Talk:Mass Effect/Archive 1

message: Is there a reason that there isn't more detailed information about the races of Mass Effect included in the article? From Revelation, there is plenty of detail that hasn't been included in the article. For example, the Asari are asexual in nature, and were the first interstellar race to discover the Citadel.
If there is some citation hindrance as to why this information hasn't been referenced, I'll refrain from doing so. Otherwise, I think it would be good to include more information on the different species. Chavi904 00:45, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not very knowledgeable about Wikipedia rules and nuances, but I don't see why you shouldn't add information as long as it's cited.  Revelations, though I haven't read it, seems like the best source of official "lore" information right now since the BioWare website's information on the races is brief at best (and most of the current Wiki descriptions seem like they're lifted directly from the official pages).  For example, the official website doesn't even mention the Hanar in text as far as I can tell, but they've released official screenshots featuring them, and apparently they're featured in the book, as well.  I'm assuming there's a lot more information about the Mass Effect universe in the book than there is online, and most of it should be accurate since the author is also writing the script for the game.  Kevin Kubo 03:49, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Race Descriptions 

message: Few pictures added complimenting the article beside it.
Killah94 21:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures 

message: I agree with the cleanup tag.  Unfortunately, there is a dearth of information concerning the game and there are few known facts outside of what is currently in the article.  It may be some time before the article is up to par; I particularly think the brief listing of characters, vehicles, and classes at this stage is unecessary given the information is not sourced and is likely subject to change before closer to release.  FDeziel 17:39, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup Required 

message: With the latest EGM magazine out, I think they three classes are now: Soldier, Biotic, and Tech.
Above comment was added by User:204.57.104.6 here  Nil Einne (talk) 20:05, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Soldier Classes 

message: The release date, unless IGN hasn't updated their website, is still "to be announced" for the US, but will be in 2006.  January 12, 2007 is another release date, but I don't know if it's for Japan or Europe.
Websites that sell games, like Gamestop or Bestbuy, will amlost always put down release dates, even if it hasn't been announced.  This way more people preorder.  However, if you look closely, they will generally put down somewhere on the page that the release date has yet to be announced.
:Agreed.  Removed the release date and put TBA in its place.  I have seen speculation for both 2006 and 2007, but no commitment from Bioware as to a specificy day, month, or fiscal quarter.  FDeziel 14:16, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was not, no release date has been confirmed as of now.  Only first half of 2007. Igfi 03:51, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

text: It's just a rumor, pay no attention. Igfi 21:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Changed date to TBA. looking at the mass effect site it still says TBA so i think it should stay TBA here. FuzionZero 16:25, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release Date 

message: I have been keeping up with Mass Effect quite frequently, and I haven't seen those mini descriptions anywhere. What is the source on the description of the mentioned races?
:The source is the latest Game Informer issue.  It's in the short preview on Mass Effect which basically talks about it's X06 appearance combined with the information on Shepard, Ashley Williams, and the races.  151.196.48.179 20:00, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can give more specific info on this. it was in issue 164, december 2006. on pages 98 -99. at the bottum is a list of all the races, Commander Shepard, and Gunnery chief Ashley Williams. {Tuckerthewise 19:33, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source on Krogan, Salarians, and Volus. 

message: hey how does the space travel work? do you like pick witch planet you want to go to on a menu or do you get to fly your ship around manually? i realy hope it is manual and has a menu for the people who don't want to do all the flying. but i have always wanted to play a game where you can freely fly a ship all over an outer space game world. :) Tuckerthewise 04:20, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed you are officially not allowed to control the ship, at the game's forum the devs have said it many times.  Igfi 03:49, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Space travel 

message: I would surgest changing the name of the page or redirecting from or to "Mass Effect (game)" in order to make it easier to find and tell the difference between this and mass effect. 
Jlclarke 22:26, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think so, I'm fairly certain the majority of people looking for Mass Effect won't be looking for the medical term.  It would probably be a better step to have mass effect become "Mass effect (medical)"(or whatever). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Igfi (talk • contribs) 22:25, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The previous person makes a good point.  I don't totally understand how "main" pages are generally determined on this site, but I have a feeling not many people want the medical mass effect, especially considering it's still just a stub.Kevin Kubo 04:27, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Surgestion: change of page name 

