The game's new "Galaxy at War" system measures your Shepard's Galactic Readiness and weighs possible outcomes of the game's final battle, factoring in not just single-player performance in Mass Effect 3, but your actions in earlier games. “Multiplayer will definitely have an effect on your single-player experience through the Galaxy at War system,” explains Houston, “so as you play the multiplayer and the Co-Op and the more successful you are, the more that will affect your Galactic Readiness level which will then affect your end game result.”
http://www.gamesradar.com/mass-effect-3-multiplay…

WOW! Stupidity! Apparently I can't type M A S S effect without that word being censored,if that hinders the link, just fix those letters. Sorry folks.

Good question, let me ask for some clarity because I skipped MW2, so I was in on alterIW. Now you are saying that this was a hack/user-fix created for the game? Is this something that, when used on a LEGAL copy of the game would lead people to belive you were running a pirated copy of the game? If so, that means that a good portion of the audience playing LEGAL copies of the game were possibly mislabeled as pirates, and that should certainly be taken into account. Even if only 25-30% of those numbers are changed, that's still a huge shift in what we previously thought were illegal players!

Great points man, thanks for sharing! :O)

What is the cost to port a game over to PC, and actually treat it well. I'm not saying to make a huge overhaul of said game, but to add customizable graphics options, controls, etc. I'm not even stepping into multiplayer, I know that is the most intense portion, but to make a port of a game, say like Spiderman Edge of Time. What are the boundaries? What is the ceiling for invest vs profit?

Also, what does one of these ports have to sell to be considered profitable? To me, the consumer, it seems crazy that every game has to sell 1 million copies to get a sequel? I mean the PC port of MW2 sold 290,000 copies right? So we still have Black Ops and MW3 coming to the platform, how far below that 1/4 million sales can the game dip?

by the way, how can you guys make your comments so big?

And by the way, Its so hard to "vote with our wallets" as PC gamers when this series gave us 5 great games in CoD, UO, CoD2, CoD4, and world at war. Many PC gamers, including myself, are in denial that Activision is trying to change our game's ecosystem to the console ecosystem. What happens when you take a tropical bird and make it live at the south pole with the penguins? Its not gonna survive is it? This is why I am concerned with the desicions made by game devs today.

I'm stepping away from the piracy topic because I think it's been discussed enough. Piracy exists, in all forms of media to include, but not limited to – music, movies, and games. So I'd rather digress and discuss PC gaming in general.

Money talks, plain and simple. Publishers want Developers to make something profitable – if it does not provide revenue, it either won't be developed or be as fully featured. This is in reference to the NHL ports in which features were missing.

DICE went on record publicly recently stating that Battlefield 3's lead platform for development was PC, but halfway through they switched to console development to get the product out the door and to ensure that they had an equal experience. Now despite the myriad server and other issues the game has experience, and thus been mostly fixed since release – the game has been received well for performance, graphics, gameplay, and features. All platforms are the same, with the PC version edging out in a large margin simply for the graphics.

I PREFER to play PC shooters with keyboard + mouse and have a really high resolution and set various other options like anti-aliasing that consoles cannot produce. Not everyone can afford a gaming PC to do this nor do some even care. But I do, that's "how I was raised" so to speak. Of the racing games or third person games I play on PC, I tend to plug-in my Xbox 360 controller to enjoy the experience a bit better and get all the visual fidelity I desire.

PC development should not be an afterthought or treated as the red-headed step-child either. I'll play a port if I have to, but I tend to lean towards developers that make PC-only games such as CD Projekt who made The Witcher 2 or even indie devs because care and attention is given to those games.

I don't think they should abandon the PC platform due to weak sales or the ratio of pirated games to retail purchased games. I think there is something inherently wrong that they should determine WHY someone is pirating the game rather than just make a sub-par product either by design or lack of attention.

