Limited Choices discussion (merged threads)

edited March 2013 in The Walking Dead
I was a bit disappointed with the story choices. Reminded me of LA Noir, where most game choices are superficial. If you pick Shawn he still dies the same. Even if the other chosen character died(Doug or Carlie), the other said the same things. And no matter what I said nothing changed story points, like Larry shoving you down even if you side with him. Oh and with Glenn, if you hand the girl the gun he says how can you let people give up but if you refuse he says how can you deny someone's choice! The character's in the game should have the same convictions no matter what you choose, this is unacceptable character development.

Supposedly the choices of Episode 1 greatly affect how everyone views you though... I sure hope the following episodes prove more impressive with the choices, and I realllllly hope it branches out and expands more. For a 2hr game it should have a lot more possibilities.

I know it's only a $5 game, just please don't let me down.

Otherwise, the story itself was awesome, the gameplay is really good and the art style is incredible. Still the best TT game to date! Keep it up guys!
«13456716

Comments

  • edited April 2012
    I would have to disagree with what you stated about Larry choices.

    I think no matter what you do for Larry, he will NOT like you and will try to kill you. He is one of those judgmental assholes and he sees Lee as a murderer only. To him, that means Lee does not deserve to live.

    The Glenn thing I have to agree with. He really should be one way or the other, not swap only because you made a particular decision. At the end, if you had given the girl the gun, he does begin to understand the reasons behind it. I have yet to play the other branch of that to the end to see his reaction there.

    I think there will be a few other choices we made that just need more time to come to fruition within the story. Episode 1 has been more about survival and reaching relative safety. I think later Eps will show more reactions to choices we made in 1.
  • edited April 2012
    Yeah I hope you're right.... I'm skeptical so far, and hate when there's just an illusion of choice/effect.

    If they pull it off, it could be one of the greatest gaming achievements in history! Even Mass Effect choices were pretty weak in the overall story, and as I said before, LA Noir although a great game, did not really have any choices that mattered whatsoever. When you go back and play a different way, you get the same results no matter what.

    As long as TWD has at least a few branches I'll be happy. It would be even better tho if you actually went to a few different locations due to your choices, but I'm not holding my breath for that.

    Either way, still an amazing piece of entertainment, especially for $5 per 2hr episode!
  • edited April 2012
    Agreed!
  • G.RossG.Ross Telltale Alumni
    edited April 2012
    The designers are trying really hard to make those choices matter further down the rabbit hole. I'm hoping you'll be pleased. :)
  • edited April 2012
    I really hope they do. After reading ADavidson's original post I'm skeptical but hopeful.
  • edited April 2012
    G.Ross wrote: »
    The designers are trying really hard to make those choices matter further down the rabbit hole. I'm hoping you'll be pleased. :)
    I know they are and understand just how hard that can be. If they pull it off, it will be a real historical moment. I can't wait! :D

    further down the wabbit hole? *snarfle*
  • edited April 2012
    G.Ross wrote: »
    The designers are trying really hard to make those choices matter further down the rabbit hole. I'm hoping you'll be pleased. :)

    Yesssssss! I am so excited! Best zombie game ever!
  • edited April 2012
    The game was more linear than I was hoping. Don't get me wrong, I thoroughly enjoyed EP1 and can't wait for the next installment (can't it be weekly? Every 2 weeks? Please? :p) but I felt as though there wasn't really a great deal of choices to make that had any significant effect on the story.

    Okay it's only episode 1, but there's only 5 episodes, so surely the first one should do more than just set the scene. I wanted to see events happen differently or not at all based on choices. The only real choice we had was who to save - why couldn't we have chosen to try to save both? Or none? Or at the beginning, why couldn't we have chosen a different way to kill the first zombie, logically everyone would go for the shotgun, but couldn't we have chosen to save the bullet and used the shotgun as a melee weapon? Then the horde wouldn't appear.

    I don't want choices to only affect the ending or later down the line, it should have an effect on every episode. Choosing between two people did have an impact but hasn't really changed the story. I mean Hershel still speaks of lying no matter the choices made, or, Kenny still saves you despite choices made. We don't really get to affect the overall story, only small bits and pieces along the way differ.

    Overall though fantastic game, but for me has yet to live up to the "choices tailor the story" claim. Also in an ideal world there'd be more in each episode or a shorter wait between each one.
  • edited April 2012
    ADavidson wrote: »
    And no matter what I said nothing changed story points, like Larry shoving you down even if you side with him.