message: can someone remove that disgusting fan box art, you shouldnt upload fan art to wikipedia, if it doesnt have a box art yet then just leave it blank.. no need to put a pic up for the sake of it, especially that awful rendering. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.194.7.253 (talk • contribs).
*According to the image attribution at :Image:Masseffect.jpg, this is the official box art. --bd_ 22:35, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed it is the real box art, look here at the Mass Effect forums:
http://masseffect.bioware.com/forums/viewtopic.html?topic=544511&forum=104
Igfi 20:03, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

text: It looks to me like the saturation of the current image is really high.  The green and red portions seem to glow, as if someone just clicked on the auto levels feature in Photoshop and all the black and blue tricked it into overcompensating on the saturation.  Is there another official version somewhere that has better color levels/saturation? Kevin Kubo 05:03, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: From the official website:
http://masseffect.bioware.com/_commonext/images/me/cover/masseffect_box_cover_01_532x760.jpg
Igfi 06:10, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  remove the box art 

message: this page is in serious work on making the footnotes consistently formatted. Chensiyuan 10:01, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  footnotes/references/notes 

message: I removed a number of images from this article, for several reasons. To quote from Wikipedia:Fair use#Policy:
*The amount of copyrighted work used should be as little as possible. Low-resolution images should be used instead of high-resolution images (especially images that are so high-resolution that they could be used for piracy). This includes the original in the Image: namespace. Do not use multiple images or media clips if one will serve the purpose adequately.
*The material must contribute significantly to the article (e.g. identify the subject of an article, or specifically illustrate relevant points or sections within the text) and must not serve a purely decorative purpose.
The images in question failed both of these two criteria.
*Fair use imagery was used to an excessive degree, in that multiple images were used when a single one would have sufficed. I'm looking at the individual characters' portraits, here, and I'll be removing them in a moment in accordance with the above policy.
*The images in question did not contribute significantly to the article, and did not serve to identify specific, relevant points that were in need of such illustration. Some specific examples:
**frame|left|The Normandy -- this image was used to illustrate the player's ship, which is not the main subject of the article and thus serves only as background to the story. It does not warrant a fair use illustration.
**frame|right|Conversations will be a key aspect of Mass Effect -- this image was supposed to illustrate conversation within the context of the game. However, the feature is by no means unique to the genre -- I point you to Deus Ex and Knights of the Old Republic -- and barely deserves a mention in the article text, let alone illustration with a fair use image.
**frame|left|Squad-based, real-time combat -- see above, this is by no means a significant feature and absolutely doesn't need illustration.
-- Daveydweeb (chat/review!) 09:56, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image removal 

message: I wanted to submit a video that has some of the press (1UP.com) talking about the game as well as some developer interviews and behind-the-scenes footage. http://gamevideos.com/video/id/3929.
Thanks!
-Jay —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jayfresh006 (talk • contribs) 18:49, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exclusive videos 

message: Has Bioware mentioned anything about Mass Effect going to PC or exclusive for the 360? --Rokasomee 03:35, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Xbox 360 exclusive.  Igfi 00:40, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

text: It was stated that there *might* be future work on a PC version, but for now they are only working on a 360 version. §ilnadmy§ 81.19.57.194 08:56, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, if this does prove to be Xbox only, the planned trilogy just might be the reason I buy my first new console since the Megadrive. It'll be a shrewd move by Microsoft if they can keep this Xbox exclusive, they could reel in all of Bioware's fans. --JamesTheNumberless 09:10, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  PC 

message: just to let you know
"The game promises extensive character generation. The player can make Shepard male or female, and one of six character classes, three of which were revealed at IGN"
at means a place or time (ie: "at school" or "at 5pm". on means a day (ie: "on thursday". just thought id clarify that as someone changed "at" to "on" - FuzionZero 16:32, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: IGN is a website and I don't know how it works wherever you're from but in my experience people always say on in this context. e.g. You would say You can see my video at www.youtube.come but you wouldn't say Come and see this video at youtube, you would say Come and see this video on youtube. You wouldn't say, there's a great article at the bbc's website today you would say There's a great article on the bbc's website today. If this is a reference to an article on IGN, you would say on. You wouldn't say I saw a great program at TV last night would you????? Or There was an excellent documentary at Fox last night? No, it would be on - I have only ever heard people refer to websites in the same way as they would to TV channels. --JamesTheNumberless 09:18, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Digging deeper, a google search for "at bbc.co.uk" returns 74,300 whereas a search for "on bbc.co.uk" returns 392,000 - furthermore the Wikipedia article on bbc.co.uk bbc.co.uk uses on in this context. I am therefore going to revert this to on for consistency (and because, quite frankly, at sounds crude.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JamesTheNumberless (talk • contribs) 09:23, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor Edit 