Sorry for the scatterbrain response, but had to say something on this…

I think I am more realistic with my expectations than the average PC gamer—I enjoy many ports and games that others turn their noses up at. I am THAT guy who likes the movie tie-ins and licensed products because I play them with my kids, but they aren't to be found anymore. I am the PC gamer who loved War for Cybertron and enjoys Spider-Man properties, but they have gone away. I voted with my wallet for those, and I lost. And then on other franchises I voted with my wallet and still lost those franchises. It's a lose-lose situation for us; if we choose to not buy a crappy port, the franchise gets pulled from the platform because of poor sales. If we support the franchises we enjoy, we still may not see them return. Why is the ball in their court when the wallet is in my pocket? Because either way PC gamers seem to lose. When I've stood behind a franchise I liked, it still gets pulled. When I stop buying crappy ports, they get pulled. That doesn't mean that I don't enjoy those franchises or still wouldn't like to experience them, but the choice is removed from my hands. I paid full price for War for Cybertron, will I see the next game on PC? I have my doubts. It's easy to say "eat somewhere else", but if I am a pc gamer and a Transformers/NHL/Spiderman fan, what are my choices? If I don't conform to the console experience, the choice has been taken out of my hands. Without a console purchase, my only choice to "eat somewhere else" is to find alternative games on my platform, and some franchises just don't have an alternative. Call of Duty has tried different measures to adapt itself for PC, can other franchises say that? I see many companies pull their IP's rather than say they made a bad port, clean up and give it a better attempt with the next in the franchise. Rather than regroup and make some changes the common solution is to simply pull out. As a gamer who enjoys all kinds of experiences, that doesn't sit well with me.

OK, so I see what you are saying about piracy, and I'm not trying to justify illegal actions-two wrongs don't make a right, completely correct. My frustration there is that it just gets pigeon-holed as a PC problem when it's not. Sadly, there haven't been any good solutions to this yet–even Ubisoft's oft slandered "always on DRM" was hacked before the games hit shelves. The problem is here to stay, it's a terrible pill to swallow, but as a gamer, I hate seeing developers run because of it. Crysis piracy ratios were said to be as high as 15:1 or even 20:1, yet the game made 22 million dollars. It's disgusting to see that ratio so high, but to say that every one of those torrented copies would have converted to a game sale is mere speculation. I'm not a big numbers guy, but 22 million dollars seems to be a successful game.

Let's talk anti-piracy measures, why did Batman : AA get it right and no one followed suit? If you played a pirated version of Batman : AA, you got the full experience, with one minor flaw—everytime you tried to glide as Batman, you were enveloped in a cloud of poisonous gas and died. I don't know the details of how tough or costly this was to implement, but it suggests to me that there are ways to add a failsafe to the code. There is innovation to be made if the resources are committed, we just haven't hit that point yet.

OK, I agree and disagree with some of your other comments. Yes, the PC is a different market. Yes, there are different needs there. Yes, many PC gamers are overzealous with that point, and certainly demand too much. I disagree that the same experience cannot be had on both console and PCs. I can think of many ports that did not have to change the overall experience—Call of Duty being one. Yes, online play is different and Call of Duty gets chided for not having ranked dedicated servers, but the core experience does not have to be changed to work on PC. I can think of a bunch of ports–Activision's own Wolverine Origins, Transformers : WfC–that work very well on PC and don't need to be overhauled for the system. I think we can agree that matchmaking systems are a console mechanic that does not get the best reception when brought into the PC arena. Are there differences that need to be addressed, sure. It's not a lofty, unattainable goal, many have succeeded. Resident Evil 5 was a great port, Batman Arkham Asylum was amazing, and it had the best, inventive anti-piracy measure ever! My point is that it can be done and it doesn't have to be transformed into a different game. Also, it's frustrating, as a pc gamer, to see a console game get patched while the PC version has no such post-release support.

"Go all in or just opt out" — agreed. This is basically what I said on the show, too — I don't understand why Activision is still making PC games if the PC audience is not happy with the games they are making. I'd rather see a full commitment or none at all. A game that doesn't exist will never waste your time.

You can't put out weak games and then point fingers for poor sales — agreed. I totally get your point here and it's the old adage of "if you fail to plan, you plan to fail." It's not fair to underinflate the tire and then complain about the bumpy ride. BUT…publishers also make these decisions based on market research, so weak sales last year mean not much power this year. It's absolutely a slippery slope. But how did we get there in the first place? I have a theory but you ain't gonna like it.

