[Cccurly]

Or they could have just included it in the game and/or not limited the amount of CEs.

Including it in the game as part of the main game is another debate.

On the subject of limited Collectors Editions, good. It makes me feel proud to have been smart enough to order one as soon as I heard they were selling out. If someone calls something limited, you don't assume it's going to be around for all of time. Just a heads up. Limited ie exclusive. No one to blame but yourselves. Next time pre order right away, it costs 5 dollars and a quick trip out of the way to save yourself from whining on the internet at a limited game with limited supplies *GASP* being sold out. Who would have ever thought. Perhaps the Skyrim Collectors Edition just wasn't in demand as much. Given the lack of content and price tag I wouldn't be too surprised. It was still some nice content, but definitely not at a price range a lot of people are happy paying for.

I've seen more spoilers of the story line, there's no way in hell this game has any cut content. I don't think the squad mate is all that critical to stopping them really if what I've seen is true. More of an oh neat look kind of thing. It will help, but is definitely not critical or the defining factor in any way. Or if it does have cut content it might be so the game can fit on the discs. There's only so much room. And people would whine like the Wardens Keep DLC if it was exclusive for a little while for the Collectors edition. So why not release it? It doesn't make any sense not to. ME3 is 2 discs on Xbox, I doubt they could fit the content on the disc. A. Either a limitation of the disc means if you want to load the squadmate you would need to load disc 2. Or B. There simply isn't enough room.

Sometimes companies do cut content, but I think this is the one time I can officially say they aren't.

Edit
I doubt the companion will even be all that fleshed out. Think Kasumi or Zaeed from ME2. If he was that critical he would be in the main game, trust me. I've seen some of the plot. The squad mate ranks as a blip, not even a big one compared to some other squad mates from previous games.

[phillip crookes]

I doubt the companion will even be all that fleshed out. Think Kasumi or Zaeed from ME2. If he was that critical he would be in the main game, trust me. I've seen some of the plot. The squad mate ranks as a blip, not even a big one compared to some other squad mates from previous games.

If it's a 10 dollar DLC, it had better be fleshed out. Zaeed was boring and shallow, but free.

[Silencio]

No, never mind. Waste of time.

[Georgia Fullalove]

On the subject of limited Collectors Editions, good. It makes me feel proud to have been smart enough to order one as soon as I heard they were selling out. If someone calls something limited, you don't assume it's going to be around for all of time. Just a heads up. Limited ie exclusive. No one to blame but yourselves. Next time pre order right away, it costs 5 dollars and a quick trip out of the way to save yourself from whining on the internet at a limited game with limited supplies *GASP* being sold out. Who would have ever thought. Perhaps the Skyrim Collectors Edition just wasn't in demand as much. Given the lack of content and price tag I wouldn't be too surprised. It was still some nice content, but definitely not at a price range a lot of people are happy paying for.

Yes, according to the dictionary definition of the word "limited".

But in the gaming industry it's a marketing trick to make a special edition that people will buy immediately, thinking it will sell out fast. The trick is, that it often doesn't work that way, so people who may have waited for a price drop or review have dropped 80 bucks on a "limited edition" that is now half the price.

I've seen more spoilers of the story line, there's no way in hell this game has any cut content. I don't think the squad mate is all that critical to stopping them really if what I've seen is true. More of an oh neat look kind of thing. It will help, but is definitely not critical or the defining factor in any way. Or if it does have cut content it might be so the game can fit on the discs. There's only so much room. And people would whine like the Wardens Keep DLC if it was exclusive for a little while for the Collectors edition. So why not release it? It doesn't make any sense not to. ME3 is 2 discs on Xbox, I doubt they could fit the content on the disc. A. Either a limitation of the disc means if you want to load the squadmate you would need to load disc 2. Or B. There simply isn't enough room.

I can assure you, there is enough space on the disc. Go ahead and pretend there isn't though, if you so want to rationalize their decision to rip people off.

I doubt the companion will even be all that fleshed out. Think Kasumi or Zaeed from ME2. If he was that critical he would be in the main game, trust me. I've seen some of the plot. The squad mate ranks as a blip, not even a big one compared to some other companions from previous games.

Or maybe he's not that critical because he's not in the main game. Why waste time and effort adding another unique character to the game if half the people who play aren't going to have him?