message: Someone should clean up references and their links. there are several same reference links. It would be better if there was just 1 for each link and all references to that link used the same one. FuzionZero 23:38, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference Links 

message: Trip to Gamestop today and the display sections were stocked with Mass Effect "preview" boxes and poster. Sales guy said their computer lists the "in store" date as June 20th.  Yeah, I know it's still not official, but I think we're inching closer to the official release. Hopefully there'll be a reliable, independent source announcing the release date soon.  
Given the amount of changes and reverts we've had to this page, I'm wondering if it's worth it to create a subsection along the lines of "Release Date Uncertainty," then list something to the effect that X source places the release at Y date, though final confirmation hasn't been given by the publisher? Jodyw1 04:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The anon IP may be refering to this.  I would have changed the article myself, but I didn't see any statement on the official bioware site and the noinclude on the article says to only change if it's from bioware itself. I haven't seen any links to a microsoft site or anything else to confirm it either. -Aknorals 22:49, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release Date Updates 

message: THERE IS NO RELEASE DATE.  Bioware states this nearly every day, and they make it very clear on their site that there is no release date or ESRB rating that is finalized yet. I admit it is quite irritating, but that's the way it is.  
Just have a look for yourselves:  http://masseffect.bioware.com/forums/viewtopic.html?topic=559883&forum=104 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 204.10.46.254 (talk) 20:21, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  No release date 

message: At the ESRB website they have relased the rating as M for Mature. Just letting you all know!
It's not final, just an educated guess.
And not to put too fine a point on it, Bioware has (repeatedly) stated that rating is not final nor official.  For like the tenth time, neither the release date, ESRB rating, or the game's favorite color for that matter, is set in stone and Bioware has gone to large, painfully public lengths to make this clear.  Which is to say, Bioware has taken a firm, definitive, uber official position that there is no firm, definitive, uber official rating or release date.
Pegi also has a rating -> http://www.pegi.info/en/index/global_id/23/?searchString=mass+effect&submit=Search
Jlclarke 22:13, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ESRB Rating 

message: Anyone out there got any information on who the voice talent is for this game. There was one scene in the X06 demo trailer there that has me wondering.--Enigmatick 16:18, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The only person confirmed was Keith David, who played Anderson in a later video.  Igfi 01:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Voice Actor Info? 

message: There is not a release date, how clear does it have to be for people to understand?  Ihave changed it to TBA 2007 please leave it that way until there is one, all this guessing at release  dates is rubbish.  DaGrandPuba 01:44, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  September 3?  Someone change that!  Nevermind, I did. 

message: I organised the alien races section into alphabetical order and rewrote the sections on Krogans and Asari. I Wrote a section for humans and made minor edits to the other races sections. I added images to sections: Asari, Krogan, Human, Geth, Quarians and Turians. I left the cleanup tag there because alot of the race sections are poorly referenced. I added a small amount of unreferenced material from the Mass Effect game site to the Time Line, - heck none of the rest of it is referenced :p - So yeah.Revoranii 18:18, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: I could of swore yesterday that the this page and the mass effect medical article were the other way round. It now seems they have switched places, anyone know what happened? SkorponokX 14:09, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page move 

message: I recall seeing pictures (can't remember where, probably Mass Effect/Bioware's main site) of the jellyfish race, the hanar but no one has put an image in the article.  Copyright issues possibly?  Or no one has gotten around to it yet?  Just curious.  - The Keeper
Added a picture of the Hanar. --ComicazieSeth 03:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hanar Question 

message: Shouldn't all references to the geth be capitalised seeing as the word itself is a pronoun?  'Geth' is the name of their race, so really it should be.
:We covered this above, anon. Basically, the consensus was to use the grammatical conceits of Bioware for the article. They lowercase everything so we should too. As that is more or less okay under the Wiki guidelines, it's the direction the article is going in.Jodyw1 04:25, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The geth 

message: The section on the Reapers seems to have been novelised.  Request someone makes it more appropriate for Wikipedia standards.
I don't remember the Reapers being mentioned in the book or the website. Unless a valid source is given I think it should be deleted in the coming days. -Nintendonien 02:06, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can find no official mention of reapers from Bioware, but there is a forum post discussing them on Bioware's website.  --Asklepios 00:15, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reapers 

