...But the DLC also doesn't explain who James Vega is or that you're being court martialed. It's called backstory, since there's six months between 2 and 3, and seeing as those six months don't involve Collector/Reaper ass kicking, you don't get to experience it. Instead it's described through dialogue, the same as any other game or movie. I can see the argument against DLC, but the first half of the point here doesn't even come up in said DLC.

@Chrisvader774 But then people will just complain about EA being greedy and making people pay to get the "real" ending. Companies can't please everyone in the community, make a profit, and keep their evil corporate overlords happy. They made a game, you bought it, Bioware isn't obliged to do anything else once you have that disc in your hand. I admit, I haven't finished ME3 yet, but so far I've had so many moments of humor, drama, suspense, and sadness that I never would have expected just from one game. If the ending really is that bad, then that's a shame, but I still think the journey there was worth the 60 bucks.

Gaming community, I am the dissapoint. Bioware's teams put out amazing games, the least people could do is treat the employees with the respect you except from one human being to another.

Because Blizzard doesn't make enough money already?

This is the sad thing about great series, a company can't just make three games anymore and let the series have a graceful end. That's why we have Revelations, Fallout New Vegas, and Bioshock Infinite (These are good games, but they aren't true sequels, like the post says, they're a mesh of an expansion pack). And I won't even mention Call of Duty. And do you really think we won't see another Mass Effect after this March? Unfortunately, the sales count more towards company then the quality and innovation of a game. No company is going to let a series end gracefully when they can bang out a new 60 dollar game every year, add a few new gimmicks, and call it a sequel when there's no real changes. Here's hoping some devs at Ubisoft care about the series and let AC III be the best it can be instead of AC II/Brotherhood/Revealations with a few new tricks.

Because we really need another firestorm of video game bashing from mainstream media if game developers flex their creative muscles by adding more gore or sex. Considering how the public reacted from stupid things like the five seconds of nudity in Mass Effect 1 or the Hot Coffee incident of GTA, I fail to see how pushing boundaries of ratings can help with the reputation of the gaming industry. After all, I'm sure gamers are sick of being pegged as potential mass murderers for playing GTA or COD. Overall, the rating system (at least the part the editor is bashing about stifled creativity and the dreaded AO rating) is fine. Developers have and will continue to make great video games, and in no way is creativity stifled because you can't have an full on porno cutscene or too much guts being ripped out some guy's chest.