit: Just so we're clear. I'm agreeing entirely with your review. Just saying that a better ending would have made a lot of people gloss over the errors (which don't go away, as you said), but they can just forget about them.

    The_Scarab on
    scarab you have mental problems
  • OrikaeshigitaeOrikaeshigitae Registered User, ClubPA regular
    Yeah, fair enough. This is one of those situations where having a critic's eye actually means that there are some basic differences to how you experience media. Thanks, folks.

2
Sign In or Register to comment.