message: I realize it's no longer in this article and was given it's own page (not that it really needed one at this stage), but the Mass Effect Alien Races page needs some clean-up.  I don't really want to tag it if I can just bring it up here and someone else can fix the article.  Offhand, it probably needs to be alphabetical (as it was when it was part of the main page) and the whole, on the council, not on council thing makes the article look choppy.  A seperate section stating who is and isn't on the council and related history would look better.  KeeperOTD 15:37, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah yes, I cut out the species info from the current article, because I saw that there was already a page for that and it repeated what the main article already had. I didn't realise there was a whole discussion about it here. At the time I too noticed the sloppyness of the current article. I think I'll have a stab at it now; alphabetical seems the best choice as there are no other clear grouping for them. RC Master 14:18, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Well I've alphabetised the page anyway now. RC Master 14:44, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alien Races page 

message: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6134975.html
:Gamespot reported based on a representative response in Bioware website.
"Mass Effect is an Xbox 360-exclusive title. But don't let that dampen your hopes, PC users. Fable and Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic were also announced as Xbox-exclusive games, but were later released for the PC."
:Questioned about a possible Pc version during an interview at E32007, Greg Zeschuk replied:
"Well, we've always been a PC games developer. We have quite a track record with PC games. That's all I am saying about it."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.25.41.102 (talk) 18:11, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible Pc version 

message: Currently the plot section says, "The story revolves around an ancient alien prophecy stating that every fifty thousand years a portal that separates the "normal" universe and a realm beyond opens, spewing out an alien machine race that comes to the galaxy to harvest all sapient organic life, and the time of their return is approaching. " but everywhere else it mentions that the geth were only created 300 years prior. All I've heard is the later, and no source is given for the former. Am I missing something?157.174.221.169 19:21, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The geth are not the machine race (the geth are humanoid). The plot section looks to be consistent with the official page. plot info geth info kind regards, --guyzero | talk 21:32, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistencies with Plot section 

message: Perhaps it should be noted on Saren's page that he is half cybernetic/robotic, as clearly shown in screen shots, and as hinted at on the IGN blog post entitled 'Heroes and Villains' http://blogs.ign.com/BioWare_Games/
The novel tells that the artefact Doctor Qian was working on had an affect on him, could this be the reason Saren modified his body?  To better interact with and control it, (or perhaps the Geth directly)?  Or could it simply be due to an injury?  This is speculation though. . .
-----------------  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 90.194.162.67 (talk) 01:15:13, August 19, 2007 (UTC) 
While a thread in the official forum states that you cannot directly control your party members, several official videos and screen shots show exactly this.  For example: In the X06 video the Turian character appears to be under direct control while taking down the Geth Arbiter's shields.  Other screen shots show over-the-shoulder views from characters other than Shepard and the 3 character icons at the bottom-left of the screen change to show that character, rather than Shepard, larger and highlighted.  Eg. http://uk.media.xbox360.ign.com/media/718/718963/img_3956801.html  Later screen shots show a totally different HUD.  While it seems all this was just for demonstration purposes and not possible in game, it seems unlikely to me.  What say ye?
-----------------  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 90.194.162.67 (talk) 01:03:26, August 19, 2007 (UTC) 
There has been rather a lot of vandalism on the page. I'm cleaning it up, but feel free to get anything I miss. Thanks.
Shouldn't there be some mention of the gameplay (i.e. the dialogue system and combat)?66.211.136.138 18:46, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unthreaded comments from talk 

message: I took it of because as of right now its all speculation. If we put up the date of the release from a non offical source (anyone but Bioware or Microsoft) then there would be 10 different dates. FSU Guy 13:19, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  UK release date 

message: Image was clutter, so I'm queuing it here per Wikipedia's image use policy. - Cyborg Ninja 01:04, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed novel image 

message: Critical reception section is now up. First of many reviews in. JAF1970 18:24, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Some mention should be made as to the fact that the review was written before the game was released. SharkD 14:44, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critical reception now open 

message: Added the line that solves the weird display of the mass effect general information
AnnihilateApocalypse 15:09, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor web tag error 

