CK's Assorted Reviews - Today's Review - The Mass Effect Trilogy - Now With 61% More Mass Effect 2!

[ChancellorKremlin]

Right, so I've decided to aggregate my reviews under one roof. I don' represent anybody, I do this for fun, and it goes without saying spoilers abound. I plan on adding more of these reviews to this column, where I will appropriately link to them. The next one will probably be X-COM: Enemy Unknown. Yes, I realise a lot of these titles have been released for ages. No, I don't care. I also don't do scores, so to get the gist of my reviews, you actually have to read them.

 

I just thought it would be nice to have a little column where I keep track of my reviews. Enjoy!

 

 

Below are the links to my reviews. Be warned, major spoilers ahead!

 

-- Fallout 3 - The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

 

-- The Witcher 2: Assassin of Kings - A Long, In-depth Review

 

-- Aliens: Colonial Marines - A Missed Opportunity

 

-- Crysis 2 - What Shooters Are About

 

-- BioShock - An FPS With A Soul

 

-- Mass Effect - Perhaps The Most Amazing Sci-Fi RPG Ever

 

-- Mass Effect 2 - When Less Isn't More

 

-- Mass Effect 3 - A Complicated Love Affair

[Veta]

Hey ,these reviews were pretty good.

[Ark of Truth]

CK it would most likely be best if you put each review in their own threads. That way users are not reading replies about multiple games and getting confused, then moody, then bitchy.

 

Just a thought.

[ChancellorKremlin]

CK it would most likely be best if you put each review in their own threads. That way users are not reading replies about multiple games and getting confused, then moody, then bitchy.

 

Just a thought.

 

Thanks Ark, but that would defeat the purpose of having all the reviews in one place! 

 

Plus, I don't mind if people post replies to various reviews, I'm sure I'll be able to handle them, and if they get bitchy... well, that is what my arsenal of moderation tools is for! 

[ChancellorKremlin]

Fallout 3 - The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

 

 

 

 

 

"Mostly harmless"

 

 

Introduction

Well then, having completed Fallout 3 today, I felt compelled to write my afterthoughts on it. A lot of what I will say has probably already been said, but some of it I feel is new. Everything I noticed or thought worth mentioning as I progressed throughout the game has been noted, so most of these observations are in chronological order.

Also, some background info on myself people may or may not find useful. I'm 20 years old, and I am both an avid PC gamer, and a fan of the original Fallout series. (One and Two, the second being my favourite) I'm also a regular at NMA. To some here, that bit of information is probably enough to label me a Fallout 3 hater. That is not the case. Being a middle aged gamer, being old enough to appreciate content and not be swayed by eye-candy , but not old enough to disregard the mindless, yet fun aspects of games, I think this puts me in an interesting position to judge Fallout 3 as impartially as I hope to. I will leave the final judgement up to you however.

The layout of my little review is based on the classic western film, The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. As noticed, it has been preceded by an introduction, and will be succeeded by a conclusion. So, without further ado, I give you, my thoughts on Fallout 3.


The Good

Art:

Something that struck me as soon as I started the game, and by that I mean from windows, not actually playing it yet, was the art. The slides on the menu were very very appealing. Some of it was random, some of it was informative, and some of it was mildly humorous. In game, however, this was taken a step further with all the 50's references, with actual vehicles, houses, and a decent '50's atmosphere. Kudos to the art team. They did a good job at immersing me into a 50's world, both graphically, and through writing on random newspapers, billboards and so on.

While the radio stations I think were out of place, the 20's-50's music also added to the retro atmosphere. Its nice being immersed in something not purely graphical.

Effort:

Its easy to see a lot of effort was put into this game. Having taken four years, I would expect so. For starters, the game is probably bigger than both Fallout 1 and 2 combined, although set in a smaller region. There are many more maps, many more locations, a bigger world to explore, and a bigger diversity of areas. Effort was definitely put into world design, that's for sure.

There are also many side quests, some of them pointless, some of the funny (Lug-Nut and the Naughty Nightwear comes to mind), and some of them are just boring dungeon crawls. Still, a lot of variety, freedom of exploration and so on. Good score overall. As explained latter though, all this inspiration seems lacking in the main quest.

Pre-War Organisations and Vaults:

A good direction I think Bethesda took with Fallout 3 was its depiction of pre-war organisations. From RobCo to Nuka-Cola, to Corvega and Lob Enterprises, and not to forget the devious Vault Tec, Fallout 3 expanded on the Fallout world of greedy and immoral corporations, with many of their headquarters based where the game is set. Score for Bethesda.

Also, I liked the addition of extra Vaults in Fallout 3. Fallout would not be Fallout without Vaults. Still, I wished there were at least some that survived somehow, either through being a control vault or one where the experiments did not result in the demise of all the vault's population.

Combat:

Its not quite an FPS, yet its not an RPG either. VAT's was born through the need to reconcile both of these. For somebody playing on a low end PC, VAT's was definitely a life saver when it came to small crowded spaces with lots of enemies and a particularly annoying FPS (Frames per second) score. I only played from first person perspective, and thought it was a passable shooter experience. VAT's made the game interesting when needing to quickly dispatch dangerous enemies, and unlike many of my NMA counterparts, the exploding heads did not bother me too much, I actually enjoyed seeing it every time. I only wish it happened a little less often. With a luck of two and constantly scoring criticals, it did have me wonder.

Weapons:

I liked the variety of weapons in Fallout 3. Many of the original series weapons were replaced or absent altogether, but made up for with Chinese weaponry, custom based weapons (awesome by the way), large variety of grenades and mines and unique weapons. Also, melee characters were well rewarded.

Communism and the Chinese:

Another interesting direction Beth took. I liked the large numbers of Chinese spies, remnants, Vault 112 simulation commandos, and so on. Their weaponry also made sense seeing as they had a large presence in the D.C area. I think Communism was well explored in Fallout 3, something I always felt was missing in the original series, giving the paranoia of the 50's and McCartheism. Liberty Prime's taunts were priceless.


The Bad
 

Megaton Crater and Bomb:

One of the first things that struck me as I entered this strange settlement; the story of its creation. People think its located on a crater because of the bomb dropping, (which is strange, seeing as unexploded bombs do not create craters) but it was actually because of a plane crash there. (Parts of aircraft are indeed used to make the walls of the settlement.

Well, I have news for the level designer. Plane crashes DO NOT result in massive craters. Level design is still something I am going to expand on here, so bear with me. More to come.

Vaults:

For me, the eeriest vault was vault 92. No survivors, an interesting love story, deserted yet monster infested place, eery (may have something to do with the fact I have seen White Noise) and ironic as I re-entered it to find the music book for Agatha whilst listening to her playing the violin over the radio, just as the original vault-dwellers would have when they were being subjected to white-noise.

It worked for me because it was believable. The other vaults record experimentation beginning almost immediately after the vaults were closed, and then the immediate failures that followed. While I was scared [censored]less in Vault 106 due to the hallucinations, having survivors there broke the spell for me. Same applies to all other vaults. How the hell does Gary reproduce? How did the survivors survive in all those vaults seeing as the people to maintain them were either mutated/insane/dead, for a good 200 years? Assuming the only ones left were the test subjects and all the technicians, overseers, scientists and technics were all dead, how did food, water and heat production continue? Their continued existence just doen't make much sense, as eery as their presence may be.

Size of settlements:

OK, so I was quite pleased with the sheer number of settlements in Fallout 3, far greater than in the other series. However, one important caveat, cities of 3-8 inhabitants are NOT settlements. They are at best isolated groups of dwellings, tribes or neighbourhoods. Rivet City is the closest we have to a city, and Megaton the closest to a town. The rest of these 'towns' cannot be called such. How they defend themselves, with their populations of 5-6 against the hundreds of raiders and super mutants that roam the capital wasteland is beyond me. Frankly, Beth dropped the ball with the civilian population of this wasteland. Creating some true ''cities'' would not have been much to ask for, giving the towns and cities in the original Fallout series. Not to mention the state of these 'settlements' is rather dilapidated for places that have existed for almost 200 years. Ever think of cleaning your street buddy? Get some of those rocks out of the way....

Watered down factions, or nonsensical ones:

OK, now this one is important. Firstly, why did Beth feel the need to recycle the original Fallout factions, giving the distance between where the original Fallout's are set and where Fallout 3 is? The Brotherhood have been reduced to a generical 'good guys' faction, while the Enclave to the stereotypical 'bad guys'. The ''Good Fight'' - really? Do we have to have this little epic battle between monsters and knights? Why is there always an epic battle between clearly defined 'Good' and clearly defined 'Evil'. Why not a choice between the lesser of two evils? In Fallout one, the Brotherhood of Steel were no heroes, they were just a military cult selfishly devoted to preserving technology without any thought towards others. The fact their aim of destroying the mutants coincided with yours was a coincidence at best.

I am very happy Beth had the decency to create the Outcasts as at least a nod to the original Brotherhood and their selfish intentions. The raiders are another nonsensical faction. They make sense insofar as they rape, pillage and plunder, but not in that they are psychotic ruthless maniacs with a fetish for rotten flesh and senseless gore.

Seriously, raiders in the original Fallout's had reasons. They terrorised, pillaged, exerted pressure for NCR, and so on. In Fallout 3 they just seem like they were added in there as the 'medium class' enemies to occupy the wastelands and buildings. Also, who the hell likes being around rotting corpses? Are they also satanists by any chance? Their whole attitude to bodies, torture, decomposition and so on makes no sense whatsoever.

Vampires and Zombies. I will expand on this later, but the whole Vampire theme just sounds like an attempt to broaden the target demographic, and feral ghouls (read zombies) were a cheap shot to add yet another filler enemy, this time to the many dungeonesque metro tunnels in the capital, not to mention to make the game a little more ''survivor-horror'' style. Not cool Beth, not cool.

Level Cap/Forced Ending:

Seriously, what the hell? This was one of my biggest gripes with Fallout 1, I was exhilarated with Fallout 2 for doing away with both, and then Fallout 3 comes and reinstates them? I was having fun exploring the wasteland and avoiding the main quest till I hit this brick wall called level 20, and then having to finish the game and not being able to play afterwards.

I should be able to get all perks and experience point and play God after the main quest is finished if I want to. I should not be limited, when it would be so easy to make it continue. An official Beth statement to this is that ''All games end''. Well, yes, games do end. But if you notice, some allow you to play after you end them, the predecessor being one of them. The ones that allow freeform play afterwards tend to be the good ones too. Bad move.

Dubious morals/priorities/hypocrisy:

Right, this one is not directly pointed at Beth, more towards the United States and its ridiculous rating system. But Beth also has some blame for not having the balls to do what its forebears did, and for creating the publicity that would have made it impossible to do otherwise.

Firstly, we have exploding heads, gore, albeit in a cartoon fashion, tortured victims hanging from walls, organs splattered on the floors, quartered and mutilated people, drugs (under different names), drug use, alcohol, slavery, basically all that is wrong and bad and all that as seen by mainstream society, and ONE person in the entire wasteland to have 'sex' with?

What the hell? You are telling me that its okay to have violence, swearing (including by children!), horror, torture, alcohol and drug use, but not sex in a game? The most natural act of the above, but that is not allowed? What kind of society do we live in? The prostitute in Megaton was the only one you can 'sleep' with, and I mean that in a literal sense as all you do is go to the same bed she does and sleep, not 'sleep', but click sleep and sleep. No special fade out, just the same sleep fade out as usual. I spoke to many NPC's in the game where it was alluded you would get some, only for a dead-end response. It was almost as if these were originally women you could sleep with and at the last moment Beth decided to pull the plug on it. Seriously, giving the depravity of the previous games, I'm not impressed with Beth on this one.

Also, a strange thing I noticed in Little Lamplight. Princess has a crush on McCready because he punched her in the face? Is that even possible amongst children? It seems to me like an adult emotion of submission, humiliation with sexual undertones that is somehow present in a a child. Strange.

Missed Opportunities:

To be specific, vehicles. The original Fallout's had me bugged on this one, with Fallout 2 partially correcting it with the Car you can get, although even then its pretty rare. I was happy with Fallout Tactics for introducing vehicles on a scale imaginable for a post-apocalyptic wasteland, only to have Fallout 3 revert to the pedestrian only wasteland.

Seriously, its been 200 years, and not one mechanic can fix a car or a motorbike? You are telling me the Enclave can devise power armour and keep vertibirds repaired and in flight, but not have one single jeep or hummer? Brotherhood of Steel can get a 30 meter robot back in action, but not fix a car? Hmmn...

Level Design:

While most of the levels designed in Fallout 3 were of good standard, one particular location stood out to me like a sore thumb. Raven Rock. Seriously, who the hell came up with that?

Its the most disjointed, non-sensical layout for a continuity of government bunker I have ever seen. Had the enclave built it themselves maybe I would be more willing to believe it, but it was a pre-war location to which the Enclave migrated to. Where are all the barracks, mess halls, broadcasting rooms, control facilities, relaxation areas and so on expected of such a building? Cell blocks, a very very very simple and ugly 'war room', living quarters and strange corridor layouts do not characterise military bunkers. I suggest they look up what fallout and nuclear bunkers actually look like.

Prologue – Epilogue – Narration

OK, so the intro was mediocre, with a very cheesy ending. It was longer than Fallout's one and two, but shorter than tactics, which while good, went on for too long. I also felt Fallout 3's ending went on for too long, and that the narration was a bit forced. But what particularly annoyed me was the ''Because in vault 101, no one ever enters. And NO ONE, EVER LEAVES!''

I mean, c'mon, how cheesy is that? The little music crescendo with the narration also didn't help. The fact that clearly your father entered the vault and then left, followed by you, makes this rather pointless.

The epilogue is even worse. A slideshow that screams 'rushed through development' comes through, and you are left none the wiser about how your actions affected the wasteland. I abolished slavery, gave the Union the memorial, disbanded the raiders, wrote a book, destroyed the enclave, disarmed a bomb, not to mention countless other feats, and the game doesn't even acknowledge any of that? What was the point? I wanted to see how these actions affected the world in the long run!

C'mon.... Fallout 1 and 2 had between 2-5 different endings for each city and faction, and Fallout 3 ignores all that and concentrates solely on the main quest, which even then is already pretty limited? Seems like laziness to me Beth...


The Ugly


Inconsistencies:

OK, this is probably the main problem with Fallout 3, and its a pretty big problem. Unlike Fallout 1 and 2 that relied on verisimilitude to make the world believable, Fallout 3 really does require suspension of belief to make the plot understandable or acceptable.

