Pumbaa

I really think that it's such a wasted potential... I find weird that the people here can't seem to admire both ME2 and AP for their respective strong points. Personally, I liked ME2 better, 'cause it delivered in pretty much all fronts (story, action, dialogue, setting, art, etc, etc). But AP kicked a lot of Bioware butt when it comes to the whole consequences stuff, IMO. AP did in one game what ME took two to do: make it feel like the story you're playing is yours, and yours alone. The ending doesn't even change all that much, but you finish the game with the impression that you shaped the whole world of international intrigue, it's awesome. Now we can just imagine what Obsidian could've done with the knowledge of what they did wrong. Imagining just how polished AP2 could've been is really sad...

Because otherwise they will no longer advertise their games there, loosing advertisement income. And we can't have that now, can we? I would like to point out that AP advertised on Gamespot and IGN, and got clobbered on both websites... Besides, saying that the reviewers were rough on AP because it's not a "big" game is weird, because AP IS a big game. Not as big as, say, ME2, but big nonetheless. A 4 years development cycle, weeks of advertisement and a SEGA backing aren't directed at Indie material. I don't even think that the reviews were unfair. I mean, I loved the game and finished it twice for the choices, but I think we can all agree that Saudi is pretty bad. The story only picks up after your choices start making a difference (and that's a good halfway through). The camera was a big-ish issue; the crosshairs disappear when I use skills on a well-lit place; the weapons are somewhat unbalanced (I finished the last battle in seconds with a Comissar pistol, chain shot and Brilliance). I also had to restart the warehouse mission in Moscow twice in a row, because the objective didn't show up. And I'm not the the only one... check the AP wikia out, there's a whole page listing the bugs, and it's quite long. What I'm trying to say is that this game's not for everyone... and reviews should be aimed at the average gamer. Not everyone's interested to endure faulty AI/subpar combat and hours of lame storytelling to get to the goods. IMO, the goods in question are solid gold and the trade-off is worth it, but different people like different stuff, right? It's the whole reason a review isn't just a score (although it seems like Metacritic is some kind of deity, nowadays).