You bring up a good point though, thanks to this DLC we lost an opportunity to have a very interesting squadmate involved in the plot. Yup, thanks Bioware.

[Harry-James Payne]

Day one dlc being defended again. Tidy. EA is milking people. There really is no justification. Still, they need not worry, not only will people cue up to pay them ￡50 for a ￡40 game, but those same people will provide excuses for the practice too.

[Elizabeth Lysons]

Okay so it is a marketing trick, but now Bioware plays it straight? And your blaming them for being honest? Faulty logic is faulty, get mad at the companies that inflate [censored] collectors editions. Not the ones that are being honest. It feels weird to call EA/Bioware honest, but hey that's how it ended up this time.

I don't know the exact size of the game. So A. it can fit, but it has to be one of the discs. Or B. There is so much content it can't fit. Now to reduce loading and needing to swap discs they need to plan what content goes where. So it might look like they're playing with two discs but they aren't. In ME2 they had Illium on one disc, so they COULD fit more on that disc. It was barely anything on it, but then the problem arise of needing to switch the discs more often. Limiting it to world content only. I can TELL ME3 is as big if not bigger then ME2, so that means they've run into the same problem of not having enough space. I find it highly likely they just can't fit the bonus squad mate on there. You would need to compromise the design of the game on the xbox by having it swap the discs way more often. I know that would get annoying fast, and as a game designer making sure your game runs with as little hitches like that is key. So they probably made the call to cut out a minor squad mate and add him in as DLC. It makes perfect sense what I know of making a video game, game disc space, and a limited knowledge of how programming works. They can't simply put him on disc two because then every time you want him you need to swap that disc in. While the PC and PS3 might not have this problem, the xbox does and it's the lead platform since day 1.

If they have it as a download they work around this problem. Which makes complete sense. And since it would be unfair for collectors edition only to have it they charge the standard 10 dollars. People would demand it if it was exclusive for even a week. So cut the [censored]. They get to make a nice tidy profit off the whole thing too which is incidental.

On your last point you might be right, script revisions were going out right until the end. I don't think they ever intended him for a bigger role, right from day one he was included in the DLC. From what I get of his backstory he wouldn't be that big of a role. He's not exactly the most critical example of their species. I can't go into detail without spoilers. Now if his background was more... prolific. Or tied into ME1 more, and they cut him. I would be mad. As is, he's a neat side companion that got cut form the game. Like Zaeed or Kasumi. I can see why the did this too, if not the whole mystique behind their species would be gone. Do some characters get designed as non-critical DLC only? Yes, is that bad? Maybe. If they're completely non-critical to the game and they sell them. And they designed it outside form the main game. Sure feel free. People can think they're entitled to it but they'll pay. Now if they're sleazy enough to take a squad mate, deform his backstory and turn him into a non critical character. Then yea, I have a problem with that. Do I think they did that in this case? No, first of all because I don't think it's something EA has ever done yet. And secondly because technological limitations gave them their reason why they should have it as DLC. It's a valid reason to, even if people rage at it. Like wanting your car to teleport, fly, or have missiles. Sometimes there's just space/science limitations for why some things are done. Go get an education and design something better so we don't have these annoying arbitrary technology limits if it bothers you that much.

Now if I'm wrong there's one way to prove it, he'll be on the disc and not available as a download day 1. You simply unlock it. Then it means you guys were right. Simple enough test.

[Dean]

Still debating whether I should buy it on day one, I'll wait for the reviews that's for certain.

[Eliza Potter]

Okay so it is a marketing trick, but now Bioware plays it straight? And your blaming them for being honest? Faulty logic is faulty, get mad at the companies that inflate [censored] collectors editions. Not the ones that are being honest. It feels weird to call EA/Bioware honest, but hey that's how it ended up this time.

The companies that actually produce enough collectors editions for everybody who wants them are not the people to get mad at. It's true that I think it's a marketing trick, but that doesn't mean I think deliberately producing a limited number is a good thing.

If anything, just calling it a special edition and selling it alongside the regular edition with a higher pricetag (for the added goodies) is the best option.

They can't simply put him on disc two because then every time you want him you need to swap that disc in. While the PC and PS3 might not have this problem, the xbox does and it's the lead platform since day 1.

If they have it as a download they work around this problem. Which makes complete sense. And since it would be unfair for collectors edition only to have it they charge the standard 10 dollars. People would demand it if it was exclusive for even a week. So cut the [censored]. They get to make a nice tidy profit off the whole thing too which is incidental.