Firstly, Little Lamplight. This is a town located right next to the super mutant main base, and has been for the past 200 years, and some how they magically hold back the hordes? I mean, REALLY? You are telling me the BoS are having a hard time fighting the ''Good Fight'' (Don't get me started on that one) with power armour, laser weapons, Gatling guns and so on, getting their asses handed to them pretty bad, and a handful of kids with rifles, pistols and a flimsy gate, walking distance away from the main base of the mutant horror, cannot be conquered? You're kidding right? All the more ironic about Little Lamplight is that its the only town with a belieavable system of food and water production, almost like a vault. Yet, the proximity to the mutant base totally nuls that.

Secondly, while I think the nod to Lord of the Flies nice, and the story of how all the kids were left behind is particularly interesting, it still doesn't explain how this has been happening for the past 200 years... how are these kids reproducing? Assuming they have children as soon as they are of biological age, which can be as early as 12, then that gives max 4-6 years before the parents are expelled and the babies are cared for by the community. Fallout 3 completely overlooks this discrepancy, I mean, if sex is bad, then imagine under-age sex among children.

Radio Stations. A strange idea in a world where people are preoccupied with survival, water, food, and so on, a dispensable luxury. Still, I must admit I enjoy listening to the good old tracks while walking the land. What annoys me is people saying Enclave Radio, and this includes Sara Lyons, is a pre-war recording, when clearly Eden mentions the holocaust, current events, mutants, ghouls, the BoS and so on.

Another inconsistency is that of Slavers. As mentioned before, watered down faction? Where are all these slaves? Who buys them? I see no ''cities'' in Fallout 3 employing slaves, they are almost non-existent throughout the game. And somehow there you have it, Paradise Falls, a big slaver central shipping of slaves to imaginary buyers. If you want to include slavery in a game then put the effort to include the nitty gritty aspects of it too, not just the superficial elements.

And again. The setting. Does anybody else get the feeling all this is happening like 20 years after the bombs fell? I mean seriously, there is one tree yet to grow back from the ashes, grass is non-existent (bringing into question a plethora of problems which will be addressed further), wooden houses are still intact, shanty towns, not cities, shanty towns, dot the landscape, and people have yet to discover how to get cars to work.

I mean, really, 200 years have passed? Previous Fallouts had cities, not burnt out settlements in the middle of rubble, but cities, with clean streets, electricity, newly built housing, walls, plumbing and so on, and the east coast somehow has none of that. How computers in the middle of the wasteland function for 200 years is beyond me. Or that buildings and supermarkets are still stocked despite being in an area where survival is primarily through scavenging (more on this later).

Really, this world does not make sense. The roads are great, I really can believe they have been there 200 years. They disappear into the sand, are broken up, they feel like they have been baking under the sun for centuries. Yet, wooden houses do not. They would not last that long. Neither would computers left unattended, with inexplicable power sources. I suspect towns would start to develop and reconstruction would have taken its course. Not to mention farming. All this was present in the previous games. I would have no problem if this was set 10-20 years after the holocaust, but 200, its asking me to believe a little too much.

My next point is the economy and survival of these 'settlements' in Fallout 3. Firstly, you cannot tell me they have been living off pre-war packaged food. Food doesn't keep that long, and even if it did, from all that scavenging it would have vanished long ago. Yet they are all still present in shelves on stores throughout the wasteland. Strike one. Then you get no grass, vegetation, or anything of the sort. So there is basically no farming whatsoever in Fallout 3. The hydroponics thing in Rivet City is the closest we have, and I'm somehow supposed to believe it feeds the entire wasteland with vegetables? Strike two. Also, with no vegetation, what do Brahmin live on? Cows eat grass. Mutated cows with two heads and 8 stomachs should supposedly also consume grass. Where is the water? I do not see one purifier or clean river in that wasteland. Heck, would a well have been much to ask for? Yet people inexplicably exist in a desolate world. Strike three. I'm all out of strikes, and yet, there is more.

Lets take Fallout 2. You had a settlement that trade medical technology, one that traded gold, one that traded uranium, one that traded electricity, and one that traded fruit, vegetables, and so on. You can see how each of these would link, and how there is a dynamic economy here. Yet, Fallout 3 lacks any of this. There are like 3-5 traders in the whole wasteland, with one guard each, when there are raiders, mutants and god knows what around. Fallout 2, as you approached larger cities with larger caravans, guards had combat armour, laser rifles, mini guns, etc. It was feasible they defend themselves from large threats. Yet the caravans in Fallout 3 seem to do perfectly fine without them in an equally hostile environment. Go figure.

Then we have Fort Constantine, with a large arsenal of nuclear weapons, and some random Sat-Com Dish, with micro nuclear launching capabilities, and not one single interested faction other than Talon Company? Where are the Brotherhood Outcasts all over these places? Why doesn't the enclave care about the awesome power of destruction contained within these places? Or the BoS in general? Strange.

Dialogue:

Moving on, this is massive problem number two for Fallout 3, dialogue. I can understand people who have not played the previous games, as today's standards for dialogue is generally not high in games, but when you compare Fallout 3's dialogues, they are truly laughable.

I will start with a quote from Emil that to me says it all: ''Dialogue was not a battle we wanted to pitch''. That pretty much says it all for me regarding Beth's priorities within the game.

Investing in intelligence, charisma and speech have almost no noticeable effect within the game. All you get are chances in dialogue to pass or fail, and some extra lines. For somebody with speech 100 and intelligence 10, I still find myself communicating with others with all the skill and charm of a door knob.

A good comparison here is Fallout 2's ending on the oil rig with the biologist, or fallout 1's debate with the master, to Fallout 3's conversation with Eden. The first two involve detailed, logical, rational and intelligent points, based on evidence (sterility for Fallout 1, humanity's ability to evold and adapt in Fallout 2), to discredit your nemesis. Fallout 3's goes more or less like this: ''I will not install the FEV, you know you are right because you know you are right, circular logic, that does not compute, destroy yourself, OK then, buh bye''

Voice-Acting is mediocre at best, with only a few exceptions. That is not much Beth's fault, but more the problem of voice-acting every NPC in the game. Fallout 1 and 2 reserved voice-acting for special characters, while Fallout 3, voicing every character, makes them all sound similar, boring, and cheap to be fair. With all the money invested in marketing it does not surprise me voice acting wasn't a strength of the game. Add that to stiff and unimaginative facial expressions by all characters and you have lifeless NPC's. There are very few memorable NPC's in Fallout 3 compared to previous games.

Main Quest:

And now for the icing of the cake, the main quest.

I will begin at the end, where I think we can all agree it was the worst possible ending in a computer game I have seen for a while. Seriously, you have to sacrifice yourself? Its not bad enough you have been outcast from your vault and have no family or friends, but now you also have to die? A bit too far maybe?

Not even that, but the fact Fawkes is perfectly capable of going in there and doing it himself, yet says 'I would not take away your destiny from you''. What the hell? I just saved your ass from captivity for like 200 years and you will now not take away my 'destiny!' ???? Yeah, sure man, I could totally go in there right not and press those buttons, but becaise I DEEM IT YOUR DESTINY TO DIE, im going to let you do it instead. Hmmn, okay.

Beth responded to this by claiming NPC's were added after the main plot, so they had to tweak Fawkes by letting you die instead. Ha! I mean, would it not have been easier to just toggle radiation off in the GECK room , which, presumably, is why Fawkes is radiation resistant to begin with? To aid you in that quest? Incompetence? Hmmn... mark my words. I will not surprise me one bit if the next Fallout game, be it a DLC or Fallout 4, has the Lone Wanderer waking up on a bed or medical table after being somehow resuscitated from his radiation induced death, a realization that Fallout 3's ending was truly horrible by its own writers.

I actually liked the Giant Robot. I felt it was quite 50's style and reminded me of the Iron Man. However, his 10 minute killing spree in the city was kind of ... cool, but disjointed from the main story. Its like they had big plans for the robot at the beginning of the game and then had to end up be content with a little battle at the end. I don't know. I think there could have been more potential for liberty prime.

One thing that annoys me in particular is the recycling of the Fallout 1 and 2 plot. Fallout 2 had already gone some way recycling the plot of Fallout, so when Fallout 3 comes and does it again it kind of is annoying. I mean, by all means, continuity of the franchise ftw, but please, do come up with something that has not already been tried previously.

Lastly, Eden's plan is pretty stupid to begin with. He wants to infect the water supply right? To kill off all mutants. Well then, firstly, what is the point of his radio broadcasts? He does realise all its listeners will be dead as soon as they drink the water right?

Not to mention, unlike Fallout 2, where the virus was not optional, you inhaled it and died, in Fallout 3 people have to go to the river to drink the water to die. I mean, surely people would see people dying by drinking from the river and refrain from doing so right?

I mean it was radiated to start off with, then got clean, then people drink, and once more people die. What is the difference? People have survived thus far without that river, they can continue to do so without the Enclave diseased river.

Conclusion:

Anyway, after a long long review of what feels more like a rant than anything else, I come to conclude this little 'article'. By all standards, this is a good game. Its probably one of the best to have come out in 2008, seeing as each year there are typically 3-6 good games out. So Beth has done pretty well with Fallout 3, as sales clearly indicate. While I enjoyed playing the game, I did not enjoy it as a Fallout sequel. I think this is where mainstream Fallout 3 fans and hardcore fallout fans go their separate ways.

While Fallout 3 is a good game, it comes short in all areas that made the fallout series special, such as compelling main quest, intricate and thought out dialogue, re playability value, and believability, or in this case verisimilitude. These were indispensable factors in Fallout's success and cult following, and something Fallout 3 has done away with in the eyes of many NMA'ers. It has, however, concentrated on many areas with were not as essential to the original games, and which perhaps these days has a better return for money. I suspect the target demographic, console gamers, also has something to do with the inevitable watering down of the game. Still, the original Fallouts represent the pinnacle of gaming in some respects, so a watered down version is still bound to be good, just not as good.

All in all, its a good game. A very good game. I think we can all agree on that. But I suspect it will be forgotten by its legions of captivated fans long before its predecessors ever will be by those glittering gems of hatred.

 

[ChancellorKremlin]

The Witcher 2: Assassin of Kings - A Long, In-depth Review

 

 

 

 
"Quite possibly the best game ever made"

 

 

First Impressions:


I absolutely loved the start of the game at the siege of LaVallete Castle. Praise must be offered to CD Project Red for so faithfully reconstructing a siege in the way they did, its perfect - ballistae, onagers, archers, casamats, even siege terraces! Its extremely well thought out for such a small section of the game, very detailed, and very realistic! Here I thought it would be the likes of Total War that would introduce siege terraces, but nope, it was an RPG that beat them to it. Kudos to the team on that one.

The setting is very nice, the camp, the tents, the siege. I like the very start, with naked Triss, as it really set the tone of the game. This is an adult game, and we do not shy away from nudity. Good on you CD Project RED. The dialogue is indeed very good, the mannerisms and figures of speech fit the setting, its all very believable and 'immersive'.

My first gripe with the the game was the new menus for items and meditation. I found the whole thing a bit overcomplicated in some areas, but far too clumsy in others. I found it really annoying for example, that items tend not to stack, but repeat themselves through your item list. So I can have say Kadwaeni Sword, Small Blackjack, Small Blackjack, Kaedweni Sword instead of just having two of each with a 2x symbol.

The strange thing was some items stacked, others did not, and some stacked but for whatever reason other items of the same type didn't. A further drawback was that I could not even read the name of the entire item on the screen because the names cut out a lot. Personally I found this annoying and lazy. Added to this is the fact armour, which could be subdivided into boots, trousers, gloves and chest, simply all fit into the armour category with the above mentioned stacking and non-stacking, eventually you have to literally trudge through your inventory to find what you want. I can see why these things have been done, to accommodate console players, but I found it badly done and done in a way that I feel penalises PC players. CD Projekt Red would do well to remember its roots, and that if it wants to expand to include the console players, at least do this in a fashion that does not penalise its original players and fanbase.

My next major impression came with combat, which I cover below.


Combat:


Moving on, I initially found combat extremely difficult and died repeatedly throughout the prologue. True, I did play on the hardest difficulty short of insane, (and then on dark when that came out) but it took a while to get used to from the first Witcher. I actually *liked* the combat difficulty. It felt real, it reminded me that Geralt is indeed human (well, sort of) and that he is not immortal and can still die. Rolling around may get a tad old after a while, but it feels like what someone with his abilities would have to do to survive. Ask any martial arts instructor how you can defeat up to five opponents and they will tell you that while it may be hard, the trick is to not let them corner you, surround you and overwhelm you. The same principle applies to the sword fighting and I think this is represented well in the combat system.

On the other hand, the fact you can now simply 'point and click' with abandon towards the nearest enemy made combat somewhat easy for me. I remember in the first Witcher how attacks had to be executed with careful timing and precision to deliver them properly. I remember my joy at 'linking' five strong or group blows and the satisfaction I got from doing it right. I miss that system, and I thought it was a lot more challenging and simply bashing my mouse repeatedly, safely in the knowledge that my attack cannot be interrupted (only shielded against) and that meanwhile attacks directed against me have no effect on my own attack. I could be wrong here, as it was a while since I played the first Witcher, but wasn't this decided by difficulty? As in, in the novice levels, you could indeed just click and click whereas in the harder options timing was essential? If this was the case, I think the same thing should be done with future games. Harder levels of difficulty should essentially rearrange how combat is fought, with rolls, timing, precision and blocks playing an integral part of combat as they did in the fist game.

As for signs, I tended to rely very little on them (being mostly a swordsman in my playthroughs) with the exception of Quen, which I think is now a tad overpowered. Its basically a shield, like something out of sci-fi, and feels a bit out of place or simply too strong. Anything can be deflected with even the lowest level of it. I found the Quen in the fist game a lot more challenging and rewarding, as there were a number of moments within the came during combat when imbibing an extra potion was necessary. The other signs are mostly the same as before, which I enjoyed.

Sadly, I stayed clear of potions and oils for most of my games, so I will say little about them. I avoided them generally because their effects lasted only a fraction of time(I had to take cat about 8 times during the mines in Vergen) and blade oils didn't drastically alter the damage I dealt. I am aware there is an alchemist development path that addresses these, but surely Geralt should be able to produce a cat potion that lasts more than two minutes. Is he a Witcher of a novice still about to undergo mutation?

As for the potions themselves, I was let down by them. Unlike the first game, where potions generally all gave positive results except of course for toxicity, with the better ones offering higher levels of toxicity and so providing a good challenge to the player to wisely choose which potions he wanted to use and in what combination, the Witcher 2 instead gives us potions that in effect cancel each other out, such as either offering increased damage at the expense of vitality, or greater sign intensity but lower defence, and other odd combinations. I felt this change totally unnecessary and one of the reasons I stayed clear of potions. I also disliked the fact toxicity vanished the moment the potion wore off, meaning in effect I could imbibe as many potions as I wanted. Is it not true that if I drink too much alcohol I wake up with a hangover, or that these potions are indeed very powerful toxins and poisons to which the Witchers (no pun intended) are adapted to, but not entirely immune? So why this change? I found it a bit lacklustre and the reason I stayed away from them.

