madskillz said:
Interesting points. For me, Munkeh, I could care less about framerates and variety and more about gameplay. You can have a turd as a game, but if the gameplay is awesome, I'm forgiving. I got tired of it locking up sometime - and my 360 scratched my review copy - but that was after like 11 straight hours of playing it. That game was HOT. Seriously, I look at all of it and say wow. It's like GTA - I love the open sandbox. I hate linear games. In ME, you can jet around the entire galaxy and still come back and have a blast. And oh, the mission on the Moon was the bomb for me. I can't tell you how long I just stared at Earth. Is it perfect? No. But name another game recently that combines RPG elements, real-time combat, a story that can change based on your actions, the option to intimidate folks, powerups and real strategy. Man, the warts and all can't stop me if the game totally rocks.
|
I'm not saying that framerate is more important than gameplay, its just the gameplay is so good that they need to concentrate on technical aspects rather than the gameplay because that only needs tweaking. I would like to actually go to the earth as well, even if just for a little bit. Personally I either like a completely linear game (a la Call of Duty or Uncharted) where it is completely focuses on a single thread of story if you like, whereas in Mass Effect there is more depth in the story (which I think is awesome (all the codex stuff) and all the sidequests) but I do feel it can be a little overwhelming with so much to explore. My guide does help, but I do still find it quite confusing.