They can put him on disc 2 actually, and just have you download some data to the hard drive. If a technical limitation was the reason for having a download instead, why the $10 added price?

And secondly because technological limitations gave them their reason why they should have it as DLC. It's a valid reason to, even if people rage at it. Like wanting your car to teleport, fly, or have missiles. Sometimes there's just space/science limitations for why some things are done. Go get an education and design something better so we don't have these annoying arbitrary technology limits if it bothers you that much.

So what you're saying is, if there's no limitation then there should be no reason? Well if it weren't a separate DLC character then there would be no limitation, because then he would be accessible in the game just as any of the other squadmates, no matter what disc you're using.

Now if I'm wrong there's one way to prove it, he'll be on the disc and not available as a download day 1. You simply unlock it. Then it means you guys were right. Simple enough test.

I'm sure companies have already learned not to do that, because that lets perceptive buyers (rightfully) call them on their bull[censored].

[Kirsty Wood]

It has to be a limited number, they've stated the items inside are costly. At the end of the day they're trying to make a profit. For simple availability and costs, they can't keep making a collectors edition. It will cost more and more, and as more people have the game less people will buy the collectors edition making it too expensive to produce. In a fantasy world where things can be produced like that sure, it would make sense. But it can't be done for some of the items. Hence the DLC. Tons of unsold copies means it is wasted money. There's nothing wrong with wanting to save money on a product clearly labeled limited. Now if the collectors edition was nothing but digital exclusives, it would be another case all together.

Microsoft doesn't allow free DLC. They can make some more money to better fund the next game. Fans are obsessive people that want more, more, and more. So why not fix it up and sell it to them? In the case of it downloading off the disc it might work, but again I'm sure there's technical reasons why it won't. Even if they are arbitrary xbox live control rules. It would probably qualify as free DLC or something and get them fined or some other arbitrary stupidity.

It's additional content. You got your game, and are happy. But maybe you want more. So there it is. It's not a limitation. It's like buying an addon for anything. It's not my problem if your definition of complete is bordering on insanity. It's like the people who buy a vehicle loaded down with extra features for the "compete" package. They don't whine they have to pay extra for sutf that doesn't affect them. It's the same with DLC. Now do note, I have a problem with it if it's something critical or otherwise considered standard by the large population of users and they cut it out to sell back just to get the product into a working state. EA/Bioware hasn't done any such thing. A completely additional element is able ot be gotten that doesn't really affect the main game. It's easy enough to beat the game with a perfect ending without the DLC squad mate in other ways.

You have no idea how clueless and/or penny pinching companies can be when they do that. I'm sure it's not the end of that. Even then you need to make a distinction of what the final game is and additional content. The final game is sold as is, nothing else is needed to play it. Additional content somewhere has to tie into the game. It's not necessary to play, enjoy, and finish the game. It might look like it's critical to the overall appearance, but again it isn't. So don't buy it if you don't like it at that price. Your right, it's completely unneeded. Back in the day before Bethesda and DLC all of this content would just be tossed on the scrap floor and never looked back on. Now a lot of it is added back into the games. Unless we're industry insiders there's no way to know if there cutting things out, or adding them in. But given the length of Mass Effect 3 without the DLC and it rivaling ME2 and all of its DLC. I'm going to say they're not cutting anything out. It's additional to the game. Now a game that is more skimpy even with the DLC is more suspicious. If the game is so short that they still cut content out to sell, then I find it far more dubious. I'm struggling to think of a game here, I tend not to buy bad games if I can help it.

[Elisabete Gaspar]

Microsoft doesn't allow free DLC. They can make some more money to better fund the next game. Fans are obsessive people that want more, more, and more. So why not fix it up and sell it to them? In the case of it downloading off the disc it might work, but again I'm sure there's technical reasons why it won't. Even if they are arbitrary xbox live control rules. It would probably qualify as free DLC or something and get them fined or some other arbitrary stupidity.

It's additional content. You got your game, and are happy. But maybe you want more. So there it is. It's not a limitation. It's like buying an addon for anything. It's not my problem if your definition of complete is bordering on insanity. It's like the people who buy a vehicle loaded down with extra features for the "compete" package. They don't whine they have to pay extra for sutf that doesn't affect them. It's the same with DLC. Now do note, I have a problem with it if it's something critical or otherwise considered standard by the large population of users and they cut it out to sell back just to get the product into a working state. EA/Bioware hasn't done any such thing. A completely additional element is able ot be gotten that doesn't really affect the main game. It's easy enough to beat the game with a perfect ending without the DLC squad mate in other ways.

