Showing posts with label Mass Effect. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mass Effect. Show all posts

Thursday, 13 August 2015

Which is the Best Mass Effect Game?


Which is the Best Mass Effect Game?

The Mass Effect trilogy is one of the most well know, well-loved and arguably best trilogy’s in gaming. There are many high points throughout all three games but I’m asking the question which is best? I’ll put it down to categories to find the best Mass Effect game in my own humble opinion.

 

Plot.

It’s important to understand what plot actually is as it is pretty confusing. The plot is the events that make up the story and these events will relate in a sequence to create the story. This isn’t the same as premise which is the idea of what is going to happen. So with that in mind we can quickly eliminate ME2 from this category as thinking about it, it barely even has a plot.  The premise is to stop the Collectors but the events don’t really lead up to this ultimate goal. The side stories with the characters and loyalty missions are interesting but don’t build up to the Collector threat in any way.

 

So we have ME1 and ME3 and personally I think ME1 has a better plot. ME1 certainly has the most coherent narrative of the trilogy and while ME3 has the more epic and emotional moments ME1 has the events build on top of each other to build the plot and impact the characters. I also think the twists work better in ME1 and I’d be remised to not mention that infamous ME3 ending. So the winner here is ME1.

 

Protagonist.

Which game did Shepard the best? I understand he/she is a blank slate to project ourselves onto but I’d argue the character still needs to grow as a result of the experiences throughout the trilogy. ME2 Shepard doesn’t really grow at all and as I said earlier is not really relevant to the plot. So once again I’m left with ME1 and ME3.

 

ME3 is interesting as we do get to experience Shepard’s loss of sanity at parts of the games through his stresses and pressures of what he’s doing. The dream sequences in particular appear to focus on this but the interactions with characters on the Normandy (the one where Shepard snaps at Joker stands out to me) show how he’s being affected by what’s going on. ME1 also does well with Shepard as this game really makes us feel the progression of the character from soldier to Spectre and then throughout the plot. This was a tougher one to call but again I think I’ll need to go with ME1 as I think Shepard has more relevance on the Plot in ME1 than in ME3.

 

Side Characters.

It probably sounds like I’m just going to say ME1 is better in every way, maybe say that the second 2 games are just pandering to the filthy casuals who have the nerve to play the games the hard-core and far superior gamers like. Yes that was a joke and ME2 wins this category without question. All three games are excellent in this category but I feel that ME2 was the one where they got the most focus and development, especially through loyalty missions for the squad mates.

 

I liked the characters in ME1 but I didn’t find myself getting really attached until ME2. You deal with things that are far more personal in ME 2 and as a result these characters begin to feel far more real. ME3 meanwhile has those characters return but you were already so invested because of ME2.

 

There are anomalies of course, a lot of these characters weren’t even in ME1 and the first game had squad mates that weren’t accessible in ME2. The difference is I found the plot more interesting than side characters in ME1 while in ME2 the side characters and their stories could easily make their own game.

 

Visuals.

I don’t mean graphics when I say visuals, I mean which game had the most interesting environments and style. ME1 had an interesting style with its grainy look to make it look like an old Sci-Fi television show. ME 2 and 3 meanwhile discarded the grainy look and overall went for brighter colours.

 

ME1 has the advantage of having all those worlds to explore in the Mako, the issue however is they pretty much all looked the same. ME2 had the most interesting locations to explore with the Citadel, Omega and Illium. ME3 only had the Citadel while ME1 meanwhile also had multiple explore able worlds with the likes of Noveria. For the places you visit and the ones I remember most I’m giving this one to ME2 for having the most interesting visual locations.

 

Emotional Impact.

Which game got those feels going? Well in all three games characters can die and they all have monumental choices to make. All three have emotional impact but really ME3 cannot be matched in this regard. This game had some of the saddest deaths I can think of in my time gaming, Not just individual deaths impact you either, everything is on such an enormous scale and worlds being destroyed and possible extinction is something that really has Shepard on edge.

 

The sad moments are big but the lighter moments can but just as emotional. Chances are if you’re playing ME3 you enjoy the camaraderie and friendship between characters and moments like shooting bottles with Garrus can be just impactful as any other. These games make you feel like you’re really attached to these characters and moments like this really highlight that so without doubt ME3 wins this one.

 

Gameplay.