I was pleased with the bosses and the final boss in particular, Letho, although I found my confrontation with him in the Baths a lot more difficult than my last encounter with him. I would also advise CD Projekt Red to steer clear from the more traditional and overused bosses in the form of gigantic ugly monsters such as the Kayren, a clear reference to the Kraken. I think such creatures and unnecessary and end up reminding us of the more mundane games and films out there. The Witcher II deserves better! Having said that, the dragon (Saesenthasis) fit in well, but only just. And while were on this note, Quick Time Events. QTE's. Absolutely and totally unnecessary, I've seen reviews call it a 'gimmick' and I must agree with them, there is no need for them. Given how absolutely beautiful the graphics and the setting of the Witcher 2 is, when there is a cutscene I want to enjoy it in all its glory, not have to think about what button I am going to press and how quickly I am going to do it, it detracts from the moment and means I end up missing out on the beautiful action unfolding around me because I have to concentrate by staring right into the middle of the screen to see which button I am going to press.

The same is true of the fistfight mini-game, which is ridiculously easy. At least in the first game there was a bit of a challenge, but even then it was also easy after you got used to it. If you are going to force the players to rely simply on QTE's for the minigame, at least make it challenging then. The stakes here are not as high as with bosses, and if you lose you've only lost a few coins and not say, the entire game if you are playing on insane. Make more than three combinations, make counter combinations and even linking certain attacks and combinations with others. Really challenge the player. Rather, we have a minigame that just seems to be there for its own sake, with little reward in the way of a challenge or even money (more on this later)

Right, so I think this about covers it for combat. We move on to storyline.


Storyline and Choices:


This is where the Witcher II really comes into its own. The storyline is very well thought out and well written,it is compelling, immerses the player and really offers difficult choices. Not the usual good, bad neutral situation, or even a situation where if you follow the good path everybody wins. There are real shades of gray in this game where not everybody wins and not all get what they deserve, the player included.

In my own way, I divide the plot into two possible ways out. The 'side with the state' way in which the common people get trampled underfoot by those in positions of power, and the 'side with the people' way which sees a much more people and freedom centric approach. In either case, one gets the better of the other, with another singular choice of whether you want to free your loved one, Triss, or further help the state/people.

To give an example, in my first playthrough I sided with Roche, helped Henselt, and eventually rescued Triss. This last choice does not change much because Roche succeeds in getting the heiress to the Temerian throne, Anais, without me, so it is an optimal situation. Still, the 'people' get trampled. Vess is raped by none other than Henselt himself, Vergen is crushed, the Pontar Valley's dream of independence is swiftly shattered, and worse of all, their leader Saskia ended up killed. Not knowing that Saskia was the dragon, I killed it to 'put it out of its misery' thinking in my ignorance that I was being kind, only to realise in the second playthrough that I had indeed killed Saskia!

On the other hand, if you side with Yorveth, Vergen is sucessfully defended, Henselt is humiliated, and you have the chance to either save Saskia from the spell or leave her under it, at the cost of 'saving' Triss (who gets rescued by Letho anyway)

All these outcomes goes to show the complex web of choices and consequences that CD Project Red have taken care to weave into the story of The Witcher 2. You cannot have it all, a free pontar valley and a strong Temeria, be friends with Roche and Yorveth, free Saskia or help Triss, you must make choices, and the importance of these only become apparent during your second to third playthroughs. The story itself is very gripping and well thought. I must admit though, that I was right in my prediction at the very beginning when I saw the Nilfgardian ambassador in Foltests camp. I thought 'who will benefit from utter chaos in the northern kingdoms?' - Nilfguard. And lo and behold, it is Nilgard that Letho serves. Despite the web of treachery and intrigue woven by him that leads you through the game, sometimes the easiest explanations turn out to be the correct ones.

On another note, I must praise the sex scene in the elven baths, easily I think the pinnacle of maturity and tasteful sexual content in any game I have ever seen I think. Well executed, loving and sexy, it is this kind of ground I praise the developers for having the courage to cover in this game.

Needless to say, I was very impressed by the storyline of The Witcher 2. It was mature enough, intelligent, well written and believable, even in the smaller elements. The party with Roche's men was pricelss (just as the party in the first game) not to mention the many sidequests.

My one gripe with the sidequests were those that included gambling and fighting. They seem like they are there simply to tick off the quest box. There is no real pleasure anymore in playing dice poker, because the stakes are far too low. Why? What was wrong with the game in the first instalment? It was fun, addictive and really helped ease the longer sessions of serious gaming, and were a good way of making some money, up until you 'cleaned out' each player. Now, its pointless. The same goes for fistfighting, as I have already described, and arm wrestling, the stakes for which are also ridiculously low. These should ideally be tuned up considerably.


Characters:


I must praise the choice to continue with full voice acted dialogue, which is very well done, realistic and makes the player feel like he is really part of the world. Even if some of it gets repetitive for certain NPC's throughout the game. I disagree with those that say Geralt has a monotone, I think it suits him perfectly, especially his cold 'neutral' way. The game's characters are very well thought out and believable, and you really come to care about most of them.

I must say I was very sad when Foltest died. I like him as a king, I thought he was brave, honourable(ish) and even a decent father. This is in spite of the fact he ploughed his own sister. This stands as testament to the shades of gray concept that CD Projekt Red really nails on the head, people are three dimensional, and have depth. I was similarly moved by Saskia, Roche and Yorveth, even Letho. I was less impressed by Triss, who seemed a bit distant most of the time. Still, I played a Geralt that cares deeply for her, even loves her, as I did in the first game. This was before I read the books and found out about Yennefer. For this reason, in my first playthrough I sided with Roche (for the camaraderie we developed and because he let me out of prison) but then disappointed him in the end by rescuing Triss (how could I possibly leave her to be tortured in Nilfguardian dungeon?)This offered me a satisfying end where I saved the girl, Roche got Anais, and in the end I fought Letho. When I played again and sides with Yorveth, I did the same again, because I 'love' Triss.

Yorveth is again one of those character that really develops. I liked it, at first in my original playthrough I thought of him simply as a brigand, a terrorist with high ideals. In the end, this is all he is, but the game does a good job of fleshing out his character. We discover he has feelings for a certain rebel leader, and that in many ways normal humans are just as bad as he is - see Loredo for example.

I thought there should have been more interaction between Geralt and his close friends, Zoltan and Dandilion. Who can forget that party in the first game, which regardless of who you brought with you was hilarious? The drunken stupor, the arguments, the silly banter. All very well done, I think we need more of those little moments with our close friends, moments which add to the story in their own little ways.


Graphics:


Not a lot to say here. You guys really outdid yourself here. And it was refreshing to see a game where this does not trump storyline. If anything, the Witcher 2 stands as proof that graphics can indeed stand side by side with an intelligent storyline.

While not strictly a graphical issue, I thought this could go under here. I am referring to the many different types of armour in the game, from boots to suits and mail coats. Seeing that enhancements are now available, would it not be interesting to see them actually add to your armour? Like in the form of gauntlets, spaulder, pauldrons, or aventails, making each set of armour uniquely customisable not only statistically but graphically also? This could be expanded to include perhaps things such as scale mail, lamellar armour, even perhaps a suit or enhancement of 'lorica plumata' - a uniquely beautiful combination of scales and ring mail.

Other than this, the graphics cannot be faulted. Nor can the environment and the setting, which is very detailed and beautiful to look at.
 
Music:
 
Probably one of the enduring legacies of The Witcher series will always be the music and soundtrack by Adam Skorupa and Krzysztof Wierzynkiewicz. Truly beautiful masterpieces that really immerse you into the game and depart quite markedly from your generic action/peaceful/insert relevant scene here music, the moment you hear it you know you're into a good, good game, ranging from say the very intro itself, to moments like Vergen, hearing "Vergen by night" and other beauties. CD Project Red understands there is more to immersion than just graphics; kudos to them.


Length:


Sadly, this is one aspect where I thought The Witcher II needed improvement. It is significantly shorter than the first Witcher, and worse still, Act Three seems woefully short in comparison to the other two acts. This is a shame, because it is only really here where Geralt is coming to his own and showing the skills he possesses and what he is capable of.

The city of Loc Muihn, while absolutely beautiful, suffers from a lack of characters, quests and lots of locked doors and dead ends. If I were to add to length, I would also comment on the number of monsters which grace the Witcher in this second instalment. There are sadly very few varieties compared to the first game, which was beautifully populated by hosts of every type of monster imaginable.

In particular, I found the Witcher 2 was so concentrated on the storyline of the 'Kingslayer and the assassins of kings' that there was little room left in the game for the profession of the Witcher itself, slaying monsters. This was a shame, and side quests perhaps involving a few more tombs, caves, haunted fields and forests and other mysteries and inevitably the new and alternate monsters that would accompany these quests would have gone a good way towards lengthening the game and providing us with the beasties we miss so much from the first game.


Conclusion:


All in all, I think this is one of the best RPG titles out there, period. I have not had the pleasure of playing either Baldur's Gate or Dragon Age, but I have played the first two Fallout's, and I consider The Witcher, both I and II, to rank alongside those epic titles. The story is well written (the most important thing in an RPG), the combat is hard and rewarding (although a number of tweaks could be implemented) and the game is mature, it treats its players like adults. This is a genuinely refreshing attitude to games these days, which tend to spell everything out for the player and avoid controversy or anything that may hurt its sales. Still, CD Project Red must take care. Already has the game been 'consolised' to an extent. Where art the sex cards now? I hear some asking. Already there have been changes made to the basic formula of the game to take in in a direction that does not sit comfortably with its original fanbase.

Having said that, CD Projekt RED, I salute you. For developing an intelligent, mature, rewarding and mold-breaking game. For bringing hope into the heart of an RPG fan who thought the heyday of RPG's had died with Fallout 1 and 2. But above all this, I salute you for your respect and dedication to your fans. For tirelessly continuing to release patches to address the bugs, for adding content - and unlike other game studios - charging nothing for them, in the for of your DLC's. We will never forget the Witcher 1 enhanced edition, nor shall we forget Patch 2.0 for the Witcher 2, with the Arena and Dark Mode. It is ultimately this dedication which I believe merits you as one of the very few studios to actually pay attention to your fans, much like Valve which incidentally, also releases titles of the highest quality.

And it is precisely because you listen to fans, that I know for a fact the third instalment of the Witcher will have addressed the issues raised by your fans, and built on them. Here's to an even better third Witcher title! To CD Projekt RED and Andrzej Sapkowski, for making it all possible in the first place!

 

[ChancellorKremlin]

Aliens: Colonial Marines – A Missed Opportunity

 

 
 

"Surprisingly unconcerned with Aliens"

 

 

First Impressions:

Well, the first thing that struck my mind when I started playing was how dated the graphics seemed. Now, I want to say this from the outset - I really don't care too much about graphics. I really don't. And I am aware this is a common criticism of the game, and the whole demo vs final product fiasco, and I'll cover this in more detail later. But even putting that aside for a moment, c'mon - this is 2013, I've seen better graphics in games dated 5-6 years ago. In particular, I'm talking about textures, and lighting, though the latter didn't bother me too much.
 
The first hour or so of play is atmospheric enough, and quite immersive. The devs obviously lavished the player to references to the first two films, and this is something that continues throughout the game as a whole. I liked the idea of having the game follow the plot of Aliens closely, though this is something of a double edged sword, as I'll explain later. Overall, the first few hours actually quite impressed me, though gameplay quickly became repetitive and some of the flaws of the game became evident as my playthrough progressed.
 
 
Gameplay:
 
The first thing I noticed and thought a little "out of place" was the plethora of attachments available for weapons. I didn't actually like them, and I thought they distracted me from getting on and killing aliens. I don't know, I just didn't feel it was necessary. This isn't Call of Duty, or a multiplayer game, or a modern war shooter, this is Aliens - why the hell do I need silencers (which serve no function whatsoever in the game) extended clips, four different sights one only slightly better than the last, etc etc? It felt gimmicky, and like it was just there to appease shooter fans or compare favourably with said shooters. On top of that, the system itself is rather immersion breaking - you can carry as many guns as you want, and you don't even find the attachments or anything like that (which would make exploring a little more interesting) but rather you "earn" them through kills and such. Remember that part in Aliens, when corporal Dwayne Hicks is shooting aliens in the face with his pulse rifle, then runs out of ammo, and pulls out a battle rifle, and when he runs out of ammo for that, pulls out a shotgun and then a submachine gun? Yeah, me neither. Rather than have a system where you could carry say, two or three main guns and a sidearm, nope, you can have the lot. 
 
Moving on to enemies, wow. And Aliens: Colonial Marines is the first title that I have reviewed that has allowed me to use that word in a sarcastic fashion. What the hell happened. The game is called Aliens: Colonial Marines - not Weyland Utani: Colonial Marines. Its such a simple formula you'd imagine anyone would struggle to fuck it up - Aliens. Marines. Go wild, violence ensues. Why... WHY did they have to include human enemies? Again, its almost like they were trying to justify all their weapon attachments, or make it more of a "modern" shooter. It goes even more pete tong when the human enemies (in the form of WY pmc commandos) are actually deadlier than the franchise's iconic monsters. "Hostiles, 12 o'clock - multiple parties.!" "Engage the commandos FIRST! Repeat, WHATEVER YOU DO, kill the soldiers FIRST!"
 
Seriously, I actually have to praise the human ai in the game - they are lethal, seek cover, flush you out with grenades, are quite accurate (which is a feat in itself given how inaccurate rifles seem to be in this universe - no wonder the Marines in Aliens had a hard time killing them) and there's quite a neat variety of different types of soldiers and weapons yielded. Like I said, if this were any other title, this would be a good thing - but not when it comes at the expense of the Aliens. 
 
Bloody hell, the Aliens - you can shove them back with the butt of your rifle for crying out loud! I can't think of a quicker way to break immersion than having one right in front of you, ready to tear you to shreds, only for you to shove him back. These things are fucking lethal! They are most certainly not pushovers, literally! You try and hit a *real* xenomorph and see what happens! Also, what the hell happened to the acid blood? Honestly, you can walk right into one and blast him in the face, explode him and come out of it scot free. Did they miss that part of the film where a marine's face falls off because of the acid? There's no challenge at all - don't bother killing them from a distance (and good luck giving the horrid accuracy) but even if they close in on you, no problem! Just give them a shove and you're off!
 