You have no idea how clueless and/or penny pinching companies can be when they do that. I'm sure it's not the end of that. Even then you need to make a distinction of what the final game is and additional content. The final game is sold as is, nothing else is needed to play it. Additional content somewhere has to tie into the game. It's not necessary to play, enjoy, and finish the game. It might look like it's critical to the overall appearance, but again it isn't. So don't buy it if you don't like it at that price. Your right, it's completely unneeded. Back in the day before Bethesda and DLC all of this content would just be tossed on the scrap floor and never looked back on. Now a lot of it is added back into the games. Unless we're industry insiders there's no way to know if there cutting things out, or adding them in. But given the length of Mass Effect 3 without the DLC and it rivaling ME2 and all of its DLC. I'm going to say they're not cutting anything out. It's additional to the game. Now a game that is more skimpy even with the DLC is more suspicious. If the game is so short that they still cut content out to sell, then I find it far more dubious. I'm struggling to think of a game here, I tend not to buy bad games if I can help it.

Generally I consider any content finished before the full release of the game and then sold separately as cut. Obviously Microsoft does allow free DLC it happens all the time, Mass Effect 2 had 6 free downloads including a new companion.

Spoiler

I would consider a Prothean, one of the most important species in the game story/lore wise, to be included in the game as standard

Bioware/EA could have easily done another Cerberus type anti-preowned software, but instead they decided to charge extra for it.

[CSar L]

Except that you can't add major additions after a game comes out. Integrating a companion in needs to be done from the ground up. You can't make them afterwards. There's just no way to insert them into the game or make it feasible price wise. So during development as things get cut, they get added to DLC. They have three separate teams. And don't give me the [censored] excuse it's money that could have gone to singleplayer or making the game complete. No it isn't, because they would never agree to give them that large of a budget. So it either goes to other projects, in their bank, or on one of the separate teams handling multiplayer/DLC. I would rather have some DLC done than nothing. Also I'm not too familiar with xbox lives policy, I assumed that's how it was. I know free content is almost impossible to put up there though form what I've seen/heard/been told. Take for example the Cerberus DLC, it wasn't free. All new copies of the game got it. So you paid for it to be up there with your new copy.

Why they didn't do Cerberus Network again? Now that is a crooked move, it was a fairly good deal they had. Probably because they knew they could get away with it. However, just because they didn't do that like last time doesn't mean they're quite as large of crooks as so many people have brought up here. There are other real unsavory and dubious things EA/Bioware has done. Making DLC isn't one of them, at least so far. It is a blow that we won't have like an Alliance Network though, it still doesn't invalidate all the fair points I've made.

Edit
Oh the squad mate, YOU consider it that. Except they don't and from the leaked script for good reason. It makes sense why he isn't more important, that's all I can say. Your not missing out on anything in the main game with him not there.

Edit2
From BIowares own forums we get a confirmation the base ME3 game was done when they started work on the new squad mate, that should allay many peoples concerns. I know EA/Bioware can be a little dubious, but this isn't the time for the torches and pitchforks. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXGUNvIFTQw Please I ask you save them for another time. When they really do something stupid and we need your anger.

Proof is in the link, but massive spoilers as to who said squad mate it. You've been warned. http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/323/index/9403705/1#9403705

Edit3
Just because they developed it after the game doesn't excuse them from the lack of more free DLC ala Cerberus Network style. I'll give everyone that point.

[Kelly Osbourne Kelly]

You are making excuses for a bad practice. EA are haggling on a mass scale, and you and the other people who are defending them are letting them set the terms. They need your money. You don't need their product. They're robbing you blind.

It's your money, though. I, for one, "feel proud to have been smart enough" to not throw mine away.

[marie breen]

How I'm looking at it is:

1) Either it's an important piece of the game that contains lots of lore/story elements that they decided to cut in order to make a quick buck because they knew people would want it. If this is the case, I'm going to have to say I think it's a little "dirty" of them to pull this kind of stunt (of course they'll get away with it, as most people don't truly care enough to actually boycott or whatever).

