Maybe the sales targets were unrealistically high, but Tomb Raider and Hitman are both iconic series, and these new entries were both great games. I'm not all that surprised that Sleeping Dogs didn't sell as well (I personally loved it but it lacked the polish you'd expect of a AAA game), but considering all I've heard about all of these games I expected more sales.

I don't think it's them ignoring the PC market, either. They've done a better job than some other publishers of paying attention to the PC market. For example, Sleeping Dogs had PC only texture upgrades and Tomb Raider had that new ATI TressFX tech on display. I'd say it's a failure of their marketing department if anything. SE's not as good at marketing as they used to be. Remember the commercial for FF7? That made me want to buy the game despite never having played a JRPG.

I played this on my friend's Wii U. It's not all that good. A few nice concepts--I personally hate permadeath but I could at least stomach its implementation here--but it's just not that good a game. I'm starting to think there's not really a place for what the old school folks call survival horror in the modern big budget marketplace. There might be one in indy games (that's where basically all the 2d platformers went) but the market for the kind of survival horror the horror freaks want just doesn't seem to be there.

Male paragon vanguard and male renegade infilitrator for my two playthroughs. I love Jennifer Hale to death, but femshep always came off as too butch for my tastes. Which I suppose is going to happen when the dialogue is the same for the tough as nails marine guy. That does it for some folks, but not for me and obviously not for a lot of people. Whatever its other problems, I quite liked both male and female Hawke from DA2, myself.

I'm glad they have all these options, but personally I get annoyed with the folks claiming femshep is the true Shepard, people who play a male/vanderloo/paragon Shepard are idiots/lazy, etc etc. Everyone has their own preferences and no one is the "correct" set, but it seems statistically people liked doing things on the default path. Hopefully this helps give some perspective.

Well, I suppose to make a game as big as Assassin's Creed on a yearly basis, you need things like this. Still, it certainly helps to explain the kind of schizophrenic throw it all in feel the last few games have had, especially ACIII.

While I'm happy to see a lot of folks working, I'd also like them not to all be working on one project. It's a bit hard to believe Ubisoft wouldn't be better off in the long run if those 8 separate studios were making 8 separate games, and they took AC off the annual production schedule.

The campaign was good, not great (WoL gave a great feel of the world but this one was back to old style floating heads giving you barebones intel, and it lacked the options WoL had). Still, for the amount of content it had, 40 bucks isn't bad--remember, people complain about DLC now but this is technically an expansion, not DLC, which people used to not have issues with.

I've got problems with Blizzard myself, as I'm not a fan of the DRM, the AH in Diablo III, or this pandering to professional players who make up less than 1% of the population in SCII. However, I'm even more annoyed with people just saying "Blizzard sucks, Diablo III sucks, SCII sucks, everything sucks" with no explanation. They just assume everyone else shares the same opinion as them. It's fanboy myopia at its worst.

I'm not necessarily concerned because it's a Chinese company, I'm concerned because I finally seem to know the reason so many of these top people from Epic got out last year. That many people leaving so quickly does not bode well for this company's management strategy.

I'm in Japan so I'm happy for now, but I'd much prefer a game I could fully understand so I'm hoping for an English release. Really, I thought SE had learned by now not to ignore the western market for this kind of stuff.

@frankblack789 Well, that's the question isn't it? The thing is, games have been very violent for a generation (Mortal Kombat was a long time ago, folks), and we're not all axe murderers. Personally, I'm not of the opinion that freedom of expression should be censored because there's a (highly debatable) chance that some games might have an impact on people who are already disturbed and should be getting psychiatric help. Nor should that constitutional right be interfered with just to make it easier on parents--yes, being a parent is hard, but it's also not a job for the government.

Unfortunately, getting to the real source of the issue, that is, actually catching these disturbed people before they go on killing sprees regardless of what influences them, is much harder. It's a lot easier for politicians to go after the bogeyman of the evil violent video games than to beef up our mental health infrastructure and early warning systems.

@vault-boy @OJ_the_LION Yay, condescending comment number 10,000 about this game by someone who "gets it" over someone who they think doesn't. The game's point was interesting, it just wasn't the best game I've played, and intentional or not, that's not a good thing. Call it a statement if you like, at the end of the day people still paid for a full entertaining experience and that's what they should get.

Shame it's not the playable characters, but still it's a bit interesting. Despite the vocal complaints about RE6, I might get it. There were similar vocal complaints about RE5 and I put by far the most amount of time into that one out of the series. Playing co op with my good friend as Sheva and me as Chris, I lost track of how many times we cleared the game and played mercs, it just had replay value the other games don't.