Since everyone is pretty invested in the characters they've created/played with over the past five years...pretty much all they have to do is give you a life story update on a few fan characters and let you fuck alien chicks/blow shit up and it's gonna be 10's across the board.

If you're stingy with the cash, them ME2 (if not ME1 if you have an Xbox) is a better investment...the 'core' of the game will be the same and I doubt the multiplayer element in 3 is gonna be worth it (especially since they still haven't completely locked down the FPS feel). If you like ME2, you can pick up ME3 in a few months when it's more like 30 bucks.




>Yea, no, I'm pretty sure I'd like it, I'm just real stingy
>with buying games these days because I'm hesitant I'll feel
>like I got my money's worth with most of them (ironically,
>most of my game playing this generation other than NBA 2K and
>flagship PS3 titles has been buying PSOne and PS2 classics on
>PSN).
>
>But reading the positive reviews around the web this morning
>(not that video game writers are very good about keeping their
>dicks in their pants...) is pushing me in the right direction,
>especially since a few of them seem to have noticed the same
>weirdness that I do:
>
>"The move to PS3 makes Mass Effect 2 look sharper and bolder.
>Maybe that's a product of the PS3's visuals naturally having
>more visible contrast than the 360, or perhaps it's the result
>of the game running on the framework BioWare is using for this
>fall's sequel. The tradeoff for these minor aesthetic
>improvements is that the stiffness of the animation is a lot
>more obvious as well. BioWare's clunky animation didn't seem
>too distracting on 360. Here, though, it's sometimes
>distracting. Perhaps the extra detail enhances the uncanniness
>of the valley, or something."