2)Or it's something they quickly threw together right before release that has no impact on lore/story/gameplay/etc that they figured some people may like and might want to purchase. If this is the case, it's probably not worth the $10 anyways.

[Jessie]

How I'm looking at it is:

1) Either it's an important piece of the game that contains lots of lore/story elements that they decided to cut in order to make a quick buck because they knew people would want it. If this is the case, I'm going to have to say I think it's a little "dirty" of them to pull this kind of stunt (of course they'll get away with it, as most people don't truly care enough to actually boycott or whatever).

2)Or it's something they quickly threw together right before release that has no impact on lore/story/gameplay/etc that they figured some people may like and might want to purchase. If this is the case, it's probably not worth the $10 anyways.

Little bit of A and a Little bit of B. Ultimately it does have to connect to the game and have interesting things, or why would anyone buy it? Just that they aren't all that critical. I don't really think you'll be missing out on too much lore, if you care enough you can probably just watch it on youtube later on.

"Excuses" we have dismissed these claims. I think I'm the only one in this entire thread to devote a day of my life to anolyzing EA's DLC and trying to explain it to people. Yea, clearly I have no idea what I'm talking about here. It might not necessarily make me right, but it sure as hell hasn't brought forth the holy grail of contenders to correct and enlighten me either.

[Rachell Katherine]

Who is "we"? The royal "we"?

They need your money. You don't need their product.

It's as simple as that. If people followed this simple principle, they wouldn't need to be continuously shelling out more money for less content.

[Nathan Hunter]

Who is "we"? The royal "we"?



It's as simple as that. If people followed this simple principle, they wouldn't need to be continuously shelling out more money for less content.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJdH_286w78.

Straw man argument, you've not told me what's wrong with wanting to make money. Or why this DLC is bad. You've simply pointed out some other argument/topic/debate as though it's proven your whole case. It's done nothing of the sort. We've gone from debating if this DLC is a ripoff out of the main game. Then you go and start saying all they want is my money and I don't need there stuff. Please do get back to the topic and enlighten me as to why said DLC has been ripped out of the game. Prove it. I've given plenty of evidence showing otherwise. But who knows, it could be out there to refute me. Just sitting in some dark corner of the internet.

[.X chantelle .x Smith]

Straw man argument, you've not told me what's wrong with wanting to make money. Or why this DLC is bad.

I didn't say there was anything wrong with wanting to make money. I didn't say the DLC was bad. You're constructing straw man arguments for me. That's nice of you, and I admire your skill, but please don't.

We've gone from debating if this DLC is a ripoff out of the main game. Then you go and start saying all they want is my money and I don't need there stuff. Please do get back to the topic and enlighten me as to why said DLC has been ripped out of the game. Prove it.

Since "we" seem to be fond of (warning: spoilers) http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=http://forums.bethsoft.com/topic/1348972-mass-effect-thread-54/s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CC4QtwIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DeK99_T61alc&ei=hPdFT7XJG9GJhQfS7-inDg&usg=AFQjCNGFlE_55yciFNTYFKNBTq1IK1d0PA&sig2=8D2E6k2Bf-XD-SwAwwp5vA:

Spoiler

"Prothean squad member in ME3 that can be found in the demo files."

It's even in the demo game. Clearly it was cut out.

[Alberto Aguilera]

My humorous one-liner caused a page full of arguing. Whoops!

For the record, i don't support the idea that this was ripped off the game to be sold separately, but has been developed concurrently with the game. That is stupid (to use resources on additional content instead of the game), not evil

[Karl harris]

I didn't say there was anything wrong with wanting to make money. I didn't say the DLC was bad. You're constructing straw man arguments for me. That's nice of you, and I admire your skill, but please don't.

Spoiler

Since "we" seem to be fond of (warning: spoilers) http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=http://forums.bethsoft.com/topic/1348972-mass-effect-thread-54/s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CC4QtwIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DeK99_T61alc&ei=hPdFT7XJG9GJhQfS7-inDg&usg=AFQjCNGFlE_55yciFNTYFKNBTq1IK1d0PA&sig2=8D2E6k2Bf-XD-SwAwwp5vA:

Spoiler

"Prothean squad member in ME3 that can be found in the demo files."

It's even in the demo game. Clearly it was cut out.