    I think Larry will always be a selfish jerk no matter what happens. Besides, I think it's being set up to where Larry will have a most satisfying and gruesome death.
  • edited April 2012
    Just to throw my two cents in...
    Or at the beginning, why couldn't we have chosen a different way to kill the first zombie, logically everyone would go for the shotgun, but couldn't we have chosen to save the bullet and used the shotgun as a melee weapon? Then the horde wouldn't appear.
    Imagine this- You do not know the cop is a zombie, you do not know there are more zombies in the woods, and you do not know that zombies are attracted to loud noises. In fact, at the beginning of the zombie-pocolypse, you know absolutely zip about zombies. You have a shotgun and a shell for it in hand, with a fairly bloodied cop crawling at you, apparently to kill you. Now, are you really going to use that shotgun as a club? Really? Somehow, I doubt it.
    I mean Hershel still speaks of lying no matter the choices made
    If you are as honest as possible with him, he speaks of lying, but he doesn't come right out and call you a liar. He just lets you know that he knows there is more to you than you are saying. He is also much nicer about it at the end of the conversation.
  • VainamoinenVainamoinen Moderator
    edited April 2012
    Here's a fairly recent quote from Chuck Jordan (until 2010, he was with Telltale) on the failures of Mass Effect 3:
    Essentially, BioWare created the problem for themselves by, to be blunt, promising more than they or any other developer could deliver. They’ve sold the Mass Effect series on the premise that the player can completely customize his character and his character’s story [...]. But even the largest team of writers and content creators won’t be able to deliver an indefinite number of conclusions that all have the same level of impact, satisfying enough to conclude a multi-year, multi-game epic series. People have been spending years trying to come up with a way to create systems that generate compelling narratives, and no one’s cracked the problem yet.

    I think that is still the key problem here in The Walking Dead. You can't have the story branching out too much because Telltale would never finish the game and tie all loose ends. Particularly not in the first episode: Too much branching out in episode 1 and the design trouble will rise exponentially for the future episodes. If they're bold, we might get a real branch-out kicker by episode 3. If they're not, we'd at least get 800% more ending diversity in episode 5 than EA's undisputed failure delivered.
  • edited April 2012
    I mean Hershel still speaks of lying no matter the choices made

    Here's how you avoid that. I'm not sitting here and doing it as i'm describing it but I can lead you in the right direction.
    Wait til night. Don't say anything and Shawn will call you a Good Samaritan. When you meet Hershel, do the same and Shawn will introduce you as a Good Samaritan. Tell Hershel your name and that you hurt your leg in a car accident and that a cop was giving you a ride.
    When it comes to the barn, I can't remember which choices I made which had him trusting me. Be sure you say "sure" when he asks if you want to hear his advice.

    Anyway, there's some way very close to all that to get that. It's tough because Lee is a very poor liar.
  • edited April 2012
    Shawn will call you a Good Samaritan in the daytime too if you stay silent :)

    In the barn, tell Hershel that your family is in Macon. That's one I remember.
  • edited April 2012
    I have noticed quite a few people are upset because they want more choices in the game. I understand the frustration of, “Why can’t I do this instead of only that?” I would like to try to explain a little as to why this is. Most of the following is opinion and speculation, but also with some understanding in the mechanics of writing and programming.

    When building something in the magnitude of our newly beloved game, there must be limitations. The creators cannot build for every eventuality. The writing alone would take forever, and fill millions of pages. To put it mildly, to even make the attempt would be ludicrous.

    The programming would be even worse. To allow for branching of the game in most cases, it is not as simple as adding or changing one line of code. Many times it includes complete new sections. Then to have those differences reflected as the game progresses, requires all that additional code in every place it would come into play. Can you see where this is going? Think of the Ripple Effect. It starts as a little ripple here, but as it gets farther away, it becomes bigger and bigger.

    I am certain, when they began the process of creating this game; they had ideas for it flowing out of every pore. They wanted to include everything they possibly could. That is when the limitations kill things. So they have to decide where they must “trim the fat”, and where they can expand.

    They look at every situation and decide the best ones to add meat to. Some are obvious choices and others not so much. There are some that may have room for expansion, but because most people would choose a particular path, it is decided to only create that path. Decisions like that help to keep things manageable without too much sacrifice.