These are games so gameplay is important. The shooting element is obviously important in a game where you shoot bad guys and ME3 naturally has the best shooting mechanics. They refined the shooting in ME2 which has already refined the shooting in ME1 and added some good new features such as the ability to roll and the improvement to the melee system. I also thought ME3 had the best level design in terms of what you had to do as you played through. The focus on verticality was nice as it made the levels feel less like walking from shooting gallery to shooting gallery and put greater emphasis on a tactical approach. Despite the occasional turret section ME3 combat was best without doubt.

 

ME3’s gameplay falls down with the more auto dialogue included in the game however. ME2 was better in this regard I felt as was ME1 however the interrupt system makes me prefer ME2 as you can impact conversations in more proactive ways. Overall though ME3 didn’t have so much auto dialogue that it made the game feel like I wasn’t contributing and having less focus on the paragon/renegade system was a positive so this category is ME3’s.

 

Verdict.

This blog post hasn’t been very conclusive has it? Each game has won 2 categories and I genuinely didn’t plan it like that. Maybe I could do more categories but I think what it shows is it depends on what matters most to you in a game. My personal favourite is ME3 but a strong argument could be made for any game in the series. I guess that makes sense really, it’d explain why the series is so popular with such a large range of gamers and why people cared so much about controversies such as the ending. If nothing else it proves gaming can tell epics as well as anything else if you’re dumb and still won’ believe it so that’s something.
 
 


Thursday, 30 July 2015

Mass Effect's Ending and why it's terrible


Mass Effects Ending and why it’s Terrible

This discussion probably comes about 3 years too late, however as a newcomer to the series I haven’t long beaten the trilogy and thus haven’t had any reason to talk about it until now. So … here I am.

 

The big thing to mention is like pretty much everyone I loved the Mass Effect Trilogy.  It wouldn’t be an exaggeration to say about 98% of the series was fantastic and it is easily one of my favourite gaming series ever. It’s very much about the journey, not the destination so that’s good … doesn’t make the ending suck any less though.

 

Many complaints about the endings have been made and I’ll be discussing the endings as edited by the extended cut as that’s what I experienced. I will say that after watching the version before the extended cut was released however that what I saw was not as bad as it could’ve been. The extended cut was an improvement and did have some really good additions. When I talk the ending however I mean the part after the scene with Anderson and The Illusive Man.

 

Before I talk plot holes and such things let’s talk the actual premise. I personally didn’t like it and that’s due to how it basically abandoned the series genre. Mass Effect is obviously a science fiction but it was always grounded in the rules of its own universe. It’s not like in Star Wars where it seems magical and the limits of the force and the characters power is essentially limitless. All along Shepard is a normal human with no extraordinary abilities. The closest thing to space magic in Biotics has its own rules, limitations and is explained by the in game codex.

 

Suddenly however this Star Child comes along and tells you the crucible somehow has 3 completely different functions which you get to choose somehow. It all felt so out of place in the Mass Effect universe. It was one step away from declaring it Shepard’s destiny or something and it felt like we weren’t even in a Mass Effect game anymore. Then these options are barely explained and you end up making a pretty blind choice hoping for the best even with the extended cuts added dialogue.

 

Looking into these choices doesn’t help. We’ll start with control. It’s portrayed as a good option and even has the colouring of paragon blue. As a paragon Shepard I’d spent since the end of Mass Effect 2 and deciding to destroy the collector base fighting with the Illusive Man saying that controlling the Reapers is a bad and more importantly morally wrong solution and now it’s pointed as a good thing. What’s more is if you do pick control Shepard descends to this other level and controls the Reapers. The problem is Shepard talks as no longer Shepard and if you pick this option the Reapers are incredibly likely to end up being used to rule with an iron fist if any conflict breaks out again.

 

So that’s bad and it seems like the same cycle would just break out again, except with Harbinger replaced by Shepard. So maybe choose Synthesis like I did first time and instantly regret it. The specifics of synthesis are incredibly vague but what I can say is it goes against everything we’ve fought for. So much for bringing everyone together despite their differences and working for a greater goal together, now organic and synthetic are basically all homogenised into one and it seems to me like everyone is being turned into a husk.