message: I heard today that Bioware was taken over by EA today and I researched it a bit and it seems to be true. So just seeing if anyone who knows about this can add some info. 59.154.24.147 08:24, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the BioWare article, the acquisition occurs in 2008, after the 360 release of ME. cheers, --guyzero | talk 22:55, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  EA Takeover 

message: Do you all think that Mass Effect is an action RPG or just an RPG? I am having a hard time thinking it is like Diablo II when the video gameplay content has so many choices of PC - NPC interaction. Note that Knights of the Old Republic is simply labled a RPG. Tony Pacheco 17:13, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi! Welcome to Wikipedia. =) I agree this is debatable .. event the action rpg article points out that the definition is sometimes blurry. The safe bet would be to go with the definition the reliable sources are applying to this particular game. I flipped through a few from the article (IGN, xbox.com, the official masseffect faq at bioware.com) and they either define the game as an action-rpg or no definition is provided. We might keep an eye on reviews to see if they say different than the action-rpg moniker that has so far been applied by bioware/microsoft marketing (which may in fact be less than accurate, as you suggest). cheers, --guyzero | talk 21:35, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Action RPG or just RPG? 

message: Who owns the Mass Effect IP, Microsoft or BioWare? 204.69.40.7 18:05, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Electronic Arts will in January if the deal is allowed by the gov't. But Bioware owns it now. JAF1970 18:24, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intellectual Property 

message: Am I the only one who finds it odd that the North American release date is the only one that's unsourced? I'm sure that, given how close the supposed release date is, that there must be a reliable official source for the information given.
I'm at work right now, and I'm unable to browse game sites. Wikipedia, thankfully, keeps me sane ☺. Just thought it would be worth a mention, but I'm unable to fix it myself. -Louis 167.1.143.100 19:28, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done! cheers, --guyzero | talk 19:34, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hot diggity dog, that was fast. Realised after I posted that the release was mentioned in the same source used for the other regions. Thanks for the speedy update  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.1.143.100 (talk) 19:36, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  North American release date 

message: Now that reviews are coming in, I know its safe to assume they will be mostly positive, but by the ways of wikipedia (lol) we should keep the reception section as neutral as we can, even if cons in reviews are minor. Stabby Joe 19:01, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reception: NEUTRAL! 

message: Sorry, but where exactly is this "while inside the box, there is a smaller container with a smaller amount of copies, usually between three and five, labeled "SELL ON NOVEMBER 13, 2007." coming from?
--∑ssarege∑ 22:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cite: Street violations - Confirmation of K-Mart management 

message: I just posted that (http://www.cheapassgamer.com/archives/cags-score-mass-effect-early-at-kmart.php) had revealed that Kmart was releasing this game early (under the counter ish...) Its probably important info? I'd think so, If you disagree, please post your reasoning and do what must be done. Thank you!
--∑ssarege∑ 02:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I cleaned it up a bit and added a link to Christ Priestly's confirmation of early sales. Also changed it to "Street Date Violations" DumberDrummer 01:44, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Thank you for your hard work! My wording was off too, but thanks for the clarification, it is greatly appreciated! --∑ssarege∑ 20:53, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't think I can post it in the article, since it constitutes original content, but I'll just let everyone know as a heads-up. I picked up a copy at my local K-Mart on Tuesday the 13th. However, when I went back with a friend yesterday (Thursday the 15th) the register wouldn't allow them to sell it. A message popped up when they scanned the UPC saying the game wasn't released yet. So, it seems that K-Mart has taken steps to stop the early sales. -GamblinMonkey 15:34, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kmart Early Release 

message: Just a reminder that the details to the plot should not be posted BEFORE the release of the game officially (i.e., those that purchased it at Kmart). I'm basing this on a similar rationale as not posting the Harry Potter 7 plot details based on the .pdf that was released a week or two early.
155.212.94.131 17:01, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't this a little different, though? People (like myself) already have official copies in-hand. The PDF was possibly a hoax. It's not like they're going to press a vastly different version and ship those to retailers next week. The copies that are out there are the same as the copies that everyone else will get when it comes out. -GamblinMonkey 13:59, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I was more referring to the rationale of not releasing the details before they were meant to be out in the open. You are absolutely right about this definitely BEING the final plot, but all I'm saying is that the story shouldn't be publicly available HERE before it was intended to be.
155.212.94.131 17:06, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot Details 