    Let me give a hypothetical example without giving away any spoilers. Let’s use the early scene of Lee and the newly-turned-zombie cop. (I saw this mentioned in another thread, which is what gave me the idea to write this. No disrespect is intended to the original post writer.)

    Imagine, if you will, a room full of writers and programmers, all around a large table. The table is covered with papers, writing utensils, half-empty cups, and half-eaten donuts. This is how I see it happening…

    “What can Lee do with the cop crawling after him to kill him?”

    “What would most people do?”

    “Well, they were just in a cop car. There must be a gun nearby, right?”

    “Hell, yeah, shoot the sum-bitch. That’s what I’d do.”

    “Hehe. That’s what most people would do.”

    “Exactly, but where is it?”

    “What about a pistol on his hip?”

    “Good. What else?”

    “There’s a shotgun in the car. Almost every cop car has a shotgun in that bracket in the front seat.”

    “Hmmm. What if it was thrown from the car during the wreck?”

    “The cop might have grabbed it to defend himself.”

    “Perhaps, but either way, I like the shotgun over the pistol. Shotguns are better equipped for blowing heads off dead cops, and it gives good shock value to the initial kill scene.”

    “Do we want to give them a shotgun right out of the gate? They might seem a bit too over-equipped for the start of the game.”

    “How about we only give them one shot?”

    “He could use it as a club.”

    “We want shock value here, and most people will want to shoot him, not club him over the head. That will come later.”


    You can perhaps see where this is heading.

    Hopefully more will understand now why we do not get to do everything we may have wanted during the game. I feel we are given quite a few choices for a two hour game, with much more to come. The price is certainly nothing to complain about.

    Fantastic job, Telltale! I applaud you and can’t wait for the next episode! *Clap,clap,clap!*
  • VainamoinenVainamoinen Moderator
    edited April 2012
    Sorry for the merge, Wabbit. But I really think this is the right place for your post. ;)
  • edited April 2012
    Sorry for the merge, Wabbit. But I really think this is the right place for your post. ;)
    That's cool. Thanks :)
  • edited April 2012
    It's not that the choices felt limited, they just felt arbitrary and lacking in plot differentiation. Choice games are tough to make since people want their decisions to have story weight yet the developers have a clear vision of where the plot must go. It's all about seasoning the illusion of choice with enough "my decicions matter!" type of variation moments while traveling down the main plot.

    A good example is the Carly/Doug decision (as there is a clear plot difference) and a bad example is the Duck/Shawn decision (as either decision leads to Duck's survivial and Lee being forced from the farm).
  • edited April 2012
    Saboteur-6 wrote: »
    A good example is the Carly/Doug decision (as there is a clear plot difference) and a bad example is the Duck/Shawn decision (as either decision leads to Duck's survivial and Lee being forced from the farm).
    Sure the initial results are basically the same, but farther reaching results may vary. From the comics, we know Shawn must die. I feel they were just choosing to show that here, instead of having it happen somewhere off screen. Opinions vary on whether seeing his death was a good idea or not. Some feel like we should have saved him and he die later.

    The farther implications are whether we tried to save Duck or not. How will Kenny and Katjaa feel at some later point? They may seem okay with it now, but what happens in a stressful situation? Either one of them may remember that point and be very upset, or very happy about it (depending).

    For us, it is an unknown as to what exactly will affect later parts of the game.
  • edited April 2012
    Just because we haven't seen an effect from a decision point doesn't mean that there won't be one.
  • edited April 2012
    I would have to disagree with what you stated about Larry choices.

    I think no matter what you do for Larry, he will NOT like you and will try to kill you. He is one of those judgmental assholes and he sees Lee as a murderer only. To him, that means Lee does not deserve to live.

    The Glenn thing I have to agree with. He really should be one way or the other, not swap only because you made a particular decision. At the end, if you had given the girl the gun, he does begin to understand the reasons behind it. I have yet to play the other branch of that to the end to see his reaction there.

    I think there will be a few other choices we made that just need more time to come to fruition within the story. Episode 1 has been more about survival and reaching relative safety. I think later Eps will show more reactions to choices we made in 1.

    /agree
  • edited April 2012
    I think it's a little unfair to judge how effectively player choice has been implemented when we've only played 20% of the game. We're never going to really know how well it was done until we've gotten to the very end. Remember (since we seem to keep comparing TWD to Mass Effect) most people thought the Mass Effect games were doing a great job with player choice until the last ten minutes of the last game. Now it's become an example of how to do it wrong (or, more realistically, how it can't possibly be done to the degree that people were expecting with those games). Player choice lives and dies in the endgame.