Piracy — I DISAGREE with this common misconception: "You say PC gaming has piracy but you never talk about consoles having piracy." Two wrongs absolutely do not make a right. Acknowledging console piracy — which we did in our discussion on the podcast — in no way lessons the existence or impact of PC piracy, any more than noting the existence of a blue car would remove red ones from the roads. Console piracy exists; handheld piracy exists. Game piracy in all forms exists. PC piracy, as you note, is prevalent, probably because the tool to play the game and the tool to steal the game are the same. That open architecture makes it easy to create workarounds, cracks, keygens, and other tools of the illicit trade — but you can't easily make a crack for a 360 game using just a 360, you know?

I DO think some PC gamers forget that their market is very different from the console market — what works in one does not always work in the other. The console market is driving the decisions because that is were the bulk of the business is right now. Not that quality PC games can't be made — but to say "Look at what those guys are getting, I want that too" yet but on a completely different kind of architecture with different programming needs and independent hardware makers (thank heavens for standards, but we still have two major video chipsets and games still choose which one they optimize for) and all other manner of differences. I think PC gamers have very high expectations, yet they do not want to accept the inherent differences between the platform they own and the platform that's getting all the attention. If you really want a 360 experience, you're going to have to get a 360. Support the PC experiences you feel are worth your investment, but don't be hurt when a company doesn't want to make the same commitment to a much more challenging — albeit potentially prevalent — market.

PC gaming is not as expensive as we made it sound — not necessarily agreed, but acknowledged, when you bring up things like deluxe headsets and other console luxuries. I suppose that the costs balance out if you are comparing a fancy console setup with a standard PC setup (which is empowered to deliver a higher-res experience by default). It's still fundamentally difficult for console players to understand why you would pay $300 for a video card if their whole system costs that much, though. You are still looking at a good $1K for a decent gaming rig of new parts (dunno about you but I always carry over old parts with each new build, so I rarely build all new from scratch the way a console gamer would have to do for their first PC). Also, Kat and I both have gaming PCs, but both our 360s and our fancy headsets cost about the same as a single one of the PCs. So…still pretty darned expensive. And I've got the Newegg receipts to show why I say that! (Ironically, I play my console games on a very cheap Dell PC monitor via VGA and HDMI cables. It works wonderfully.)

But the ending of your article made me very concerned. I am NOT suggesting that PC gamers should be thankful for what they get. I would suggest they should be REALISTIC about what they get and consider the factors that contribute to what is offered. I am really suggesting that PC gamers — like all other gamers — have to vote with their wallet. Tired of being offered scraps? Eat somewhere else.

And don't mistake this for a flippant "get out of my kitchen" — this is a matter of self-respect. This is not a case of dumb, angry people boycotting a game before it comes out; yours is a very logical and understandable position based on unsatisfying personal experiences. I think you're right. But quite honestly, if you're mad as hell and they're not giving you what you want even after you tell them very loudly, why do you keep giving the agitators your money?

Actually, now that I look at it again, "Go all in or opt out" is actually a strange way to go about it. "Sell me a product the way I want it, or don't even offer it for sale." Um…what about not buying it? Why does the change have to come from their business plan instead of yours?

In short…why is the ball in their court if the wallet is in your pocket?

EDIT : Ummm……really? I can't type Mass Effect?! That's M A S S Effect for those of you thinking I may have put something sinister in there!

I just e-mailed this list to a buddy of mine who just bought an iPhone

As far as the length of the campaign, I actually had mentioned I thought it was a little too long. There were a couple of times in the game I was thinking it was about to end, just to have another section added that did not make a lot of sense to me. I think this game could have actually done with a little less, not a little more.

As for Anarchy, it's a lot of fun with people you know. I'm not sure how it would work with randoms on XBL but we've had several nights with 3 or 4 from TaG playing and had a blast. Particularly at higher levels you have to work as a team to get enough points to move on and the skill shot combos are even more challenging. As for Eric not wanting to use his friends code, don't and play anyway. The game seems to imply you need the code but the code is just for extras. We've has a couple of different TaG'ers who just rented the game and played without the code.

As for too short, I thought the length was about right. But I will say with any of the modes there's a time limit before you need to break. If Eric had went through the campaign in 3 or 4 nights instead of 2 I think he'd have found the length more acceptable. But that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

Also as a podcaster myself great job i just clicked the subscribe button and look forward to listening to you guys.