message: According to the article at the link below, the game has recently been Banned in Singapore because of a hoomosexual scene in the game.  Should this be in the article.  Here's the link.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20071115/tot-uk-microsoft-singapore-ban-566e283_1.html
Looneyman 20:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ban lifted, see updated article. Chensiyuan 14:07, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Singapore Banning 

message: Michael Ironside also has a role - I don't know the character's name, tho. JAF1970 (talk) 03:19, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Michael Ironside 

message: I added semi-protection to the page because of the increased vandalism lately. FSU Guy (talk) 12:24, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I put in a request for semi-protection just now.  I was unaware that it had to be approved first. I think we are going to need it with the increased traffic starting 11/20/07 with the release of the game. FSU Guy (talk) 18:01, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: Can we dump this arcane piece of shit. This is NOT USEFUL. Period. End of story. JAF1970 (talk) 14:25, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arcane review score box 

message: Hold off on compilation for another 48 hours to allow them to catch up to the rest of the incoming online reviews. JAF1970 (talk) 15:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Compilation scores 

message: And... What's up with the references? Link 31 and onwards are reduced to lines of HTML source. - Louis 167.1.143.100 (talk) 01:13, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed.. someone left a ref tag open. --guyzero | talk 01:22, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: I know that many here will quickly call me a fanboy but don't and hear me out. I mostly edit game pages to make the reception section more neutral so I'm by no means trying to prevent cons and lesser reviews from being added but the problem with PC world is 5 fold. 
*1 - Its a PC mag that has reviewed a console game, and it doesn't review PC games alot either.
*2 - Again, no fanboyism but its less than normal review status and linked with the previous point might lead some to think its biased?
*3 - It doesn't contribute to Metacritic or Game Rankings.
*4 - It hasn't ever been mention in any other game articles.
*5 - We don't know the reasons why it has a 60%.
Despite being said I know people will call me biased but I'm far from it if you check my other major contribution in reception sections. Stabby Joe (talk) 15:21, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  PC World 

message: Howdy. In regards to the Dialogue section where it states:
:<I>"The player can interrupt the speech of another character, and the character will react appropriately to the interruption."</I>
It was to my understanding that this feature has been removed. I believe they may have mentioned it in the newest 1Up Show episode. Anyone have an "official" answer on that?  - Louis 167.1.143.100 (talk) 19:49, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: From what I am seeing playing the game at the moment, it no longer interrupts, but rather skips the speech been given at the time of pressing "X". This seems to have no effect on Paragon or Renegade, or the NPC's, but instead just a methed of speeding things, up.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.154.24.147 (talk) 19:59, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool, thanks for the clarification there. Can't wait to get out of work to play this! Killing me inside. -Louis 167.1.143.100 (talk) 01:13, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dialogue Section 

message: The medical term mass effect (the physiological effect of a growing mass such a tumor pushing on nearby tissue) has been displaced by this article.  The redirect page does not have a link to that former article.  It should be restored.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.35.35.34 (talk) 00:21, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: FWIW, there is a link to the disambiguation page (which includes a link to the medical term you mention) at the top of this article. cheers, --guyzero | talk 01:40, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Displacement of medical term 

message: The dialogue section is in dire need of a cleanup, specifically the third paragraph. All of this particular part needs to be removed:
:<I>"The player can interrupt the speech of another character, and the character will react appropriately to the interruption (as opposed to a system that simply allows you to skip through dialogue to save time). If the player wants to befriend someone, they must wait until the NPC finishes speaking, deterring the player from constantly interrupting NPCs. The only drawback to the dialogue is that however the character may appear"</I>
For one, as discussed earlier, the characters DO NOT react to you interrupting them. You simply skip the dialogue as in most other RPGs. Secondly, this does not change their disposition towards you, or your renegade / paragon stats. Lastly, the last sentence runs straight into another one. It wasn't that I copied and pasted it wrong as it may seem, but there is actually no end to the sentence.
Don't have an account, so I can't edit it (sorry... I'm a Wiki-at-work kinda guy ☺). -Louis 167.1.143.100 (talk) 16:26, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dialogue Section 

message: Can someone please correct it? The part about interrupting NPC's lines - it's not in the game. Any dialogue line can be safely skipped to save time and it has absolutely no effect on character's reaction.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.224.209.216 (talk) 23:38, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dialogue Section 