There are a few varieties of xenomorphs which makes the game slightly more interesting, but nothing majorly exciting. A "spitter" alien which spits acid at you from a distance (really wasn't surprised when I met that one) a few facehuggers thrown in (which ironically, have an "attach to your face" animation that actually looks worse than the one in AVP which came out three years earlier) and the odd boss, which looks slightly different, ie a big, scarred looking alien you have a fight with in an auto-loader (Ripley style!) and a Rhinoceros type charging bull type. If I may just return to the former though, this is one part where the game could have really improved, as in that particular fight, you have a hand to hand duel with the large alien in the same exoskeleton (the auto loader) Ripley duelled with the queen in at the end of Aliens. But it was so flat and disappointing - all you do is click and hit it, click and hit it, click and hit it. Rinse and repeat. This could have really been an exceptional fight, with combinations of attacks, or different animations for each strike, even a few QTE's thrown in maybe, but nope. As it is, it is just very sterile and boring. A real chance missed here.
 
QTE's are also, to me, unnecessary. I don't particularly like them, and there are moments in the game (being facehugged, or knocked down) that required them. In particular, the alien that knocks you down (the runner) is actually terrifying, and I only wish they were the real Xenomorph template rather than the generic one they have (warrior I think) which is slow, bipedal and easy to kill. The runner is fast as hell, usually lethal if he pins you down, and extremely hard to shoot as he presents a very small target surface. Acting in conjunction with the other aliens and in swarms, they can really mess up your game if you're playing on hardest difficulty (which I always play on, I like challenges!) - this is what I mean, there are occasional glimpses of brilliance in the game, but only just, and you can't help but wonder if only a few decisions had been made differently, we would end up with a much more satisfying game. 
 
A further example of this is the Alien you meet in the sewers (one particularly badly scripted and animated one was fondly called the Derpy alien by fans) which is a truly terrifying and dark part of the game akin almost the the weeping angel episodes of Doctor Who. Unarmed, in the dark, you have to navigate a maze of tunnels without making a sound, lest you attract the Alien whom - even more terrifying - is flanked by inanimate "statues" of Aliens all of which look exactly like him. That particular sequence (and the one that precedes it, where you have to run away from the scarred Alien) are good examples of those moments which show the game can actually be good when it tries.
 
Overall, there is just no sense of urgency or even just sheer terror that you should have in an Aliens game. For the most part, you are perfectly safe so long as you stick to corners and have your back against the wall, your companions never die (which destroys not only immersion but any inclination to cover or even care for them) and even though your weapons are crap, they get the job done. In fact, companions will generally wander off far ahead of the player, or in some cases lag ridiculously behind. I do appreciate the feel of having someone with you, I really do - I like that in games, when NPC's are properly included - but again, it does kill the suspense. The most terrifying parts of the game are when you are alone. And when you are accompanied, you almost regret it because of how stupid your companions can be - getting stuck between walls, wandering off, or just plain failing to shoot that alien right next to you.
 
 
Music and sounds:
 
Now here the game really comes into its own. The soundtrack is almost a faithful recreation of the original score for Aliens, and you get that feel throughout the game, you replay those scenes in your head and you remember the music that went with it and the audio cues, the sound of a pulse rifle firing, the voice acting, the drums in the marine music that evokes that hoorah bravado... everything is faithfully recreated, and it sounds awesome. The voice acting itself is convincing, the sounds of bullets and xenos blowing up is satisfying, and for the darker and more intense parts of the game the music is suitably creepy and evocative - like exploring the derelict and so forth. Really, top notch here the audio, can't fault it and if I did scores, I would give this title next to a perfect score on this regard alone. Sadly, the graphical side to the game really, really lets you down.
 

Graphics:

I think this is quite possibly the main reason why Aliens: Colonial Marines has received so much flak from the gaming press, that and the whole demo - final product scandal. The simple reason being the demo showed a game that looked modern, graphically awesome, with remarkable lighting effects and high resolution textures. And the game we have... well, it has none of that. Other reviewers have covered that angle well enough, so I'll just gloss over that briefly - but they are right. The lighting in this game is terrible. Absolutely terrible. And where there is dynamic lighting, you immediately wish there wasn't. The iconic engineer sitting on the gun scene in the derelict was ruined for me because of a light that was constantly on my face, blinding me. The same could be said for a particularly key scene where a major character is revealed, again destroyed because a background light was shining in my face as he started to speak, thus obscuring him. 
 
Smoke and fog are done very badly. There's not much to say on this. Fires are actual sprites on the game, which just revolve as you go around them. And the explosions... oh God the explosions. They are TERRIBLE! Seriously, 2 minutes into the game, your marine companion throws a grenade and blows up a dropship - watch that. Reload, and watch it again. Slow it down if you have to, though that is by no means necessary. The explosion effect is absolutely terrible - I am not exaggerating when I say I've seen better explosions in 2003 than I have with this title. The general animation of the game is also poorly done - you can literally walk through NPC's, and even the cutscenes are poorly scripted and animated - the CUTSCENES! Seriously, they are terrible. The one part of the game where they could have gone all out and made the video look awesome, they do just as bad a job.
 
Textures are poor and generally quite low res - and I ran everything maxed out and have a top of the range PC. Level design has a lot of shortcuts, with meshes and objects literally just blending in and melting into one another - you see about ten facehugged victims, all of which wear the same clothes and are obviously clones - they all look the same. The minute an NPC opens his mouth you get to see the poor interior detail of the models - essential when they speak, but it gets ruined by just poor facial expressions. A lot of the cutscenes were also jagged and just felt "bulky"... object collision was also all over the place.
 
The problem here is that the graphical standard of this game is about six years behind. Seriously, it is just bizarre. The one thing I liked, which was done very, very well, was the water effect on your visor when it rains. I actually thought for a minute there that I had spilt water on my screen. That was it, the one redeeming graphical feature. The atmosphere on the moon was non-existent, there was very little depth of field (if any) ... etc, the list goes on. 
 
I don't much care for graphics, but this really was taking the piss. 
 
 
Plot:
 
I have mixed feelings about the plot. On the one hand, I very much like the fact it stuck faithfully with the lore of Alien and Aliens, being almost a sequel to Aliens in most ways. From a personal perspective, having HATED Aliens 3 and going as far as not considering it canon, I welcome the approach taken here by Aliens: Colonial Marines. Having said that, I did feel that, because it stuck so closely with the events of Aliens, that it was in all effects a re-hash. It has all been done before - The Sulaco, Hadley's Hope, the Derelict, etc. There was no new ground broken, nothing really new or enticing about it. It kind of felt a little "old", and a little disappointing in that regard.
 
The plot itself is also fairly straightforward and quite incoherent at times. Half the game is a rescue mission which then becomes a rescue mission, and the other half is basically a battle and then an escape. That's it. It was all fairly predictable, with one major exception. I'm including this here because I think it fits, but characterisation. I like the characters. Yes, in  battle your followers were useless, but I liked how the characters were handled. I liked O'Neil (not so much Bella, reminded me way to much of AVP's Tequila and Aliens' Vasquez) and even Reid and the Captain, even though he was your typical cardboard cut USMC commander who makes the tough calls and then dies in a glorious and hoorah fashion. To a point, I almost felt like this was O'neil's and Bella's story, and I was just a sidekick in this. The voice acting, the dialogue, the characterisation, this was all top notch - the emotions, language, the conflicts between the characters, the (few) instances of humour, it all made them seem human, and definitely made the game more appealing in my eyes. I could related to these people. Even though I knew Bella's fate, and it is something of a repeated trope in the Alien universe - girl gets facehugged, we try to save her, she dies. Duh! A pretty impressive moment for me was when they unveiled Dwayne Hicks. Now that caught me totally off guard - and I loved it. I hated the way he was just killed off together with Newt at the start of Alien 3.
 
It was like "Yeah, remember that epic battle to save those characters you loved in the 2nd film? Yeah, we're killing them straight off the bat at the start of this new film..." - how did that even get approved? So yes - I was amazed. Even though he looked slightly younger, the voice acting (I think it was the actor himself, Michael Biehn) to voiced him, it was all perfect. I was impressed, and it was a legitimately good twist in the game, even though his explanation as to the events surrounding his capture was somewhat convoluted. Again, this is a glimpse of those moments of brilliance in the game that hurts even harder because you realise the game did have potential, that some people here clearly had some brains and some good ideas. 
 
Moving on, my main problem with the plot is Weyland Utani - they just have no need to be there on that scale. That entire faction is just unnecessary. I want to kill Aliens, not humans. And they really went mental with the scope of Weyland Utani here - they are more heavily armed, armoured and resourced than the USMC. It just all became a bit silly - one research lab bigger than the next, entire bases, huge ships, etc etc etc. Three quarters of the way through the game, you're basically fighting one huge battle that just makes you question whether you are really in an Alien game or playing CoD. I don't know, it was a good sequence, just not in this game. The "destroy the AA" part almost made me feel I was playing Quake IV again.
 
Like I said, double bladed sword. It would have been nice if somehow, while linking to the events of Aliens, they could have explored their own universe - even if the Sulaco was included. I mean, the whole point of the explosion at the end of Aliens was to destroy everything down on the planet, precisely to prevent it from happening again and allowing Weyland to get their hands on it - so it is kinda stupid that there is still anything left down there. In fact, other than superficial structural damage, nothing seems to have been destroyed at all, which is kind of a slap in the face of the ending of the film.
 
 
Conclusion And Final Thoughts:
 
Well, like I said. Wow. Sarcastically. Such a shame - as I've pointed out, the game shows occasional glimpses of brilliance, only to be brought down by an overall mediocre gaming experience. I honestly don't know why it has received such scathing reviews though, it isn't THAT bad a game. It is mediocre, maybe a five, four at the lowest (out of ten). I think primarily, the reasons the gaming press seem to hate it so much are A the graphics and B the fact it was developed by Gearbox, which has (or had) a good reputation for the quality of its games. Half Life: Opposing Force, Brothers in Arms, Borderlands, to name a few. I don't like blaming developers, especially in this case, since it is unclear who did what - Gearbox developed this game in association with three other developers, so it is hard to draw a line. But someone definitely did fuck up big time, either by negligence or incompetence.
 
I think another point is that a lot of people expected (and hoped) this would be the game that would reboot the Aliens franchise, but rather, it has just gone on to add another terrible title to the mix, making it even harder for it to be rescued in the future. I can count on one hand the developers I would trust for another title, and the one I think would do the best job would probably be Monolith, as they have a good handle on terror and psychological fright, shooters and good dialogue and storyline. Overall, Aliens: Colonial Marines feels shoddy. It feels mediocre, underwhelming and bland. Neither are words I would think could in any way be associated with an Aliens game, but Aliens: Colonial Marines makes that task seem effortless. And if I could end with a corny but particularly apt line, this would be it:
 
"Game over man. Game over".
 
Thanks for reading.

 

[polluxval]

A LOT OF SPOILERS IF YOU DIDNT PLAYED THE GAME DONT READ.

 

well, i almost agree on each one of yout reviews except for one little issue i didnt liked from witcher 2.

 

i hated that cdprojekt left many, many, and many uncompleted business that, im sure (and hopefully), will be answered on witcher 3. what i didnt like about this "choice", is that, checking my last savegame (wich im pretty sure will have an option to be imported on w3) i find out that only "some" of the choices i made, are, in fact, stored in it. what im trying to say, is that, exactly as happend on witcher 1 savegame import, not all the decision i made on W2 (many very importat) will have a real impact on w3. for example: in witcher 1 i did in fact joined with the scoiiatel and i had shani as my lover and when i played w2 i expected to have her at my side... and what did i find????????????? they just made a little (and when i say little i really mean it) text stating that she left.... wow!!!!!!!! amazing!! so i really brake my head to made shani a lover and now that is wasted!!! another issue is that making an alliance with the scoiiatel didnt matter except dor a liittle tiny comment you have with iorveth... did that help? NO BECAUSE HES ALREADY YOUR ALLY WHEN THAT CHAT OCCOURS. i have like 4 savegames with complete different alliance and lovers, etc. and i find that in w2 it doesnt matter a shit. i find out that the importing thing its just to have ""some"" old items and 1% of your god damns fffffffff orens...wow... im amazed...!! they are so f****ing kinddddddddddddd!!!!!!!!!!! and what about everything the grand master said??? he was high as hell afterall..... i should have killed him when he was a god damn kid....

here is a portion of the wiki regarding imported data:

 

 

 

Several choices, items and some money is transferred to the sequel and is accessible at the start of the game.

Some of these items include:

• Steel Swords
  • Ard'aenye
  • D'yaebl
  • G'valchir
  • Gwalhir

• Silver Swords
  • Aerondight
  • Moon Blade

• Other Items
  • Raven's armor
  • A small percentage of your orens (about 1% of your saved game from the original game added to the standard ~ 150 orens of a fresh game).

Some of the choices (spoilers for Witcher 1 ahead):

• Chapter 1
• Chapter 2
• Chapter 3
  • Kill or save Thaler during All the King's Men (you will receive a message and a package from Thaler in Flotsam if you saved Thaler – this is default game behaviour)
  • Romance with Shani (a journal entry based on why Geralt parted ways with Shani was added with the Enhanced Edition.)
• Chapter 4
• Chapter 5
  • Kill or save Princess Adda during Her Highness the Striga (her fate is mentioned by Foltest
    during the Prologue and later by other characters, as well as in a
    journal entry, and it may have a minor impact on the status of Temeria
    at the end of the game)
  • Kill or spare Siegfried (Neutral/Scoiatel paths only: Geralt is either attacked by the fellow knight or left alone by the order)
• Epilogue (final path):
  • Order path:
    • Fewer issues with the Order in the third chapter.
    • Geralt may meet Siegfried and Polycarp.
  • Neutral/Witcher path:
    • Iorveth's path: you cannot get through the front door in Loc Muinne.
    • Roche's path: you have to kill an angry knight in the second chapter.
  • Scoia'tael path:
    • Some dialogues changes with Iorveth.

what im trying to say (and my rant is about) is that it doesnt matter what you did choose. in the next w3, im sure those choices will have little, to any impact at all, and that many of the IMPORTANT choices you did will be CHANGED FORCIBLY by cdprojekt (like what it does happend on W1 i say again, the most important choice and IT IS NOT RESPECTED).  im sure the only choices will be ported will be who do you left live, in this case the faggot kings, with who you did make alliance (iorveth or that other fag - wichi have my doubt seeing what they did on Witcher 1 alliance), those lesbian sorceress and if you left letho live (wich im pretty sure it wont be ported, why? because the last savegame you have its just "before" battling/sparing him)..... for example, i saved Anais, i bet you a 1000 orens in W3 she wont even remember that (if she appears at all that is) and they will left a "default" option.

