All thats going to happen is that launch sales will be much lower than before and people are going to base their purchases off of word of mouth and review scores from websites like Gamespot and IGN. Rather than initially purchase the game, find out it's not to their liking and then sell it back, people will only buy a game that is a AAA title, which a lot of small scale publishers are not able to create.
You know what? It was actually a lot more of a satisfying ending than the one they had before. It seemed like proper ending like one you'd get from the Fallout series and such. The good thing about it too, is that it doesn't really disprove the "Indoctrination Theory" that's been going around, but for those that don't believe it, it is a fulfilling ending. Now some people are also still talking about the destruction of the relays and how they can eliminate entire solar systems. You have to remember that the Relays are reaper tech, and that they might just be imploding due to the energy pulse wave, and it may be different than just smashing it with an asteroid.
From the videos they presented, this game looks like the game NFS: Carbon should have been. I miss Black Box, they did a good job with the original NFS: MW, but Criterion knows what they are doing and we'll just have to give them the benefit of the doubt for now.
If they had an offline single player, like you know, their previous two games and maybe an "Open Multiplayer" like Diablo II, they wouldn't have to worry about this problem. Jus sayin...
NFS: MW was probably one of the best NFS's to date, other than Hot Pursuit II. Everytime I hear they're making a new NFS, I hope that it would be a proper sequel to NFS: MW, and Carbon didn't cut it. So hopefully, like @elzabador said, it won't turn into some hardcore arcade thing, and there'll be proper driving and crash physics like in The Run
Man, if they do to Elder Scrolls what they did to Warcraft, changing it from one style of gameplay (Warcraft being RTS) to another (MMORPG with WoW) I'm going to be upset. They better keep it real time and no silly standing there waiting for powers to cool down.
As was the case with Dante's Inferno, that by the time it came out everyone knew it was a God of War clone, what the level layouts were like and even how to defeat some enemies. It takes the fun out of the game in the same way an author would take the story out of a book by summing up the chapter before hand. Just enough to know what to expect and ruin the magic. This game isn't ruined for me, but I'm not psyched up to play it.
@Dante369 I completely agree with you. It's not that the ending was insignificant or that it was terrible, it was just drastically non-conclusive. What's the point of having a meaningful relationship, with Shepard and his spouse repeating "I love you" if they display no obvious signs of guilt or remorse? Whats the point of delving into the theme of sacrifice if the game displays no benefit of doing it? When the writer mentioned artwork, it would be as though an artist told everyone they would paint them a picture of a sunset, got money from them and then revealed it to secretly be a picture of a funeral. Yes, it may have it's artistic merits in its own right, but it's ultimately not what the consumers wanted. In all honesty, even a DLC that just had a concluding cinematic that joined the final cinematic with the main characters to that after the credits would be virtuous enough.
My guilty pleasure is actually Mercenaries: World in Flames which Gamespot only gave a 5.0. Yes it has glitchy graphics, terrible controls and a confused storyline, but its the experience that drives what a game is. Game is like art, it can be interpreted by each individual solely on their own personal experiences and how they relate it to that adventure. That game gave me an experience in freedom, chaos and destruction that I have yet to see
Brokendemise's comments