message: "An example of a major moral choice the player must make is to kill or set free a Queen Rachni (found on an icy research world). There are arguments for and against letting the Rachni queen live; in the game's back-story, the Alliance fought a huge war against the Rachni 2,000 years before the start of the game. The Rachni were only defeated by the Alliance with the aid of the Korgan. The Rachni war ended with the extermination of all the Rachni (genocide) as no peace was possible between the Alliance and the Rachni of that time"
It was the Citadel races, not the Alliance, that defeated the Rachni, 2000 years ago.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.29.31.5 (talk) 10:03, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Articel errors 

message: I don't know if they will bring this up in the game, but I think that Anderson might be rather jealous that Shepard is given the duty of Spectre. In the novel it was originally considered to Anderson, but Saren badmouthed him. Also I wonder if Anderson will make it a personal vendetta against Saren to payback for the damage he did to his career.64.24.85.114 01:51, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jealousy 

message: In the begining of the text it says Shepard, later (Character background part) it says Shepherd
Someone sould change that...
//S990WE  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.217.42.64 (talk) 13:33, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! Fixed. Why is this article still semiprotected? --guyzero | talk 18:05, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shepard or Shepherd 

message: I don't know if they will bring this up in the game, but I think that Anderson might be rather jealous that Shepard is given the duty of Spectre. In the novel it was originally considered to Anderson, but Saren badmouthed him. Also I wonder if Anderson will make it a personal vendetta against Saren to payback for the damage he did to his career.64.24.85.114 01:51, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jealousy 

message: In the begining of the text it says Shepard, later (Character background part) it says Shepherd
Someone sould change that...
//S990WE  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.217.42.64 (talk) 13:33, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! Fixed. Why is this article still semiprotected? --guyzero | talk 18:05, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shepard or Shepherd 

message: OH MY GOD CAN SOMEONE PLEASE PUT A SPOILER ALERT ON THE PLOT DESCRIPTION!!!
WHY PLAY THIS GAME WHEN IT'S BIGGEST SURPRISE IS REVEALED IN THE FIRST SENTENCE OF THE PLOT DESCRIPTION!!!!!!!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.228.38.130 (talk) 05:53, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot 

message: In the interests of our own guidelines I have removed the Wikia Mass Effect link. The Complete Mass Effect Wiki and Mass Effect Planet are good enough fan sites and wikis, as well as all the official links. Please see Wikipedia:External_links#Advertising_and_conflicts_of_interest for further reasons of the Wikia removal. JayKeaton (talk) 12:27, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Conflict of interest has nothing to do with this, and Wikia's wiki is far larger than The Complete Mass Effect Wiki (379 to 73 articles). Kirkburn (talk) 23:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

text: It seems that neither The Complete Mass Effect Wiki nor the Mass Effect Planet are non-profit.  In which case, I would ask a neutral party (who has no intrinsic stand for or against the fansite's hosting service, Wikia) to objectively evaluate the content and quality of the three fansites, to decide whether the Wikia fansite can be added back. -Pan Sola (talk) 23:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

text: If BioWare feels that the Mass Effect Wiki at Wikia is worthy of being listed on the official Mass Effect site, then there is no reason that it should not be listed at Wikipedia. JoeLay (talk) 03:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Agreed, including the wikia link is not a WP:COI conflict and that site's quality of content seems to be at least on par with the other fansites listed. A proposal is to just post the single link to Official Mass Effect fan site list and delete all fansite listings. cheers, --guyzero | talk 11:17, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of the Wikia link 

message: Should there be mention of it in the article? Chensiyuan (talk) 02:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There most certainly should be a mention of it in this article. There are meant to be two more Mass Effect games that will complete the story arch, and downloadable content in between each game that will fill in the gaps of the story between each game. The DLC should have been mentioned in the lead, as no other game has ever spread a story arch over three titles in this way and had DLC to continue the main game story. The reason is, and spoiler alert here, but your choices in Mass Effect carry on to the other games and DLC, so all your hard work and unique gameplay will continue on. JayKeaton (talk) 02:59, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can't wait for the DLC, but it seems the official site doesn't have specific treatment of the topic -- most I've heard was it being mentioned in interviews before the release of the game. Guess it could still take some time. Chensiyuan (talk) 03:02, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Interviews with the developers should be a good enough source, in fact it is probably an even better source than the official site as official game sites are often just purely promotional and they are never up to date. They are usually just put up once as general information and then forgotten about by the publisher JayKeaton (talk) 04:02, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: True, but I think in terms of DLC, as and when it is announced, should come from the developers first -- in the interim of course, I don't expect the official site to be constantly updated. Chensiyuan (talk) 04:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