 

its the only complain i have... they need to work that out or ill rant till the end of days.

[windpl]

A LOT OF SPOILERS IF YOU DIDNT PLAYED THE GAME DONT READ.

 

well, i almost agree on each one of yout reviews except for one little issue i didnt liked from witcher 2.

 

i hated that cdprojekt left many, many, and many uncompleted business that, im sure, it will be finished on withcer 3. what i didnt like about this, is that, checking my last savegame (wich im pretty sure will have an option to be imported on w3) i find out that only "some" of the choices i made, are, in fact, stored in it. what im trying to say, is that, exactly as happend on witcher 1 savegame import, not all the decision i made on W2 (many very importat) will have a real impact on w3. for example: in witcher 1 i did in fact joined with the scoiiatel and i had shani as my lover and when i played w2 i expected to have her at my side... and what did i find????????????? they just made a little (and when i say little i really mean it) text stating that she left.... wow!!!!!!!! amazing!! so i really brake my head to made shani a lover and now that is wasted!!! another issue is that making an alliance with the scoiiatel didnt matter except dor a liittle tiny comment you have with iorveth... did that help? NO BECAUSE HES ALREADY YOUR ALLY WHEN THAT CHAT OCCOURS. i have like 4 savegames with complete different alliance and lovers, etc. and i find that in w2 it doesnt matter a shit. i find out that the importing thing its just to have ""some"" old items and 1% of your god damns fffffffff orens...wow... im amazed...!! they are so f****ing kinddddddddddddd!!!!!!!!!!! and what about everything the grand master said??? he was high as hell afterall..... i should have killed him when he was a god damn kid....

here is a portion of the wiki regarding imported data:

 

 

 

Several choices, items and some money is transferred to the sequel and is accessible at the start of the game.

Some of these items include:

• Steel Swords
  • Ard'aenye
  • D'yaebl
  • G'valchir
  • Gwalhir

• Silver Swords
  • Aerondight
  • Moon Blade

• Other Items
  • Raven's armor
  • A small percentage of your orens (about 1% of your saved game from the original game added to the standard ~ 150 orens of a fresh game).

Some of the choices (spoilers for Witcher 1 ahead):

• Chapter 1
• Chapter 2
• Chapter 3
  • Kill or save Thaler during All the King's Men (you will receive a message and a package from Thaler in Flotsam if you saved Thaler – this is default game behaviour)
  • Romance with Shani (a journal entry based on why Geralt parted ways with Shani was added with the Enhanced Edition.)
• Chapter 4
• Chapter 5
  • Kill or save Princess Adda during Her Highness the Striga (her fate is mentioned by Foltest

    during the Prologue and later by other characters, as well as in a

    journal entry, and it may have a minor impact on the status of Temeria

    at the end of the game)

  • Kill or spare Siegfried (Neutral/Scoiatel paths only: Geralt is either attacked by the fellow knight or left alone by the order)
• Epilogue (final path):
  • Order path:
    • Fewer issues with the Order in the third chapter.
    • Geralt may meet Siegfried and Polycarp.
  • Neutral/Witcher path:
    • Iorveth's path: you cannot get through the front door in Loc Muinne.
    • Roche's path: you have to kill an angry knight in the second chapter.
  • Scoia'tael path:
    • Some dialogues changes with Iorveth.

what im trying to say (and my rant is about) is that it doesnt matter what you did choose. in the next w3 theyll have little to any impact and that many other choices you did will be CHANGED FORCIBLY.  im sure the only choices will be ported will be who do you left live, in this case the faggot kings, with who you did make alliance (iorveth or that other fag - wichi have my doubt seeing what they did on Witcher 1 alliance), those lesbian sorceress and if you left letho live (wich im pretty sure it wont be ported, why? because the last savegame you have its just "before" battling/sparing him)..... for example, i saved Anais, i bet you a 1000 orens in W3 she wont even remember that (if she appears at all that is) and they will left a "default" option.

 

its the only complain i have... they need to work that out or ill rant till the end of days.

 

Save import was implemented late in dev procces. At first they did't intendeed to add it. But they got inspired by mass effect - me2 save import :3

So I belive w3 import will be more detailed. But that will also leave some peps (PS4) in disadventagus position, because they have no saves.

[polluxval]

 

A LOT OF SPOILERS IF YOU DIDNT PLAYED THE GAME DONT READ.

 

well, i almost agree on each one of yout reviews except for one little issue i didnt liked from witcher 2.

 

i hated that cdprojekt left many, many, and many uncompleted business that, im sure, it will be finished on withcer 3. what i didnt like about this, is that, checking my last savegame (wich im pretty sure will have an option to be imported on w3) i find out that only "some" of the choices i made, are, in fact, stored in it. what im trying to say, is that, exactly as happend on witcher 1 savegame import, not all the decision i made on W2 (many very importat) will have a real impact on w3. for example: in witcher 1 i did in fact joined with the scoiiatel and i had shani as my lover and when i played w2 i expected to have her at my side... and what did i find????????????? they just made a little (and when i say little i really mean it) text stating that she left.... wow!!!!!!!! amazing!! so i really brake my head to made shani a lover and now that is wasted!!! another issue is that making an alliance with the scoiiatel didnt matter except dor a liittle tiny comment you have with iorveth... did that help? NO BECAUSE HES ALREADY YOUR ALLY WHEN THAT CHAT OCCOURS. i have like 4 savegames with complete different alliance and lovers, etc. and i find that in w2 it doesnt matter a shit. i find out that the importing thing its just to have ""some"" old items and 1% of your god damns fffffffff orens...wow... im amazed...!! they are so f****ing kinddddddddddddd!!!!!!!!!!! and what about everything the grand master said??? he was high as hell afterall..... i should have killed him when he was a god damn kid....

here is a portion of the wiki regarding imported data:

 

 

 

Several choices, items and some money is transferred to the sequel and is accessible at the start of the game.

Some of these items include:

• Steel Swords
  • Ard'aenye
  • D'yaebl
  • G'valchir
  • Gwalhir

• Silver Swords
  • Aerondight
  • Moon Blade

• Other Items
  • Raven's armor
  • A small percentage of your orens (about 1% of your saved game from the original game added to the standard ~ 150 orens of a fresh game).

Some of the choices (spoilers for Witcher 1 ahead):

• Chapter 1
• Chapter 2
• Chapter 3
  • Kill or save Thaler during All the King's Men (you will receive a message and a package from Thaler in Flotsam if you saved Thaler – this is default game behaviour)
  • Romance with Shani (a journal entry based on why Geralt parted ways with Shani was added with the Enhanced Edition.)
• Chapter 4
• Chapter 5
  • Kill or save Princess Adda during Her Highness the Striga (her fate is mentioned by Foltest

    during the Prologue and later by other characters, as well as in a

    journal entry, and it may have a minor impact on the status of Temeria

    at the end of the game)

  • Kill or spare Siegfried (Neutral/Scoiatel paths only: Geralt is either attacked by the fellow knight or left alone by the order)
• Epilogue (final path):
  • Order path:
    • Fewer issues with the Order in the third chapter.
    • Geralt may meet Siegfried and Polycarp.
  • Neutral/Witcher path:
    • Iorveth's path: you cannot get through the front door in Loc Muinne.
    • Roche's path: you have to kill an angry knight in the second chapter.
  • Scoia'tael path:
    • Some dialogues changes with Iorveth.

what im trying to say (and my rant is about) is that it doesnt matter what you did choose. in the next w3 theyll have little to any impact and that many other choices you did will be CHANGED FORCIBLY.  im sure the only choices will be ported will be who do you left live, in this case the faggot kings, with who you did make alliance (iorveth or that other fag - wichi have my doubt seeing what they did on Witcher 1 alliance), those lesbian sorceress and if you left letho live (wich im pretty sure it wont be ported, why? because the last savegame you have its just "before" battling/sparing him)..... for example, i saved Anais, i bet you a 1000 orens in W3 she wont even remember that (if she appears at all that is) and they will left a "default" option.

 

its the only complain i have... they need to work that out or ill rant till the end of days.

 

Save import was implemented late in dev procces. At first they did't intendeed to add it. But they got inspired by mass effect - me2 save import :3

 

i didnt knew that... but that doesnt answer why the choice of letting Letho lives its not implemented. so, afterall, he will not appear on W3 even if you let him live? why making a god damn kick ass CGI of him killing that faggot king? :/

[windpl]

 

i didnt knew that... but that doesnt answer why the choice of letting Letho lives its not implemented. so, afterall, he will not appear on W3 even if you let him live? why making a god damn kick ass CGI of him killing that faggot king? :/

 

That's is to huge event to left unheck. WE3 may also start at point as you left it (flashback from WE2). That would aslo help people that don't have saves to tailor thier past.

[Jerbsinator]

Skyrim has NOTHING on Witcher 2, truly one of the best RPG's ever made.

[ChancellorKremlin]

Skyrim has NOTHING on Witcher 2, truly one of the best RPG's ever made.

 

Indeed. 

 

In other news, hadn't heard of this guy before, but his review of ACM pretty much matches mine, but in a much more theatrical way. Hilarious!

 

[Veta]

Angry Joe is pretty okay but I was really disappointed at his Skyrim review, I think he gave it a ten which is just not right .

[Jerbsinator]

Ya Angry Joe is great but sometimes his scores are not very consistent, like giving Skyrim a 10 / 10 and Witcher 2 only an 8. He would probably give Withcer 2 a 10 now since CDProject fixed everything he was critisizing, FOR FREE.

[ChancellorKremlin]

Crysis 2 - What Shooters Are About

 

 

"An exciting shooter with an unexciting plot "

 

 

First Impressions:

Well, what can I say? I think that sentence pretty much sums up the feel of the game for me. First thing that struck me as I started to play Crysis 2 was the intro, which I found… underwhelming. I don’t know, it screamed “this is awesome!” but failed in its delivery. Half of it was spent with me either looking in the wrong direction (when my view wasn’t restrained by the game) and the other half I was forced to look at something when I felt something far more interesting was going on elsewhere. It was very inconsistent and very forced. It didn’t feel natural or cutsceny, even though you’re actually watching real in-game footage, maybe an actual cut-scene would have delivered the message better. Or restraining the player, period.

Aside from the execution, the actual plot makes very little sense at the start. You’re basically thrown into the game without having any knowledge of what has gone on from the previous game(s) and it appears you’ll be fighting an entirely different enemy altogether this time round (you’ll see). Your character – a marine – starts off the mission as if this is another typical mission in the core, which it is not, and appears totally oblivious to the Alien invasion that has been happening for the past few years. Yes, that fact just pops up and appears to be as unexpected to the player character as it isn’t for the player, who ostensibly played the previous games and knows fine well what is going on. But more on this later.

Gameplay:

They’ve been plenty of calls (as there always are) that this game was “dumbed down” for the console audiences and simplified, especially when compared to the two previous games. I can’t say, from a gameplay perspective that I’ve really noticed, with a few exceptions which I would credit with just bad design choices rather than intentional dumbing down. But we’ll come to that.

The combat mechanics are solid and the game feels good when you’re running around, seeking cover, firing from behind objects and using your suit’s built in abilities. In this aspect, I believe you’ve lost a few abilities from the previous games that were merged in this one, though I can’t say it negatively impacts the game. Stealth is still cool, armour + strength mode still gets the job done, etc. Though I did find myself over-using stealth, but that is just how I play. I emptied entire maps just sniping from behind cover, stealthily killing enemies, and moving on. I loved every second of it. In particular, I loved how seamlessly the player is integrated into the game, ie firing from behind cover, jumping and grabbing the edge of a ledge (no pun intended) and my personal favourite – running and then crouching into a slide (which I did by accident the first time round) and in the process knocking over an enemy. For someone who doesn’t expect much from a shooter, that really made my day. Stealth kills feel satisfying, as does bludgeoning your enemy to death with a rocket launcher, with surprisingly effective results. Bullets fly as they are supposed to, headshots make satisfyingly squishy noises, bodies drop as they are supposed to, the works. It all played finely to me.

But those are just mechanics. What do the enemies have to say? Well, surprisingly little. AI is standard. Not good but not bad. There was a reason why I could easily pick off an entire map one by one, because enemies conveniently “forget” you’re around if you remain cloaked for long enough, even as the body pile of their recently alive comrades piles up around them, whether alien or human. Both seem utterly unconcerned as I pop over from cover in front of them and drag one of their fellows into the darkness whilst twisting a knife into its chest. Besides that, they seek cover and flank, but these days that is increasingly a given.

For some strange reason, the Aliens (the Ceph) have gone through an underwhelming and totally uninspired make-over, and are now bipedal and humanoid (hoorah for originality! Haven’t seen a thousand of those have we?) – I mean, seriously, what was wrong with the cool and utterly alien looking aliens of the previous games? So yes, they are boring, gelatinously contained blobs of unoriginality that occasionally become interesting when the other two slightly larger (but equally uninspired) enemy types come in, what basically amounts to a tank and then a mech. They are difficult to kill and add to the game, but they are oh so cliché. That’s it, there are like 3 different types of enemies for humans, and Ceph. Add in a bomber Ceph and a helicopter and the party is complete. So yes, very underwhelming enemies, which should be one of the more varied aspects of the game, but sadly it is not. You eventually become so used to them it becomes easy to kill them even on harder difficulties, unless there are large numbers of them, or many different types of heavies, which eventually becomes the only way the game remains challenging, and basically what every level throws at you.

Guns are another aspect of the game which could have more variety, in particular in the rifle department. I think there were like… 2, 3 different rifles in the game? I was disappointed, if only because killing things was so much fun. I wanted to find other ways of killing things. Firing a rocket at a fully loaded jeep for example, that felt good. As did exploding things with the grenade launcher. But I wanted more. Yes, there are attachments and so forth (apparently this is a must for games these days) which added to the game, but I still felt the weapons – the real meat and potatoes of any game – were sadly lacking in variety. Enemies and weapons, sadly lacking. So while from a mechanical point of view, the game plays fine and feels satisfying, it really does leave you imagining if those levels could boast a little more interesting number of things to fire and blow up.

Speaking of levels, the jungle of the previous games has been replaced by a concrete jungle. It looks fabulous, and there is generally a lot to explore, but nowhere near as open as the previous games. Level progression is quite linear, with only a few, very superficial “stealth, explore and flank” options available, from which you can either find a cache of ammo and weapons, an advantageous position to snipe from, or a way to avoid enemies, and even then you are told exactly where to go by your HUD. So yes, a tad constraining there. Level design is of a good standard, lots of cover, a plethora of very “vertical maps” to drop down from and rain righteous might of sniper fire on your enemies. Anyway, moving on.