    Personally, I've been very impressed with the way Telltale seems to be implementing it so far. It's much more subtle and much trickier than I would have expected. It seems to me that a choice like the one at the end, between Doug and Carly, would be relatively easy to work out. It's like a video game choose-your-own-adventure book. You choose Doug and you move on to A Version of the game, you choose Carly and you move on to B Version of the game. That's fairly simple. But having a choice like the one with Duck and Shawn that doesn't effect the immediate outcome, but instead effects how a number of characters react and respond to you further along in the game - that seems much more complicated and much more impressive to me. That's like moving on to B Version of the game, with variables of C, D and 50% of E.
  • edited April 2012
    Question for you guys...

    Did any of you completely betrayed Kenny?

    i wondered if you did, he wouldn't have came out with the axe and save Lee.

    Instead he would have took that icepick from the female walkers shoulder and kill her, then make a run for it.

    It probably never even happened that way, just wondering though?
  • XPOXPO
    edited April 2012
    This is my first TellTale Game and my first post.

    Just wanted to mention that though the choices appear limited up front, if you watch the preview for the next chapter (that plays after finishing chapter 1), some of the choices you make do come back to haunt you.

    I played it once where I sided with Larry and agreed to kill Duck. -- In the preview Kenny said something to the effect of "remember when you thought Duck was bitten and you were going to kill him...." (definitely not the quote but basically reminded Lee of what happened)

    the original time I played he didn't say it.

    So the branching is limited at the trunk of the tree, and looks like it can expand quite a bit down the line. At least that's what it looks like =)
  • edited April 2012
    Shawn was walker bait from the get go. He had to die for the canon to remain canon. He was already dead by the time of the original story. However appropriate it might seem to be able to save him somehow that is one instance where, as a prequel, there was only one way it could go down. I'm cool with that.

    However, I do hope Telltale focuses on real choices with consequences and sincere differences rather than the illusion of choice. Glen's being annoyed no matter what you do might be a problem, but then again I've met a guy like that. In a tough situation like that one there is no right answer and some people, perhaps not unlike Glen, wouldn't be happy with ANY choice you made. Naive to be p hoping there was some happy ending for the lady, but there wasn't, and Glen couldn't see that until later (as witnessed when he suggests he understand why you chose to let her off herself if you took that option). At least that's how I see it and it fits within the way they have portrayed Glen, to me.
  • edited April 2012
    ViCiOuS-V wrote: »
    Question for you guys...

    Did any of you completely betrayed Kenny?

    i wondered if you did, he wouldn't have came out with the axe and save Lee.

    Instead he would have took that icepick from the female walkers shoulder and kill her, then make a run for it.

    It probably never even happened that way, just wondering though?

    Kenny always saves you, he just calls you an asshole if you reject him.
  • edited April 2012
    Okay it's only episode 1, but there's only 5 episodes, so surely the first one should do more than just set the scene. I wanted to see events happen differently or not at all based on choices. The only real choice we had was who to save - why couldn't we have chosen to try to save both? Or none? Or at the beginning, why couldn't we have chosen a different way to kill the first zombie, logically everyone would go for the shotgun, but couldn't we have chosen to save the bullet and used the shotgun as a melee weapon? Then the horde wouldn't appear.

    I agree with you on this point. The choices need to be more adamant and versatile. A first person shooter would have gone through that zombie with a right click melee attack or a left click head shot. Although I'm guessing it's to early in the game to tell how detrimental the choices are that we make and what to expect in future episodes.
  • edited April 2012
    cyclopst wrote: »
    I agree with you on this point. The choices need to be more adamant and versatile. A first person shooter would have gone through that zombie with a right click melee attack or a left click head shot. Although I'm guessing it's to early in the game to tell how detrimental the choices are that we make and what to expect in future episodes.
    Well, since in the Which decisions are important? thread, I found this from Jake at TTG.....
    Jake wrote: »
    While those five big choices get called out for you, the game remembers literally everything you say to everyone, and writers of future episodes can call back to any dialog choice or series of events you've made when crafting how their episode plays out.
    I don't see how the choices could get any more adamant or versatile.
  • VainamoinenVainamoinen Moderator
    edited April 2012
    I don't see how the choices could get any more adamant or versatile.