text: This recent interview  mentions upcoming DLC (hopefully by year end!) but is too vague in terms of schedule or content to make for any reasonable inclusion into the article. If there is DLC coming soon, I'm sure we'll see better information that we can include soon as well. Is there an RS and good information with regards to the fact that decisions made in part 1 will carry through to parts 2 and 3? That'd be a great addition to the article, if so.  cheers, --guyzero | talk 19:15, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Downloadable content 

message: This arcitle is a mess the plot is less that basic and inacruite the plot does not follow a prophey insted a hunt for a rouge spector. it falies to metion any points in the story and ingnors the ending. but thats just to start the whole this is rilled with inacroute facts and missing items of large importantce, Has this arcitle even been updated post realse? I can see all the proplems with facts in this article but as you can tell my skill with gramor means i am unable to correct the proplems with this .....well its not a arcitle about mass effect because there is too much wrong with it plese fix this junk article  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ralon silver (talk • contribs) 08:51, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is the worst yet 

message: Is it of value to the article to continue to retain information about ME's E3-2006 awards and also information about the various award nominations (vs. wins)? cheers, --guyzero | talk 18:27, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Take pages like Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion and Shadow of the Colossus, they don't list every win and nomination, just the wins and the most important ones because along with the page theres a citation for a complete list of awards EG in Oblivion's in the intro it says it won numberous awards followed by a refference to the whole list. Stabby Joe (talk) 18:45, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I've made an edit  to remove most E3-2006 awards (with the exception of the Game Critics Award) and all of the nominations in an effort to tighten up the article. Please feel free to revert if you feel that the article is better with this information intact. cheers, --guyzero | talk 06:39, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Awards? 

message: And may I please ask where specialization classes??? This article is not very well put together. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LaBarge (talk • contribs) 00:58, January 9, 2008
As someone else would have eventually pointed out, this isn't a game guide and information like that was included in the early days of the article, but was subsequently removed due to Wiki policy violation (or the anal retentive interpretation thereof).  This article, overpoliced or not, is put together well by any standard.  It may not be the way you way you want it to be put together and therein lies the rub.  There is a difference between your aesthetic opinion and actual fact. (144.92.84.206 (talk) 20:09, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  specialization classes 

message: It's early days yet (in terms of distance to GA), but a good gaming article should have a development section. Chensiyuan (talk) 02:53, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Development section missing 

message: Citadel Station (Mass Effect) should be merged here. It's not notable enough for a separate article, per Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Notability (fiction), and mainly rehashes the plot, which could be covered here instead. Pagrashtak 18:48, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The page just redirects to here now, so I'm going to remove the template. --Asclepius Dices mihi 20:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge Citadel Station 

message: Found this on Penny Arcade - http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/KevinMcCullough/2008/01/13/the_sex-box_race_for_president?page=full&comments=true 67.81.60.34 (talk) 03:54, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe we should add this note into the article?  The McCullough article has gotten pretty widespread links, and I imagine lots of people (like me) will want to read about Mass Effect on wikipedia -- and then they will be (like me) confused by the lack of sex. (Not that I'm not often confused by the lack of -- oh, nevermind...) I don't want to add it without getting some consensus, though...  Deltopia (talk) 11:37, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Fourthing that opinion, I already removed this from the article when somebody added it. If this becomes a bigger deal then I would support adding a section explaining his mistake if sources could be found. Mad031683 (talk) 23:04, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Foxnews picked it up.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YEzRJ5ojtg god I hate them.. 90.148.96.21 (talk) 13:33, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sex 

message: Don't you think we should remove the Sales Controversies.. category? It's not really a big deal. A rumor about Kmart and Kmart saying there is no Mass Effect out yet. So what?--71.72.82.183 (talk) 05:50, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This sounds familiar, doesn't it. I won't object to its removal. Chensiyuan (talk) 06:55, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sales Controversies 

message: I know that there's a section for this at the bottom of the page, but this is newish and that's oldish. Anyway, should there be a section about Fox's wildly innacurate report on the sex scene in this game, and EA's letter rebuttal? 67.204.195.235 (talk) 02:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sex Controversy and Fox News 

message: Does anyone know who did the voice for Sovereign? It doesn't appear to be in the credits, or listed here or on IMDB. Mloren (talk) 11:53, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Voice of Sovereign