Graphics:

Not a lot to say in this department. The game looks GOOD. Yes, it’s already dated and there are never titles out there, but still. Lighting looks perfect, the (relative) depth of field looks nice (I say relative because maps aren’t really that large horizontally) and textures and other effects are done to perfection. On a decent rig, the game plays at a smooth 80FPS with everything maxed out, and the scenery is just stunning. You get a totally beautifully destroyed New York to play with, with parks, subways, car parks, burger joints, shops, office buildings, ports and islands to play with. We all know I’m not big on graphics, but this game cannot be faulted on that – it looks superb.

Plot:

By miles, the biggest issue of the game for me (a common theme for most of my reviews, and something apparently most developers struggle with) and something that really stands out when playing it. It is just all over the place. From a very nonsensical and rushed intro sequence, to the loading between maps, to the development of the plot as a whole, it is just very convoluted, silly and undisciplined. The intro… well, it does a bad job of introducing. It really does. Apparently there has been a plague and an alien invasion going on for some time, but you and your marines are seemingly unaware of it. Also, for whatever reason, CELL (your human enemies – a mega corporation with mercenaries – original, I know!) controls New York and inexplicably hunts you down, all because they want your suit. That’s it, their sole motivation for the entire game. All so their leader can wear it himself and battle the aliens alone.

So yes, there an invasion going on, but don’t mention the war, like to anyone. I said it once, but I think I got away with it – the marines clearly didn’t get the memo. The basic plot is trying to rescue this scientist while your suit goes through some miraculous and unlikely biomechanical changes which will basically make it the bane of all the alien menace from the inside out. Not only do you use it to kill your enemies in cold blood, but just inserting your arm into alien structures is enough to cause them to come tumbling down in ruins much as it will do with the alien plans in general. This is it, the entire game – insert arm, collect alien plan foiled token. Even the end.

You skip through missions by being shown a weird 3d map of the city and you inexplicably covering vast swathes of city relatively quickly, in what basically feels like going from A to B to C, rescuing a scientist here, helping bravo squad there, evacuating civilians here, and making a last stand on X. Characters are all pretty generic – annoying scientist, vengeful mercenary commander, undercover pretty (but not overly hyper sexualise) CIA agent and silent protagonist. The list goes on.

So yes, pretty uninspired plot. Which is a shame, because that of the previous games was really quite simple, but good. It was basically THIS IS A WAR BETWEEN US AND THEM and that was it. No complication, no unnecessary distractions, just you and them and war. Here you dally between the Marines and Cell, get captured, nearly killed, released, etc… some very generic and repetitive stuff. But then again, plots aren’t really key to any shooters, and the shooting in Crysis 2 is solid, so I’m willing to overlook the premise of the game somewhat.


Conclusion:

Well, much like the sub-title reads, an exciting shooter which does the job of making me want to shoot and kill stuff with some good action, exciting combat sequences, mildly challenging enemies and stunningly beautiful environment, all wrapped in a thin excuse for a plot and a general dumbing down of its main antagonist. But in this case, that doesn’t make for a bad game. You end up paying not for the story, which is never the strong point of a shooter, but the brilliant looking maps, scenery, and the really satisfying combat you’re pitched in time and time again in the many hours of gameplay you’re put through, which is definitely a good thing.

So on that note, I can say Crysis 2 was a satisfying game. It was good. Not excellent, but good. Solid, one might say. I do hope, however, that Crysis 3 retains the exciting combat mechanics, whilst hopefully improving the aspects that really kept Crysis 2 from being a truly sensational game. I would say time will tell, but I’m the one that needs to catch up with the times – Crysis 3 is already out after all. Perhaps it will be my next review? Only time will tell… :0

Thanks for reading.

 

[ChancellorKremlin]

And yes, I realise Crysis 2 is old and Crysis 3 is out. But I only just finished playing the former, and will likely play Crysis 3 soon, and follow up with a review to that. For the record, I'll review any game, regardless of date published.

[ChancellorKremlin]

BioShock - An FPS With A Soul

 

 

"Challenging, intelligent and beautiful"

 

 

First Impressions:

I have to say that, at first, while I was impressed by the game's art, presentation, intro sequence and the "feel" of Rapture, my first pressing concern was how "clunky" the controls felt. I felt somewhat slow and laboured, as if my feet were encased in cement, and I didn't like it. However, that feeling quickly subsided as I grew used to the controls and the pace of the game. Once this minor distraction was out of the way, I was able to properly enjoy the marvel that thi game was offering before me.

First, the setting was just both improbably and spectacular. And underwater city, but not some sheltered futuristic looking pod connected version of a city (and probably a plausible one) but an *actual* city, with skyscrapers (waterscrapers?) and neon and glitz and buzz. Yes, it had a buzz, even underwater. It was an immediately enticing setting, once one accepts the world of BioShock operates on slightly different principles than our own. The graphics did every bit of justice to what I believe the developers wanted to show, with a few minor anomalies I'll cover later. And the sounds, wow, the sounds! Plenty of times in the game, I got more "feeling" from what I was hearing than what I was seeing, and that says a lot in regards to a market which is saturated with titles that constantly trip over each other in order to have the best possible graphics, while neglecting this area, which I find just as important to immersion.

The plot starts off predictably enough through the help of an "ally", but grows and draws you in as you progress through the levels. And the game is long. And I love that, I love getting every penny worth of the money I paid for it. So far, so good. So lets move on to the meatier parts of this review.

Gameplay:

Well, like I said, initially I had to overcome a slightly odd feeling of being "slower" than normal, though it is entirely possible I have been sensitized to speed given today's gaming trends - walking is no longer an option. I also struggled, initially, to switch between plasmids and weapons, and I generally found the former to be woefully inferior and almost useless pretty much through most of the game except for specialised tasks.

I do very much like the idea of having what basically amounts to two sets of weapons, and that with only limited slots for plasmids, you're forced to toggle between them. It presents you with a nicely balanced set of skills which you must constantly maintain given the necessities of what you're doing, whether it be fighting, hacking or sneaking your way through, though I never give that option a try - I'm a fighter at heart. Enemies respawn, which while I initially considered annoying, I realised was a necessity given the open ended and "hub" like connectivity between levels, allowing you to travel freely through certain levels. It is also essential as a means of gaining certain items, especially money and ammo, both of which you'll need to overcome the game.

Combat feels very satisfying and hard on the hardest difficulty level (my default setting always) and even a measley splicer with a thompson can take you down if you're not careful. Taking on "Big Daddies" is nearly always guaranteed to result in you dying at least once (and possibly many times more earlier on) unless you know what you're doing and are properly armed/equipped and have done lots of research. This, in particular, I very much enjoyed - that you can more or less alternate between a minigame or sorts, photographing enemies in order to gain gene tonics and other properties that make fighting your enemies easier, like increased damage (with different levels) and other interesting features. These come in VERY handy later in the game, and are basically indispensable in order to defeat some of the harder foes.

Enemy AI is, for the most part, quite intelligent, with a number of different enemies putting a different set of skills to bear against you, with your usual mix of melee and ranged enemies complimented by ones that crawl on ceilings, play dead, teleport and yoru obvious "heavy" soldiers, the "Big Dadies" which sport an interesting mix of grenade launchers, close range attacks, immobilizing thumps and a deadly long range rivet gun. And then on top of these, Rapture's inbuilt security systems, in the forms of turrets, cameras, rocket launchers and so on provide a sometimes annoying and sometimes formidable line of defense.

Hacking these is generally easy if done in isolation, but throw in a few splicers chasing you around, and things get messy quickly. All in all, combat is hard and satisfying, especially given the wide variety of guns available. I liked both the number of different guns, but also the variety between them, from your bog standard pistol, shotgun and machine gun, to the more exotic chemical thrower, crossbow and a range of plasmids involving anywhere from telekinesis, pyrokinesis, a swarm of bees or cyclones.

Given the nature of Rapture, level design was primarily indoor orientated with only a few open spaces of note, these mostly being indoor parks or shopping malls. But even with a limited set of locales, each level and set of buildings and interiors in Rapture had its own unique feel and character, and this made the game very enjoyable to play, and I seldom developed a feeling of repetition or ennui as I browsed through the malls, parks, workshops, medical centers, labs, apartment blocks and other locales.

While the gameplay of BioShock incorporates many neat features, it is by no means "revolutionary" - in fact, many parallels can be drawn to magic and mana in regards to plasmids and eve, the latter which you need in order to power your spells (I mean, plasmids!) but what really makes BioShock exciting and innovative lie elsewhere, as we'll see below.

Graphics:

Graphically, the game is autstanding. Given the nature of Rapture, being built deep underwanter, water plays a big part in the game, and it looks and feels beautiful, either as you see it outside from a window, or as it oozes and flows within. The levels are all beautifully designed and each has its own set of textures and characters, and you're always given something new to look at as you move around. The enemies, sadly, all appear the same even given their differences, which is a shame.

However, the game presents you with a beautiful, decadent, dark and gloomy atmosphere which really immerses you in the story its trying to tell you, with stunning changes to the feel and vibe of each level, given the limitations of the setting of Rapture. Restaurants feel cozy and warm, the corridors and vents dank and abandoned, malls feel inviting and luxurious, and all this contrasts beautifully with when the game wants to be dark, and it gets dark, very dark.

The art of the game must also be praised, not only in regards to the setting but things like billboards, design, propaganda posters. The game "feels" retro and mid fifties, everything has a sort of exciting post war "glow" to it, from adam dispensers in the form of "Gatherer's Gardens" to ammo machines and even the "Bathyspere" one uses to move from level to level, it all feels and looks both beautiful and somehow a little foreboding at the same time, which given the events that have taken place, is spot on. Full points for immersiveness in the graphical department.

Sound:

Both the music and the effects in the game really impressed me. I very much enjoy playing a game where I hear sounds which I can easily think "Yes, I haven't heard that particular sounds before, nor anything like it". In sum, I hate recycled sounds. Most often, you'll end up hearing the same set of footsteps, ricochets, and firearms sounds. But not in BioShock. Ie, walking around some of the tunnels, and you do get the impression you're walking inside a sub, even down to the echo your footsteps make in the confined areas. The machines, whether they be vending machines or turrets, all have their distinctive audio footprints, with some even playing music randomly as you pass along. In effect, this can be very disconcerting when you're trying to hear enemies, or when you're generally caught unawares.

And there is a plethora of ambient sounds which are always occurring in the background. Most are so convincing, you're never really sure you're alone, of if you're being followed or an enemy is nearby. Given that enemies respawn, this is a constant worry. They range from anything, from the sounds of a whale to water leaking, to creaky floorboards or of metal expanding, to gunfire and screams and other more ghastly noises. At many points, you will find yourself wondering whether that room you cleared is really empty. In sum, the "atmospher" the sound makes is in my opinion just as good if not better than the visual effects.

And my oh my, the little sisters. I have never, ever, seen something quite as tragic as hearing a little sister sobbing over a killed Big Daddy. Yes, it does get repetitive after you hear it x amount of times, but wow, it is just so haunting. You really *feel* their pain, it is just so authentic and terrifying. Here are these little girls, terrified, crying their little hearts out because you've killed their night in shining armour. I haven't quite been so moved by hearing a little girl's weeps in well, forever, and for that alone this game wins my vote when it comes to the effects.

Its all about what it makes you feel, and how it immerses yourself in that world, and BioShock delivers on all levels as far as that's concerned.

Plot & Setting:

And we come to the crown jewel of BioShock, the plot. Now, I'm usually skewed in favour of plot elements above other more "traditional" aspects of gaming these days, like graphics and gameplay. But still, wow. Here's a game that really shows what its possible to do when you're acquainted with your history, philosophy and politics. I mean, the plot per se maybe isn't the most amazing aspect of the game, but the setting, the... idea behind it, is just amazing. The very pholosophical foundations of Rapture, the classical and still very relevant "big government vs little" and capitalism vs socialism, I mean, it takes balls for a game to tackle issues like these. And here we are, right in the middle of a sea at the bottom of the ocean, with objectivism and the writings of Ayn Rand being put to the test, the wheels of industry and laissez-faire moving full circle and crushing between the cogs any not strong enough to keep up with the demands of social Darwinism. I mean, this is an intelligent game! And its ambitious too!

As I've already said, while the setting is novel and compelling, it is this background, these ideas, this literature that really brings the game into a class of its own. And the way it plays out too, practically in the world, is also stunning, with the inevitable civil war following the impossibilities of such a way of life, the dangers of an unrestrained scientific community... I mean, this game really isn't afraid to "go there". I've mentioned how it started more or less "goofy" looking and maybe a little cartoony, and before I knew it I was listening to recordings by medical scientists which had taken their training in Auschwits! I mean, WHAT?! Did you just put Auschwitz in a video game? Holy crap! Like I said, they aren't afraid to go there, and its not just senseless shocking for no other purpose than to shock ideas, it does really fit into the overall story. The same for another scientist, Suchong, who survived a Japanese massacre of his village... its all so dark and gritty! The game really does go from a game to something more sinister in a heartbeart. You're left wondering whatever happened to the hilarious splicers you found yourself setting on fire a while ago.

And some of the scenes are really quite haunting, like quite literally the ones where you start seeing "ghosts" but also some of the murder scenes of Rapture's more famous socialites. One level in particular was grotesque in how uncomfortable it made me feel, again drawing a contrast between some of the ligther hearted moments of the game with a point where you reach a mad scientist and an "artist". I was just blown away by how unrestrained the game is in some of its darker aspects, but only that, but the delivery also. It isn't just gore, its the way that gore is delivered to you. And it works!

One aspect I wasn't overly chuffed with was the "morality" system where you can save or "harvest" the little sisters. Ithink the choice is fairly transparent, in that saving them has almost the exact same effect as killing them except you get only marginally less Adam than you would otherwise. The fact you get a "gift box" with 200 Adam after saving all three (in addition to a range of rare and sometimes irreplaceable plasmids and tonics) makes the choice to save them fairly loaded. While it affects the ending and the behavior of one of the major characters towards you, there you have been more ramifications for basically the only moral choice you're asked to make throughout the game.

As for the plot itself, the game begins predictably enough with someone helping you over the radio to reach a set of goals, some of which are fairly standard (go from A to and then join forces with your would be family to help rescue his family, something which is uncommon in games, where the main quest almost never revolves around doing something for omeone else unless you have something to gain. And yes, you know maybe this guy isn't all he says he is, maybe you even outright distrust him, as I did.