    This does also mean that every choice might matter - not necessarily only the ones that trigger a story notification. Hmmmm.... ;)
  • edited April 2012
    This does also mean that every choice might matter - not necessarily only the ones that trigger a story notification. Hmmmm.... ;)
    Yeah. Scary, isn't it? ;)
  • edited April 2012
    Itll be interesting to see if the character we chose to save in Ep1 constantly gets into peril, and whether we will have the opportunity to drag them all the way through it or trade them out for someone 'better' in later episodes.
  • VainamoinenVainamoinen Moderator
    edited April 2012
    Yeah. Scary, isn't it? ;)

    Pretty much. Immersion into the game is definitely enhanced if you turn story notifications off, because you can never be sure what itty bitty thingie counts somehow. But I assume not many people did turn them off, because they WANT that control, that look into the mechanics, that behind-the-curtain look at their real options, the whole game with its pants down.

    Suddenly finding out that they weren't granted that... could scare the hell out of some players. ;)
  • edited April 2012
    My first play, I turned notifications off. I wanted that as-complete-as-possible immersion. I was extremely satisfied with the result. It was only for some of my subsequent plays that I turned the notifications on to get a glimpse into what my choice ramifications might be.

    My first thoughts after discovering all choices are saved was, "Uh oh. What did I do in my first play through? I could be screwed." I had put myself in Lee's shoes completely, as I am sure was TTG's intention. I made real life, spur-of-the-moment choices. Some good; some not so good. How things play out will be... interesting.

    I love what they have done here. To create such an immersing, interactive story is quite an accomplishment. I cannot wait for the next installment.
  • edited May 2012
    So the game starts out claiming that the story is tailored by (that is a quote) my choices. I thoroughly enjoyed my first playthrough. Then I started a second because I was curious to see how things could have played out differently.

    The first thing I found out is that your responses literally do not change conversations at all. In the cop car in the beginning I chose wildly different options and what happend was, without exception:

    *short reaction line*
    blabla bla what I was going to say anyway

    This trend was continued by all later conversations without fail.

    Alright then, I thought, there are choices to be made, definitive ones, so let's see how those play out. I had gone during the day the first time and went to Hershel's farm. The second time I went at night and lo and behold, I went to Hershel's farm. The only difference was that Hershel agreed to have the fence reinforced instantly, which, no matter what I'd have said, he would have anyway in the first scenario, I'm certain.

    Right. So but here comes the first -real- choice right? First time I saved Shawn obviously, or tried to, cause he died, and no matter what I said I got kicked off the farm. Second time I saved Ducky and no matter what I said I got kicked off the farm also. Whopsie.

    Not having learnt my lesson at that point, I figured you know what I'll just show the guy at the drug store, the asshole, what's what, I'll beat that guy down. Lo and behold, everything plays out exactly as it would have otherwise. I have to get heart medicine for the complete asshole. Why exactly do I have to do that? I just do. Ok then. Someone obviously tried it. Let me guess. If you agree that Ducky must be thrown out, it doesn't happen right? Color me surprised.

    And that is putting aside, for a moment, the insanity of that whole situation. We have a guy about to die right here, and another one who is about to die, maybe, who knows, somewhere else. The first guy needs medicine that is literally 10 feet away. In my first playthrough I wanted to help him, I figured he was just being emotional and making tough choices, no qualms, and I wasted over an hour triple checking everything until I gave up and went to get Quinn, only to learn that this nonsensical action is what you have to do to even get at the medicine. I challenge anyone to hack through a padlock with a fire axe in a way that somehow makes less noise than a tv on static. What a joke.

    It's 1 month between episodes, so if your reaction is, calm down guy, your choices will have consequences in later episodes - think for a minute. Is Chet being alive or dead really a consequence? He's barely a NPC. And ask yourself: why would we assume that the second episode has greater complexity than the first?

    Don't get me wrong, I thoroughly enjoyed my first playthrough, and I will play the others too (albeit mostly because I have no choice having already paid for them), but what seemed as an involving story where I choose my destiny has turned out to be nothign but a string of BUT THOUGH MUST's.

    And that would be fine. IF the game did not claim otherwise, explicitly, right off the bat. A hollow promise.

    I don't understand are people are just fine and dandy with this but get insanely irate over the mass effect 3 ending.