There is a reason I wrote these articles and I pretty much refuse to deal with GameStop. Fortunately I have choices where I live.

Here's hoping you can find a better job soon.

1. I have not actually been trained on ANYTHING. At every turn, I have been thrown into a duty and asked to essentially figure it out myself. I wasn't told how to do things properly, but rather I was harshly corrected every time I did something wrong. Apparently their way of training includes yelling at me across a store full of customers when I make a mistake. This is extremely unprofessional, and multiple times I've had customers approach me worried, asking if they got me into trouble. If I do have to ask a question, which is fairly often, my store manager acts extremely bothered.

2. After over a month, I still don't have direct deposit set up (even though I filled out the paperwork before the first day). When I approached my assistant manager about it, he commented that my store manager probably just did it wrong. So, while I continue to wait for her to figure it out, I have to deal with the Comdata card. I suppose I just need to pull all the money out at once when I get paid and start using cash, because this card is absolutely useless. I can check my balance easily via phone, and use it at an ATM. But forget using it in stores for purchases (and with a $1.50 fee, who would want to?). There are a few that will take it, but most cashiers look at you like you're an alien when you pull it out of your wallet. The problem is that it MUST be run as debit, since it has no Visa or Mastercard logo and can't be run as credit. In this day and age, that's apparently hard to do.

3. I have been denied bathroom breaks, even when I was due for one. Their excuse? I'm the only seasonal employee "trained" on the register, so I can't leave the store if the other permanent employees are busy (which is pretty much always). This is complete BS, and I considered quitting on the spot after I was denied a 5-minute break three times in one 5-hour shift. Meanwhile, my store manager went out for a 15-minute smoke break not five minutes after I asked, and left the store again to meet with a friend came to visit her at work. This is COMPLETELY unacceptable and against regulations. If I didn't need the job, I would have been gone in a heartbeat.

4. Hours. When hired, I was promised lots of hours, due to my previous retail/sales experience. For a month after, I dealt with approximately 8 hours per week. One week I had 4. At minimum wage, this barely covers the gas to get to work. I'm trying to support myself with this until I find something else (I know this job isn't ideal for that, but it's the best I can do until someone else hires me). Obviously a tough spot. I understand if hours aren't available, but don't promise them to me. Only now, a month into my seasonal employment, am I getting any decent hours what-so-ever. Had I known this was the case, I would have accepted an offer from another store that was offering between 20-30 hours a week. But alas, I was fooled.

5. Scheduling. I'm a college student, so I have certain hours I just can't work. I marked all this on my application when I was hired. But, for some reason, I have continually been given shifts that end outside of my availability. If this is a computer thing, fine. But I expect my manager to correct it. I shouldn't have to.

6. Being asked to do things outside my job description. Keep in mind, I'm just part-time seasonal. But, since I was the first seasonal employee hired, apparently I'm a leg above the others. That means I get to train them. Yup, at minimum wage I'm training other employees on things I barely know how to do myself. I'm all for going above and beyond, but I haven't been there long enough and don't know enough to train anyone. Surely they realize this? If I'm expected to manage other employees, make me a MANAGER. Or, better yet, let the managers do it because it's their job. I don't mind helping the new kids, mostly because I want to give them all the info no one gave me when I started, but on principle I really shouldn't have to.

7. Calling in. I called in sick once because I was legitimately ill, and didn't want to cough on any of the employees or customers and get them sick, too. Instead of, "OK, get better soon," I was literally yelled at because they didn't have anyone to cover my shift. I was yelled at. For being sick. Again, unacceptable.

I consider myself a good employee, and do my best. But honestly, I can't wait until the holidays are over. Then, I can leave the store and never (ever) go back. I've worked retail before, and this is truly the bottom of the barrel. I can't speak for anyone else's store, anyone else's manager, or anyone else's experiences. But mine have been crap on all counts.

I couldn't help but notice that you're using my picture for your page. The one you got from DeviantArt.com and the artists name is Marlowlover. That's me. I'd really appreciate if you gave me the credit for that picture or made it into a link to my DeviantArt account somehow. I just like it when people ask me before using any of my pictures no matter what it is for.

