The Witcher 3 and Mass Effect Andromeda thread

Or it stands to reason that Leviathans tampered with the design and included the Catalyst in it to rewrite it. They're the only ones who know about its existance afterall other than the Catalyst/Reapers themselves and the cinematic closeup on shifty-eyes when you ask the Leviathan about the Crucible is clearly intentional.

Interesting.  Don't know if I should wait until I get there on my current MET PT (I'm about to hit Virmire, then Ilos) or just open up an old save.  That actually makes more sense.

Funny thing about direct confrontation with reapers (capital ships, anyway) is that their destruction represents a failure of the AI's prime directive to preserve life at all costs. All those "preserved" lives, gone.  Any organized resistance to the harvest that's powerful enough to destroy any reapers would be an automatic fail of the solution.

I've never been entirely sure whether the Catalyst is the AI created by the Leviathan, or something the AI created. If it's the latter, the Catalyst prolly destroyed it's own creator at some point, cuz it's inevitable.

Where's my aspirin bottle...

I really only judged the ones I did play, so...

My point was, the reason I never played it was because I didn't like the first two.  If you played two successive games of a series and found them not to your liking would you buy the third?  I made no comment about the quality of TW3, though did remark in the series based on playing 2/3 of it.  I think that's reasonable for anyone.

Or, I could just assume it's not my cup of tea.  For example, I prefer ME over DA because I love scifi.  I think fantasy is okay but I don't like it the way I love scifi.   But, you do you and play games when you haven't like the entire series beforehand.

You really think you're a better judge of what games dmc1001 will like than dmc1001 is?

What a stupid fucking article

Comparing Apples to Brussel Sprouts.

Massive difference in development time and budget
Scifi vs Fantasy
W3 was universally well recieved, while Andromeda was nit picked shot to shit by the meme team before it even got released

Sucess does not prove anything for personal enjoyment or opinion on the game, Dying light as of now has nearly 8 out of 10 on metacritic user score, and I had to force myself in finishing it, I thought the game was boring for many reasons.

And that is despite the fact that while I did not thought dead island was very good, it had some enjoyable parts and finishing the game was not a chore. It definetely was for dying light despite the fact that the game was mostly well received.

The market and reviews score don't mean shit for many people and that is totally fine, the fact that something is well received or torn apart does not mean its good or bad for many person because many people have opinion that differs from the general public and they are neither right or wrong because of that. Jim sterling himself has some reviews that goes very differently than the general opinion, he did think modern warfare 3 was a good game while everybody says it was not, and at the same time he thought mario kart 7 was mediocre while many people thought it was great.

Did he had to rework his brain to think like the majority? No he did not. And that is the same for dmc1001, its not because many people says that the game is great that he needs to think like them, nor does he have to try a franchise that he disliked the first two game.

I loved the witcher 3, but I would totally understand someone who does not want to try for different reasons.

It's "Art"  You just didn't get it.