 

The other two are admittedly better, destroy is what I wish I’d picked. It makes no sense how Shepard could possibly survive but it is kind of along the right lines. We got to fulfil what we were out to do, destroy the Reapers but at a cost of all synthetic life in the galaxy, not only wiping out the Geth, but killing one of our squad mates in EDI. When people talk about multiple endings, I’d like to see multiple endings along the lines of this, depending on how well you did with war assets and the decisions you made depends on who you can save and if you can even finish the crucible at all. The problem with destroy is by itself why is it the only option when wanting to destroy the Reapers. The best ending should be to wipe them out and not have to sacrifice an entire species, especially if you’ve done everything right.

 

Finally refusal while good being able to basically give the middle finger to the dumb Star Child feels like a massive troll. It would’ve been good if having enough war assets meant you could win the war with the military might you had sent upwards of 30 hours of Mass Effect 3 collecting. But no, no matter what everyone dies. Great. Even worse if the Star Child is obviously a Reaper construct as he has a Reaper voice if you pick this ending so he could be lying to you about everything to start with and thus your decision is completely blind.

 

I’ve picked apart my problems with the ending as an ending to a story. I dislike the plot twist and what happens as an ending, I hate the ending for much better reasons than my own niggles. Now I’m going to start a new paragraph with all the plot holes I can think of off the top of my head so 3, 2, 1 and go:

 

Why didn’t Harbinger shoot Shepard as he/she ran down the hill, why did Harbinger not blow the Normandy to pieces as the squad was being evacuated, why did Harbinger fly away, why did the Reapers establish a quick way to get to the citadel which was the best way to stop them, how did Shepard survive the hit from Harbingers beam when entire buildings are demolished by it, why does Shepard’s armour and gun change after being hit with the beam, how did Anderson get on the citadel and reach the control panel before Shepard, how did The Illusive Man get there, where do the Illusive Mans magical powers come from, if The Illusive Man kills you why does he ignore the console that he believes is key to completing his goal, how did Shepard get a wound where Anderson was shot, how does Shepard heal after taking the elevator to the Star Child, how does Shepard run now, why does shooting the core thing activate the crucible, how could Shepard possibly survive the blast.

 

That’s off the top of my head, I’m sure there’s more. Many could be answered with the two words: Indoctrination Theory but Bioware didn’t do anything to prove it and basically said, you can interpret that way if you want to. The indoctrination theory I think was a brilliant idea and something that would’ve been great to expand on in the extended cut but instead Bioware largely dismissed it and it just seems too big a stretch. So instead we have plot holes galore, another one being why isn’t Shepard feeling the effects of indoctrination after everything he/she has done. Doesn’t Harbinger say he’s going to take control off Shepard’s mind in the arrival dlc, do Reapers make empty threats now?

 

I have one more thing I want to talk about, how the ending still doesn’t supply closure and switches focus away from the characters. Yes we got a slide show briefly pointing out what happened to some characters (Although some of these slides just showed the character looking at the sky). Even if you like the slide show however you still aren’t given any kind of closure on the characters from your ship in Mass Effect 3 outside of EDI and Joker.

 

I’ll talk from my own experience, after what was a very touching scene where Liara put Shepards name onto the memorial what happened to my crew. My favourite character like with many people was Garrus, what happened with everyone’s favourite space bro. Did he ever reunite with his sister? We don’t know. Did he help rebuild Palaven? We don’t know. Did he ever calibrate the Normandy’s gun to 100% efficiency? We don’t know. Not long ago I caught him sharing a moment with Tali (My second favourite character) and calling her something to come back to. Did they settle down, maybe live in that house on Rannoch that Tali always dreamed of? We have no idea. Did Garrus ever meet Shepard at the Bar, cheesy yes but I would’ve found that satisfying. Mass Effect did such a great job in getting us attached to these characters that just leaving it all up in the air felt insulting.

 

Finally is the lack of focus on Shepard. Sure you make a choice but it’s not really your choice, it’s what the Star Child allows. All the decisions you’ve made before you’ve made by using logic and your own morality and how far you’re willing to go. Here Star Child tells you what’s allowed with no budging on what he says. Everything you’ve done up to this point is irrelevant.

 

I’ve moaned a lot about the ending to Mass Effect 3 so I’ll end on something positive. After replaying the series and once again witnessing those great character moments I can conclude that it in no way ruins Mass Effect, at least for me and I’ll buy Mass Effect Andromeda without a second thought. If anything it shows how good a job Bioware did with everything else so well done on about 98% of your series Bioware, now please don’t succumb to EA’s indoctrination and make more day 1 DLC.


https://www.facebook.com/pages/Thecoolstuffblog12/1807956062763462?ref=bookmarks