Thank you very much

I can get past the cosmetic issues and minor stuff but even the lock-ups ( a once and a while issue on Fallout 3) happen far too often. How many games do you know that lock up on a regular basis? (I'd say it averages once every 3-4 hrs or so)

I was playing last night and had to stop trying to trade with a certain merchant because every time I tried to close out it froze up. Every. Single. Time. I tried to avoid it different ways but three times in a row it froze, whenever I tried to exit the trade.

Sigh…guess what I'll be playing tonight though.

Then again, Alpha Protocol was glitchy as well.

Vader getting captured by the Rebels is also a joke, why is Vader not shown as being stronger than Starkiller? He's the one who trained him, right?! The ONLY way this story can be set straight is if ALL, and I mean all of the Force Unleashed characters die, that way it sets up for Obi Wan being "Our only hope." There were a lot of missed opportunities in this game, hopefully the third game will get rid of Starkiller, set the saga straight, and hopefully move on to the expanded universe. I think my overall problem with Starkiller, is that he has this god-like character shield where absolutely nothing rivals him, can stop him, or kill him, and it's not done in a Rambo-esque fashion either.

As for the fanboys in general, I very much hate them. I blame them for turning me away from buying an Xbox 360 sooner, especially the Halo fanboys. I had some interest in buying a 360 after getting my PS3 however, constantly hearing that because Halo "the best" and that the PS3 can't play it then it means the 360 is superior…well that completely turned me away from the console. They don't realize that people don't want to hear their opinions on these matters, because most know better. They are ruining the chance for gamers to experience both consoles, which are *both* great because they're too busy talking about how great one console is over the other. Which is ironic, since in turn, the person they're speaking to is even LESS likely to listen.

It's taken me 3 years but I finally own an Xbox 360. I've picked up the Halo series but I can't thoroughly enjoy the games because all I can hear in the back of my mind are fanboys. Even if it's a PS3 or 360 fanboy, they definitely leave a bitter taste in your mouth that's not forgotten. It takes a real gamer to exploit the benefits and disadvantages of each console.

Anyway, I do like where you're going with the pros and cons list and I'd like to see more! I'm in a serious "Oh man, I REALLY want to play Mass Effect 2" phase and quite tempted, and just waiting for the right information to tip me in the Xbox direction once I have an extra $300. Although, I did read the 360's warranty info and apparently only the red rings of death is covered for three years and in my tenure at the video game store I saw a LOT of people coming in with disc drives that had crapped out, just as many as those with the rings. Three year all around warranty, hell, when my biggest beef with the system was the astronomical failure rate, that was a fine incentive to bypass it! I do think your list is a bit slanted towards the PS3 though, because the Xbox's problems all seem to be hardware related and/or involve having to fork over extra cash where as the problems you cite with the PS3 are all a bit cosmetic. I mean, each one gets four points and Xbox's are like "shit breaks," "you have to pay X amount of money," and "they didn't include wireless so they could get you to buy an adapter for $70" whereas PS3's are like "I have to wait," "the stupid Home thing that no one even cares about is lame," and "Online gameplay is horrible because of the lack of people with headsets who ultimately just end up shouting stupid shit." Alternate for "home sucks": Xbox 360's controller is FAR superior to that of the PS3. Makes a big difference, and honestly, I didn't even consider picking up a 360 until I actually played one at the store and realized how fucking good that controller feels in the hands!

ANYWAY, I guess my initial point was that whether or not gamers are taken seriously isn't really very important because as long as we're enjoying the games, anything anyone else says is superflous because, well, who gives a fuck what a fanboy says? Most of them (from my experience) are just bratty 16 year olds with nothing better to give a shit about. They can annoy the shit out of us, but they can never take our freedom!

Pay is not good here; bottom line. Personally, I didn't have much to worry about paying for, so earning $300-$400 (if that) a month was fine by me, but for someone living on their own who has to support themselves, or even supporting others, it's tough. The Comdata card is absolutely stupid. Supposedly the reason for this card was to save paper by not sending out checks to employees and instead direct depositing into this rip-off excuse of a bank account. Why they still send out check stubs showing how much was deposited on this card still is beyond my reasoning though…

The discount doesn't seem worth it in my opinion. Where I live, tax is 9%, so I'm only receiving roughly a 6% discount. Figure this–if I wanted to buy a PS3 game that was $59.99, tax would knock that up to $65.39, and the discount would make it drop to $55.58 making a $4.41 discount off the marked price. This is where I believe GameStop believes you will take it still, simply because of the hours issue. With less hours an individual has to work, it's less money made, and with the already not-so-hot pay rate, they know that you will take that $4.41 discount because that means that you get to eat off the dollar menu another day.