And you'd be right, because he's lying to you all this time, and it turns out you've been played for a sucker, and made to kill his enemy just so he could take over. He's nothing more than a mobster. That, I more or less saw coming. But the delivery, again, the angle they took with it... it was brilliant. All through, your "ally" took on the persona of an Irishman, and over time you become sensitized to his mannerisms and way of talking, never noticing the "Would you kindlies" he throws in there... only for it to be revealed later, that is in fact a codeword he uses to control the player (who is a sleeper agent prone to mind control if a code word is used) into doing his bidding. Again, its not so much WHAT you're doing, but HOW. I just love how they've made your lack of choice (you're obviously going to do what he says over the radio, this is a game you want to complete after all!) but how they explain that, that you had no other alternative, it is just brilliant. I was just amazed. And then there's the fact you were always a resident of Rapture and grown there and Ryan is in fact your father (and your mother an exotic dancer!) ... I mean, it was well done. It wasn't necessarily brilliant, but it was bloody well put together. I loved it. That part of the game, roughly half way through... that's when I knew: This is a good game. These people know how to tell a story.

Conclusion:

It may have started somewhat slow, but wow, does BioShock deliver. Again, while it makes for an exciting shooter with an interesting mix of "rpg-like" aspects and some decent mini-games of sorts, the real "pleasure" of playing BioShock is that you're playing a game that isn't afraid to ask questions, to delve into humanity's darker corners, and really explore the limits of a deranged mind, an antagonistic philosophy, or even a cliche. Sure, there are cliches in BioShock, but every good piece of work has a cliche. But it's how they deliver them, how they build on them, that makes BioShock an uniquely intelligent, thoughtful and beautiful game. From the setting to the choices, the style and the fun (and fear!) you'll have playing this game, its a title that really ticks all my boxes when it comes to playing an FPS. If anything, BioShock to me is a sign that yes, you can build a game that's visually appealing and has style, but doesn't skimp on substance or writing. It's proof once more that these elements can co-exist even in today's saturated markets.

In sum, BioShock to me represents everything that can still be achieved when you bring the best out in making a game. It isn't just a game that'll excite you and challenge you, it's a game that'll make you think. It's a game that'll make you feel. And what more could you ask of a game, than that?


Thanks for reading.

 

[Ark of Truth]

Is The Witcher linear progress or is it more open world exploring like Oblivion and Skyrim?

[BruceWayne]

Is The Witcher linear progress or is it more open world exploring like Oblivion and Skyrim?

 

The gameplay is more like that of DAO and past Bioware RPGs. I think TW1 was even based on a Bioware engine. With that being said, the places aren't as restrictive as those titles, but it doen't get close to TES. In terms of the "openness" of the world it reminds me a lot of the first two Fable games.

[ChancellorKremlin]

Well, I suppose I should start this off by explaining that I spent the whole of November and a up till very recently playing the entirety of the Mass Effect series, back to back, doing completionist playthroughts and playing every bit of DLC and other content I could get my hands on. I am naturally aware that I am so late for the party, but better late than never, right?

 

In any case, I can't remember a series that has captivated me more as much as the ME franchise has, other than maybe The Witcher when it comes to RPG's. Having spent all that time playing and few people to talk about it, I thought I'd post my "Reviews" here in case there are any kind souls interested in reading it, or discussing/debating it further. I realise, having followed the ME3 thread, that most people have moved on, but if anyone remains, I'd be interested to hear from what you have to say.

 

I also suppose I should apologise. I'm going to post the review to the trilogy in chronological order, but the only one I haven't played a 2nd time was ME2, and I got so carried away with ME3 that my review for it basically became something else entirely. It is long. I've basically poured my heart and all my thoughts into it. So I apologise in advance for the "TDLR" nature of it, but I do hope that even if you read bits and bobs of it, you find parts that interest you.

 

As I say in the reviews, when I finished the ME franchise, I was very sad. Sad because such an amazing journey came to an end. A part of me naturally felt talking about it is a way to "put it to rest" so to speak, as many of you have probably already done when they came out (and when I should have bought them!) so this is, perhaps, as much for me, as for anyone out there that might be interested in reading this. I'll post the ME2 review soon when I've finished re-playing it.

 

To all of you out there, thanks for your time! 

[ChancellorKremlin]

Well, it’s taken me about a week now to write this review since finishing the Mass Effect trilogy, which I’ve been playing, back to back, over the past month. I suppose I’ve been putting it off for such a while because… in a way, it kind of feels like saying goodbye. Yes, it’s a late review. I’ve said previously I’ll review any games regardless of publishing dates, as long as I feel like it. In many ways, I don’t even think this will class as a review in the full sense of the word – there’s just so much ground to cover and in many ways, perhaps I am writing this more for my own sake as for those whom may be interested to read my thoughts and views on the games.

 

Anyways, I digress. I think it’s fair to say I’m sad such a saga has had to come to an end, and in this segment I’ll cover all three titles though I suspect I’ll concentrate more on the third instalment if only because there is so much to talk about, and so much controversy to go over. In addition to being late in playing the games, I actually managed to shield myself from pretty much all the spoilers and what the furore was all about (positive and negative) and I think in many ways that may have affected my perception of the games, for better or worse.

 

Anyway, that’s quite enough of that. Let’s start with Mass Effect:

 

 "Easily the best sci-fi RPG I've ever played"

 

 

 

 

 

 

First Impressions:

 

I think the first thing that struck me when I started playing Mass Effect was how much it made me reminisce of titles such as Unreal II and Star Trek: Voyager – Elite Force. Both are firmly grounded in the Sci-Fi realm, and I think both are pretty good titles (for first person shooter style games) and both are underrated, in my opinion. The Unreal universe in particular has been so under-explored due to the popularity of Unreal Tournament that the real “single player” university has pretty much fallen by the wayside, and it was a pretty fantastic universe. Unreal II in particular has a lot of parallels with ME, both in tone and feel. In any case, fleshed out, dynamic and engaging sci-fi universes are pretty rare for the RPG/FPS genre (if we exclude KOTOR and say, Dead Space) that it’s refreshing to find oneself in a universe as detailed and rich as that of ME. When I started playing, it was a beautiful synthesis of cinematics, good voice acting (VA hereafter), detailed entries like the “Codex” diaries (which in my opinion, always enrich the game – I like text, and I like reading, and I like learning new things!) and then you add things like the different builds and powers/tech abilities your avatar can accrue (together with being able to select gender – both of which are fully voiced) and you end up with a pretty diverse, customisable and replayable experience. The fact this was originally a console title ported to the PC makes these attributes all the more impressive, I feel. From the get go, I knew combat and the graphics weren’t going to be the game’s strongest points, and ordinarily for any game, that would be its death knoll – but I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, games can still be pretty near damn perfect even with imperfections in these two departments. And I knew ME1 was going to be one of those games.

 

 

Gameplay:

 

 

 

 

 

- Combat:

 

As I’ve said, one of the first things I noticed while playing the game was that, initially at least, the combat was a little “clunky”. There was a learning curve involved in coming to terms with many of the game’s signature features, like going into cover by default and having weapons with infinite ammo but overheating and cool-down periods. If you pair this with the fact I always play on the hardest difficulty (changing the INI to play on Insanity first time round) I found myself dying a lot initially, if only because many times while trying to run I found myself unintentionally being pulled towards an object exerting its strange gravitational force towards me. That and the fact enemies can be pretty relentless when laying down supressing fire, with a handful of shots bringing down shields and another salvo taking you out completely.

 

Getting used to that was perhaps one of the first hurdles I have to overcome with the game mechanics when it came to combat. Once you get become used to this feature though, combat becomes pretty rewarding, with the player free to explore the map without the burden of having to loot enemies for things like ammo or armour (shields) all of which regenerate automatically, with the exception of omni-gel and medi-gel, which can be used to bypass locks and hacks and heal the player respectively. Most other items (like currency and so on) are automatically acquired from fallen foes, though the game does still reward players for exploration in its sometimes staggeringly huge maps with finds like new weapons, weapon mods, pda’s (unlocking new missions at times) among other items. The brilliance of this style of gameplay and combat is that the player isn’t forced to go running around looking for ammo in the middle of a firefight (as becomes the case in ME2) and is allowed to explore at his own pace in the aftermath.

 

Another feature I very much liked and found very useful is that you can tell squadmates where to go with pinpoint precision, where they instantly take cover if an object capable of providing cover is available. This allows you to set up kill zones, order flanking manoeuvres, and even prevent your own flanks from being overwhelmed. It’s an innovative and long overdue feature which I very much welcomed, and have only seen implemented well on a handful of other games. Squadmates, of which you are allowed to take two per mission, are generally very useful and well able to take care of themselves, which really compliments this feature. They come in a variety of different classes and builds, such as soldiers, techs and biotics and mixes of all three, and eventually you find bolstering your own classes and overcoming its weaknesses by wisely choosing squadmates becomes almost mandatory if you want to succeed in certain missions, as enemies begin coming in shapes and forms which your chosen class and build will struggle to take out alone. It also gives you the sense that you’re not fighting alone, that you have buddies covering your back, and in a grand fashion, this becomes one of the major themes of the ME universe which I will elaborate on later.

 

 

- Enemies:

 

The enemies of Mass Effect come in a wide variety of flavours. You initially find yourself fighting against the eponymous “Geth” artificial life-forms and their “husk” servants. The latter are the series’ “zombies” which seems like a necessary cliché for most games these days. They initially provide a good combination of enemies that combine shields and moderately high health with swarming and cover and fire tactics which keep the player on his toes and having to constantly shift places and reassess his position, made easier by the possibility to pause combat and use powers against certain enemies. As the game progresses, new enemies are included, and even old ones are given many new distinctions and types, so while you end up fighting the same “factions” you never really feel you’re always fighting the same “enemies”. One example is the Geth “sapper” which is an elastic, jumping spawn like thing which clings to ceilings and takes opportunistic sniping shots at the player, which can take down all shields and even kill the player outright on harder difficulties. Mercenaries, thugs and rogue organisations (like Cerberus) and many other factions and enemies make their way into the game, pretty much all what you would expect from such a rich and chaotic universe as the Mass Effect one portrays. “Boss type” enemies are relatively rare, which in my opinion, makes fighting the actually “bosses” a lot more involving and memorable, as you feel you’ve achieved a particular point in the story rather than a particular segment of the “map” as ME2 tends to do (or overdo) with Boss like enemies. In any case, the enemies become progressively so hard a handful end up becoming “boss-like” themselves – Krogan Battlemasters, for example, with ridiculously high shields and health, with the health regenerating after it reaches a certain point. Other examples include the asari commandos, which wield biotic powers which can really screw your style of play, constantly bombarding you behind cover and exposing you to devastating volleys of accurate fire. Unfortunately, this particular enemy (and their biotic attacks which mimic the player’s) do not return in further instalments, which is a shame as I found them to be one of the most challenging and interesting enemies of the game. All in all though, the enemies of Mass Effect are varied enough so you get the feel you’re fighting who you’re meant to be fighting in such a universe and level, as opposed to enemies you can easily categorise (like “Merc” or “Mech” which becomes a problem in ME2) – rather, you have pirates, thugs, slavers, mercs, Geth, security guards, husks, thresher maws, commandos, tanks, turrets, etc – and all pose a significant challenge based on weapons yielded, barriers and protection, level design and the player’s own build and that of their squad. In essence, combat, the enemies and the player contribute towards a synergy which serves to overcome some of the shortcomings in the combat mechanic and turn it into a memorable and integral part of the ME experience.

 

 

Customisation:

 

What I really liked about ME was how much control you’re given over who exactly “Shepard” is. For starters, gender selection is obviously a big bonus. I honestly think people overlook just how much of a huge deal this is – the fact you get to play either gender which eventually covers the course of three games, complete with voice-acting and all the different interactions you get and changes in gameplay, that’s a big deal I don’t think we should take for granted. This is especially awesome because you’re given the choice to choose the “default” Shep or change him/her. A person whose opinion I respect hates that particular lack of freedom in The Witcher series, and goes as far as saying the default “male” Shep for ME “looks like a monkey in power armour”. While I don’t agree with these sentiments, you can see why the freedom to do what you can in ME would be of particular use to anybody who feels this way. More practically, it also adds an entirely new level of replayability which I find lacking in games of similar genres, (where player characters are not often voiced) especially when story-telling comes to play a larger role than sandbox exploration, as it eventually does in ME. The fact you’re not constrained into picking “the” Shepard but “a” Shepard is a huge deal and a testament to the variety and quality of the series. When you add to that the excellent VA provided by Mark Meer and Jennifer Hale, you end up with an highly customisable, engaging and personalcharacter which you can relate to, and that I think becomes one of ME’s main strengths as a video game and RPG.

 

In addition to this, there are a number of ways you can customise the player character, beginning with your own backstory, which has subtle implications in the way certain dialogues play out and how certain characters perceive you. It’s not necessarily an in-depth mechanic, but it does provide a “starting point” for your character should you prefer one backstory over another, and a nice touch. The gameplay also differs quite radically depending on what “class” you chose, as certain powers, armours and weapons are only available to certain classes and combinations. And even then, there are a number of ways to further customise your class through what build you end up going for, as there are tech tress and combat trees meaning you can become an all-out combat focused character  (with points for proficiency with certain weapons) or chose to spend points on health, shields, hacking, encryption, intimidate, persuade, among others. The last four in particular affect how many containers you can open and what terminals you can hack, in addition to contributing towards how you interact with NPC’s and squad-mates, having repercussions on relationships and the way certain quests play out depending on your “morality” – innovatively though, it does mean you have the choice of being “good” while still making use of “intimidation” dialogue, as does being an ass and yet, very persuasive. It’s a freedom I find refreshing after playing so many RPG’s that shoehorn you into good and bad with mutually exclusive good and bad dialogue. Instead, you can behave as befits the situation and perhaps how you feel (which is I believe, highly realistic as how people actually behave) rather than being constrained by past behaviour and actions.

 

Added to this are the myriad of different weapons and armour available to the player. Granted, a lot of them are relatively similar and some (due to certain stats and characteristics) might be better suited for a particular NPC or PC build, but the sheer volume of different weapons, armour and weapon mods is staggering. The same applies to squadmates, giving the player complete control as how to arm and armour your companions. There are so many different ways to “dress” your character and arm him that one playthrough is probably by no means sufficient to experience all the game has to offer. This does, however, mean it is a shame when you eventually have nowhere to store them all (despite commanding your own ship!) and thus have to sell/reduce to omni-gell a great deal of them, something that is either an oversight or intentionally penalising developer decision.

 

All these features mean you’re given the freedom to play the game in a myriad of different ways, and highly add to the game’s replayability factor. Even as a bog standard “soldier” for example, you’re still allowed to choose what weapon to specialise in, whether to favour melee combat, and how to go about hacking and encryption.