You don't get how game development happens do you? There's at least 5 phases Bioware goes through when making a game, or perhaps 4. Concept > Something > Game Design > Tweaking > Polishing Ect. Once Game Design is done they go onto other things and just polish, tweak and fix for a long time. ME3 development has been done since last year. It was almost ready to launch. There's numerous sources stating this. Since then we've seen the DLC announced. So the main game development was done when they made him. I don't see how it's cut content. The very way they make and program games refutes you.

Also it is a straw man argument none of your arguments were dealing with the main issue, and only now are you returning to it after I pointed it out. Like it or not, you were using a straw man argument. It's right there in front of your face, deny all you like.

Also put those in spoilers, or your going to get a lot of people mad. Now it's quite evident your not going to prove anything. So for the sake of both our times I'm going to stop here. Remember one of the golden rules of the thread, if you like Mass Effect this is the thread for you. We've had problems in the past where people kept coming back to heckle and harass the people trying to discuss the game. So if it bothers you that much, then you can go.

I think this sums it up fine. http://f.images.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/15072285.jpg

[Lory Da Costa]

So you're allowed to argue against others as much as you like, but when those people respond you want them to shut up?

I've participated in regional as well as national debate competitions, and I've also won many a legal bull session, so I'd suggest your assessment of me is incorrect. I'm trying to have a logical discussion with you about this. If that's not something you want to participate in, that's alright. Just say so. No need to get angry.

Like I've said before, I'll be playing this game, but I won't be the one spending money on this. I have plenty of friends who will be, and that's okay. You seem to think my dislike for the company indicates a dislike of its customers; this is simply not the case. I don't care if somebody buys this game, or however many of the add-ons and DLC that will come with it. What I do take issue with is people trying to defend EA's business practices.

And if you're allowed to trumpet how wonderful the company is, I'm allowed to counter that.

[Matt Gammond]

So you're allowed to argue against others as much as you like, but when those people respond you want them to shut up?

I've participated in regional as well as national debate competitions, and I've also won many a legal bull session, so I'd suggest your assessment of me is incorrect. I'm trying to have a logical discussion with you about this. If that's not something you want to participate in, that's alright. Just say so. No need to get angry.

Like I've said before, I'll be playing this game, but I won't be the one spending money on this. I have plenty of friends who will be, and that's okay. You seem to think my dislike for the company indicates a dislike of its customers; this is simply not the case. I don't care if somebody buys this game, or however many of the add-ons and DLC that will come with it. What I do take issue with is people trying to defend EA's business practices.

And if you're allowed to trumpet how wonderful the company is, I'm allowed to counter that.

First rule of debating, follow the rules of the debate. Wow genius. Slow down there, where you going? That's like forgetting to strap your seat belt in while taking your driving test. You should know as well as I there's other ways to debate. Feel free to move this to private messages if it bothers you that much, which it clearly is.

Again your going off and claiming all sorts of baloney. For example your back to talking about me. Your not going for the "kill" with your much lauded debating skills. I guess you won the debates, but no one says you spoke the truth. Happens all the time.

I've never trumpeted how awesome the company is. I've in meticulous detail stated why the dlc hasn't been ripped form the existing content. A fact you've yet to address. The whole DEBATE! Your trying to drag me into more and more, but never actually ending the problem. As a matter of fact the company can be quite detestable, but that is neither here nor there. This is about the game content being ripped out of the existing game to sell as DLC. You've done nothing but throw thunderous words from atop a mountain at me trying to distract me or perhaps intimidate me.

This forum isn't a debate hall. It has rules in place I can't change, or this would be so much more fun.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu8DJnR9zNw

[Hilm Music]

So, who's playing renegade and who paragon?

[Britta Gronkowski]

What a [censored] [censored]. Poor gamgee.

So much for wanting to debate and being taken seriously.

Edit
Uh oh, you tried to edit it out. Too slow.

Edit
I think it's obvious you attempted a Renegade interrupt. Guess that solves that riddle.

[[ becca ]]

Anyway... I'd take paragon. The actions/dialogue usually make more sense. Renegade just seems bit too moustache-twirling villainous to me.

So much for wanting to debate and being taken seriously.

You make it really difficult.

[Justin Bywater]

So much for wanting to debate and being taken seriously.

Edit
Uh oh, you tried to edit it out. Too slow.

Edit
I think it's obvious you attempted a Renegade interrupt. Guess that solves that riddle.

Until then you had been the more agressive/insulting one in the argument.