The phone conversations are a whole other aspect of the company. From what I was told, you need to drive points across that will make the person WANT to come to your store. I called my store earlier today to check on my schedule (my whole 7 hours, and believe it or not, that's a lot right now) and this is how I was greeted:

"Thank you for calling GameStop. This is Candice speaking. Have you heard about our Annual Game Days Sale?"

Immediately the first thing I thought was "Oh no! I have to learn another phone greeting!" but then I realized….why are we asking the person calling a question right away? The whole reason people are calling our store is because they want to get answers, not questions. Should the person answer that they are completely oblivious to what this "Game Days Sale" is, we then have to inform them that "It is a sale in which all of the hottest and greatest titles out right now such as [insert game on Wii] and [insert game on PS3 and 360] are marked down in price up to 50%" NOT a good way to strike a conversation with the customer, if you ask me…

I find a problem with management in the company. In the past few months, I have received both a new Store Manager and District Manager. At times, they are both driven for numbers, and other times they just want the behaviors to be there (the selling attitude, the effort, etc.) As I understand it, there are 5 different categories they monitor: Trade percentage, Used-game sales percentage, Reservation percentage, Subscription percentage, and Units per Transaction. Now listen to the goals we have to meet:
Trades: 20%
Used Games: 40%
Reservations: 16%
Subscriptions: 5%
UPTs: 2.0
This means that out of all the transactions that are qualified to count against us, we need to have sold this much percent of each category by the end of the day. Like what is said here, how can we possibly meet the trade goal when people can sell for more on eBay? Why would they pay $15 for the EDGE card when a city with 9% tax would effectively make their 10% discount turn into a whopping 1% off their game? Why would people even want to buy used games when it's 90% of the time only $5 off the price of a new game? GameStop needs to wake up and realize that while they may have bought out EB, Software Etc., and others that they still need to compete with Wal-Mart, Best Buy, and Target. Geez, if I had a dime for every person that came into my store and said they would rather buy their game at Wal-Mart….well, I'd be making more than I am now, but then again, that isn't much now, is it?

Overall, I have to agree with much that is said here, so much that I want to write down this webpages URL at the bottom of every customer's receipt I have from now on so after they "get a chance and go down to http://www.TellGameStop.com, enter the feedback code at the bottom of the receipt, tell us about your visit to the store, and it'll enter you for a chance to win 1 of 10 $500 GameStop gift cards!", then they'll come here and realize why I had to ramble that whole stupid thing off…

I really enjoyed Dead Space the game.
Now about the turret sections in Dead Space…
I am surprised that the turret sections pulled you out of the game.
I found them to be a welcome break from the tension and a nice change of pace and gameplay.
Honestly, I made it through the first turrent section on my first try (it was getting to the turret location through the meteor shower where I kept getting killed.) Going for the "Don't get cocky. kid" trophy, were it was necessary to complete the first turret sequence with over 50% shield remaining was brutal and took many, many attempts before I was successful.
I did not find the turret controls too muddy or slow to respond. The controls in Killzone 2 were way muddier and inaccurate. The inability to shoot while moving in Resident Evil 5 drove me crazy! I eventually got used to it, but I didn't like it.

I too am looking forward to the sequel to Dead Space and it will be a day one purchase for me.

I don't think any of them were outright bad, except for Anchorage (which I still grudgingly gave 3 stars just for the Gauss rifle and Stealth armor). That one did just flat out annoy me because I felt it's stripped down shooter gameplay constantly frustrated my attempts to play it. It seemed very counter productive and contrary to everything Fallout 3 was.

Overall though they were mostly fun and I respect Bathesda for how well they supported the game with full fledged DLC campaigns.

I did want to mention this though, I was looking up NewsStand to try and figure out why it isn't on itunes and found their website where it mentions they had to change it's name to "NewsRack" and i guess it is just being reviewed by Apple now.

Their website is iphonenewsreader.com