    EDIT: Moved it to where it would not be seen huh? Very classy guys.
  • edited May 2012
    I think conned may be to harsh a term, after all, Telltale does clearly state this is story driven, but, the lack of choices is a bit of a let down. I loved the story and the characters but it is more like a comic book than a game. Still, it was very entertaining to play and I do look forward to the next release.....
  • edited May 2012
    Having read the above post I decided to play through again, as not much else do do we dont even know when the next one will even be. And spot on so disappointed nothing different at all did not seem to matter what you say or do same places same people same outcome, burst my bubble on any play through value if just end up in the same place anyway
  • edited May 2012
    I dont think it was moved to were it wouldnt be seen, infact its been moved onto a more relative and fairly active thread, though i will be seeing if your thoughts are the same a few episodes down the line :-)
  • VainamoinenVainamoinen Moderator
    edited May 2012
    Franzs wrote: »

    EDIT: Moved it to where it would not be seen huh? Very classy guys.

    Moved to where it would be seen, where the topic was already discussed and where you might even find some answers, a more broad perspective and/or like minded people. No interest in that? Very classy guy.
  • edited May 2012
    We made our choices at first episode, we'll have to wait for the 2nd to see how much tailored is this story by us and consequences from our choices.

    We have only watched 1/5 from the whole game. Saying good or bad things for this feature it's pretty premature yet.

    All we can say now it's that it looks good. :)
  • edited May 2012
    Franzs wrote: »
    So the game starts out claiming that the story is tailored by (that is a quote) my choices. I thoroughly enjoyed my first playthrough. Then I started a second because I was curious to see how things could have played out differently.

    The first thing I found out is that your responses literally do not change conversations at all. In the cop car in the beginning I chose wildly different options and what happend was, without exception:

    *short reaction line*
    blabla bla what I was going to say anyway

    This trend was continued by all later conversations without fail.

    Alright then, I thought, there are choices to be made, definitive ones, so let's see how those play out. I had gone during the day the first time and went to Hershel's farm. The second time I went at night and lo and behold, I went to Hershel's farm. The only difference was that Hershel agreed to have the fence reinforced instantly, which, no matter what I'd have said, he would have anyway in the first scenario, I'm certain.

    Right. So but here comes the first -real- choice right? First time I saved Shawn obviously, or tried to, cause he died, and no matter what I said I got kicked off the farm. Second time I saved Ducky and no matter what I said I got kicked off the farm also. Whopsie.

    Not having learnt my lesson at that point, I figured you know what I'll just show the guy at the drug store, the asshole, what's what, I'll beat that guy down. Lo and behold, everything plays out exactly as it would have otherwise. I have to get heart medicine for the complete asshole. Why exactly do I have to do that? I just do. Ok then. Someone obviously tried it. Let me guess. If you agree that Ducky must be thrown out, it doesn't happen right? Color me surprised.

    And that is putting aside, for a moment, the insanity of that whole situation. We have a guy about to die right here, and another one who is about to die, maybe, who knows, somewhere else. The first guy needs medicine that is literally 10 feet away. In my first playthrough I wanted to help him, I figured he was just being emotional and making tough choices, no qualms, and I wasted over an hour triple checking everything until I gave up and went to get Quinn, only to learn that this nonsensical action is what you have to do to even get at the medicine. I challenge anyone to hack through a padlock with a fire axe in a way that somehow makes less noise than a tv on static. What a joke.

    It's 1 month between episodes, so if your reaction is, calm down guy, your choices will have consequences in later episodes - think for a minute. Is Chet being alive or dead really a consequence? He's barely a NPC. And ask yourself: why would we assume that the second episode has greater complexity than the first?

    Don't get me wrong, I thoroughly enjoyed my first playthrough, and I will play the others too (albeit mostly because I have no choice having already paid for them), but what seemed as an involving story where I choose my destiny has turned out to be nothign but a string of BUT THOUGH MUST's.

    And that would be fine. IF the game did not claim otherwise, explicitly, right off the bat. A hollow promise.

    I don't understand are people are just fine and dandy with this but get insanely irate over the mass effect 3 ending.

    EDIT: Moved it to where it would not be seen huh? Very classy guys.
    )





    I actually agree with all of this, the game is great but so disappointing how the choices ended up within episode one.
  • edited May 2012
    ADavidson wrote: »
    I know it's only a $5 game, just please don't let me down.
    I guess i got robbed on Steam then? :confused:
This discussion has been closed.