 

 

- Choices carrying over the franchise:

 

Very little is “set in stone” when it comes to how you want your character to act and behave, and that is a huge plus to ME, especially when we consider that, for the other games in the series, choices and builds can be imported from one game to the next, having potentially major ramifications down the line. This is, I believe, another feature that perhaps isn’t as appreciated as it could be – the rich and quite honestly, unnecessary – divergences in dialogue, cutscenes and the way quests play out over the three games based on previous player choices and actions. That alternative dialogue, writing, voice-acting and time went into allowing the player this freedom and this web of alternating ways to do things is I believe a cornerstone of the ME franchise, and speaks volumes of the developers for doing something that not only makes the game more engaging and replayable (and interesting!) but also probably a lot more expensive, time consuming at a time when most other developers settle for a hell of a lot less.

 

 

- Map Design:

 

 Map design in ME is perhaps one of the few fields where I would have some degree of criticism to level. In short, a lot of the levels for side-quests and lesser missions (all of them interior maps) are simply clones and copies of one another. The layout and textures are basically all the same, with some minor changes in cluttering and what objects/containers/computers are lying around. Thankfully, this seems confined to side missions and the main mission maps are all fully fleshed out and dynamic in their own ways, with challenging and well-thought out level design and plenty of atmosphere – few maps can conjure the same amount of awe as say, the Praesidium at the beginning, or dread such as Feros or Illium towards the end.

 

Where the game really shines though, are on the outdoor maps. I just can’t describe how fascinated I was when I first came across a planet I could land on, and I got the in-game cutscene where the Normandy air-drops the MAKO onto the planet. It was just so beautiful and exciting. And then there you are, on this huge map reminiscent of Battlefield 1942 or Unreal Tournament 2004 (which the game engine is based on, showing again what an awesome engine it is) and you have this whole open world to explore. Another thing I personally felt on these maps was that the sky made a huge impact on the feeling that this was a truly huge and wondrous world (and universe) because instead of having these grey, saturated, off-colour and boring sky ceilings you get on most other games (and unfortunately on ME2 for the most part) you really got these beautiful, awe-inspiring vistas, with skies and atmosphere changing depending on what kind of planet you were on. I particularly loved this volcanic, meteor-shower like planet with asteroids falling down from a burning heaven. That, and the “moon” or “Luna” map where you can see the earth. It was just so simple, and yet so beautiful. You could see into space, you could see the stars, you could see how all this – the map, the sky, the galaxy, was all connected. It really gave me a feeling of being there exploring, like a true sandbox style game, and it was a feeling that the “corridor” type maps of most games (and ME2/3 unfortunately) just doesn’t convey, and by corridor I mean say, an open world map set in a “canyon” or with mountains which conveniently don’t allow you to explore, things like that. You just lose so much of the feeling of being “out there” which I think was crucial to just how big ME made you feel the universe was. In three words, the game had a sense of wonder, scope and scale.

 

Granted, there wasn’t actually much to find on most of these maps. Every now and then you might bump into some minerals, or a merc base, or a thresher-maw or a group of vehicles/huts and possibly even a PDA and a sidequest, but none-the-less there was stuff out there if you wanted to explore, and for me at least, it just made finding stuff all the more exciting. I can’t imagine the countless hours I spent just wandering around in the MAKO looking for stuff. And I get it – some people *hated* the MAKO, but I just loved it. It was fast, it had thrusters, it ran over things, it got stuck in craters (rarely though!) and it was just a nice change of pace to have maps where you get to use it against harder enemies, like the Geth on Virmire or again on Ilos.

 

All in all, while a lot of the assets got re-used for indoor maps for side missions, I just can’t fault the rest of the level-design, which really compliments the scope and complexity of the game. Sadly, I feel this is one of the things I miss the most with the other two titles, which unfortunately do away with the open world maps and in fact, much of the “sandbox” feeling of exploration of ME1. In a way, this is perhaps one of the biggest casualties (together with other RPG elements) lost in the transition from ME as a purely RPG and open world game towards the more combat and story/character focused worlds of ME2/3. And as far as I’m concerned, they’re completely unnecessary and entirely avoidable losses.

 

 

Plot:

 

 

 

- Universe:

 

Without a doubt, I think the universe of Mass Effect has got to be one of the richest, most-in depth and personally, compelling sci-fi universes I’ve seen for a game in a very long time. There’s an incredible amount of detail, of thought and even plausibility to the ME world. Personally, I think it’s something I can connect to because, while it is sci-fi, for the most part, it’s still quite grounded in reality, or at least makes believing that a lot more plausible than most other sci-fi games. The signature phenomena from which the series takes its name for example, the “mass effect” has a surprisingly broad and useful range of functions when it is created through the release of dark energy released from element zero or ”eezo, the game’s “unobtanium”. When subjected to a positive electric current, it increases the mass of an object, while a negative current decreases it. The applications for this range from people exposed to dust-form eezo in utero developing telekinetic abilities (biotics), high-density construction materials, basically negating the effects of gravity and allowing cheap atmospheric entry and re-entry and perhaps most useful of all, faster-than-light travel. FTL travel with normal mass is impossible because at FTL speeds and faster, your mass effectively becomes infinite, which requires infinite force to propel. A good and quick blog explaining the properties of ME’s “Mass Effect” physics can be found here, and probably does a much better job of explaining it than I do. At any rate, further (and faster) FTL travel is made by the “Mass Relays” – mysterious alien constructs of unknown origin which facilitate inter-galactic travel by linking systems, all of which lead to the “citadel” – a gargantuan space station upon which the galactic government bases itself. “Mass Effect” is therefore the phenomena on which many of the game’s iconic features hinge upon (or rather, in future installations, hinged upon) like weapons utilising metal blocks as ammunitions which are sliced into tiny shards and propelled forwards

 

 The ME universe isn’t a dystopia, but it’s far from being a utopia either. If anything, the ME universe is in fact quite a grim one when you look at it, as is the entire story arc for the ME trilogy. Mistrust and racism is rampant, gang violence, poverty and even slavery still exist, as does disease and war, and quite a lot of the latter. In many ways, the only things that seem to have “developed” in the universe are advanced forms of technology and a loose and rather fragile galactic government with a sound economy and trade system, but accompanied by little ethical or social development. In a word, the ME universe is gritty. And personally, I like gritty, it’s a lot more realistic, reflective of the world we live in, and when paired with an engaging story and good characters, makes for an unforgettable RPG experience.

 

 

 - Story:

 

I felt particularly engaged by ME's story. Maybe its the inner archaeologist in me, or my love for astronomy, but I was strongly drawn in by the elements of exploration and delving into a past history and a hidden mystery. I really liked the "Prothean" angle and the whole cataclysmic extinctions that seem to be happening every so often. I like that, at the beginning of the game, it is merely hinted and foreshadowed at, and that a lot of the clues you find out about it are scattered on random planets that you explore. In fact, I found reading about planetary compositions and all that stuff really fascinating, because as I've already said, I have an interest in astronomy and to see all those beautifully rendered planets and to discover what they're made of and so forth really makes me wonder what our own, real universe is like. And then there were the little tidbits and so forth that made exploration interesting, like being able to land, or finding something about the planet's history.

 

And then, before you know it, you're embarking on an adventure to stop a rogue Spectre, though his ultimate goal remains illusive. To be fair, I pierced it quite quickly he was "acting as an agent" of someone, but the whole "Reaper" angle took me by surprise. The whole "Virmire" mission was really well handled, and I very much enjoyed the twist in the narrative. The hinting at and foreshadowing was there all along in the background, but I just didn't see it being that much of a story element. Like I said, I managed to shield myself from pretty much all ME spoilers in the time since it came out, so I didn't even know what a "Reaper" was. I also like the fact you're playing pretty big politics in the universe at large, how humans aren't the top dogs, and how we are, in fact, looked down upon. It is refreshing to see something like that. That, and that this futuristic universe, when it comes down to it, isn't all that futuristic, and that it is by no means a utopia. It is that backdrop that makes the universe so compelling and engaging, its something which I think you can relate to.

 

I was a little saddened by how short the main missions were. After maybe what... five planets or so, you're basically done. I very much liked the extra content and hods of sidemissions, in fact, that and the exploration probably made up 3/4 of my game alone, but I did feel when I took on a "Main Mission" that I wanted more. I really enjoyed Feros for example, with that weird and dark alien music, but I especially loved Ilos. It was just so dark and grim, it really made you appreciate the destruction the Reapers would be capable of unleashing upon the galaxy.

 

All in all, the ending delivered though, with the amazing cinematics and a challenging boss. I liked the scope of the decisions I had to make, and it felt rewarding, if a little too short. But as any first game is a shot in the dark, then ME msot definitely hit its target. I was hooked on the story from the start, and by the end of the game, I was just wanting more and more.

 

 

- Characters -

 

 

 

 

Characters were more of a mixed bag for me in Mass Effect. While I very much enjoyed the levels of customisation afforded, in terms of what they wear and what you can equip, I found it hard to actually empathise with some of the characters, which I thought were "forced" on the player far too soon. Garrus and Wrex for example, which you both gain at the Citadel within close timing of one another. I basically had no link whatsoever to these characters, and all of a sudden they just join my squad. I mean, Garrus wanted to help in the investigation, but that is quite a step towards him joining my crew. Likewise, Wrex went from "a mercenary we should meet" to "immediate crewmember" to the point I remembered the "join squad" window opening up and being at a loss at why that was the case.

 

So in terms of execution, I think that could have been handled better. I was immediately drawn to Ashley, Tali and Liara, and to a lesser extent Kaidan. Wrex and Garrus just never really "clicked" with me, for some reason. I think one of the factors was that, naturally, as a potential LI, Ashley and Liara were just far more developed as characters and had far more to say to me after each mission. I particularly liked Ashley's depth as a character - her motivation to suceed, her inherent mistrust of other races (not racism as some people would have it) and the fact she is a cynic and a poet. In fact, I found her mistrustful and cynical attitude far more appealing and "realistic" as a character than those where characters basically just unflailingly follow Shepard's command. It was also why I liked the confrontation with Wrex on Virmire, because it was something I immediately though - "Hey, wouldn't this Krogan have some issue with this?" and boy, did he take issue with it.

 

It was for these reasons I didn't much care for Liara as an LI, I found her a little too naive and "silly", or just far too girly. I was impressed by how they developed her character in M2 and ME3 though, and given the handling they gave Ash in ME3, I very much regretted not choosing her as an LI early on. Not Ash's fault, but the writers. But in terms of character dynamics, she was by far my favourite.

 

I also liked the bits in the elevators where the characters talked to each other. Seriously, I know some people hated it, but wow, you can't take like 10 seconds from your day to just wait for a screen to load? How is that any better than ME2 and ME3's waiting scenes, where you watch a bar loading? I far preferred staying on the elevator and listening to the ridiculous music, or hearing my squadmates interact with one another. I also loved how Garrus referenced that in ME3's "Citadel" DLC and reminisces about how much he misses those times.

 

All in all, I liked the characters, but some far more than others. I suppose it can be said to be one of ME's triumphs that, further on in the series, they really make most of the characters grow on you and that is one of the testaments to the quality of the franchise in general.

 

 

Graphics:

 

 

 

 

 

Given how dated the engine was even by the day's standards, I was really quite impressed by the quality of what the game had to offer in the visual department. It wasn't so much that every texture was mindstaggeringly HD or that the game had the best light, smoke and water effect I'd ever seen, but that the game compellingly renders entire worlds, from vast outdoor spaces down to small, seedy bars, with a high degree of graphical fidelity.

 

I mean, the outdoor maps were just amazing. In fact, I believe they constitute the best of the entire series. The terrain, atmosphere, the sky and the planets, stars and moons orbiting wherever you are, they are some of the best I've ever seen in a video game. Nothing quite like compares landing on an alien planet and being greeted by those buffeting windstorms, or a sky filled with falling meteors, or looking up into space on a moon without an atmosphere and just seeing the stars. Personally it was one of the most iconic part of the games for me, and something I will always remember fondly.

 

Elsewhere, the game manages to set a scene that matches the scope and complexity of the plot, like the sheer vastness of the Citadel (which again, people complained - boo hoo, it takes me too long to go from A to B!) - to those people I say, go read a book. No, the game looks beautiful, and I was even impressed by things like facial expressions, which I thought were done very well, even though Shepard seems to struggle whenever he smiles, which thankfully, isn't a lot. Another area which rightly deserves praise are the in game cinematics, which are done in such a way as to really draw the player in when an important part of the story unfolds. Likewise, the CGI cinematics are also a pleasure to watch, and really compliment the game.

 

 

Music & Sound Effects:

 

 

I really enjoyed this aspect of the game, more than I thought I would. Initially, some tracks stood out a little, such as the one that plays during certain parts of the Citadel, at C-Sec I think, which sounded a little futuristic, or retro-futuristic, more like. I suppose then I got used to it, and then I figured out one of the only reasons it really stands out is because it is one of the "happier" tracks to play in ME's universe.

 

The feel and atmosphere of the game is, for the most part, quite stark and gritty. Few places and few instances are legitimately "happy" or even upbeat, with one exception being air dropped by the Normandy on the MAKO, which I suppose made exploring all that more exciting.

 

Elsewhere though, the soundtracks are evocatively grim, such as the one that plays while you explore the Skyways of Feros, with a weird combination of what sounds like a bird singing in the background with a strange alien vibe. If anything, I found it instilled a sense of both wonder and worry perfectly. It really brings out the main missions. Likewise for Ilos, with its dark imagery and somber atmosphere, once more accompanied by a haunting and unsettling score. Then you have the series Iconic "Vigil" which manages to be beautiful, mysterious, creepy and soothing all in one it encapsulates what ME is all about in a single track.

 

All in all, top marks for music. The VA is also done perfectly, with convincing and emotive performances by pretty much all the cast involved. It definitely gives the game depth and adds to the immersion to hear everyone talking, and I found it was unusual to hear voices being re-used, which can be a particularly nasty plague in some RPG's. As for the general sound effects, I was quite happy with most of what I heard. Occasionally there was the odd audio glitch or a particular sound that sounded as if it was recorded at a far lower quality than the others, but these were few and far between.

 

 

Conclusion:

 

Mass Effect was one of those rare games that, almost as soon as I started playing it, I knew it was going to be one of the best games I'd ever played. Everything fit into place so perfectly. Usually, when I play a game, I'm looking at things to pick at, things to criticise, tear apart, etc. So when you finally find a game that manages to challenge you, to make you think and wonder, that makes you appreciate good writing and good music and really makes you engage with something, it's akin to finding a piece of art. Its about finding that something special that really enthralls you, amazes you, piques your curiosity and leaves you wanting for more. ME ticked all those boxes for me.

 

I enjoyed the combat (eventually), I liked the story, I liked the characters, I loved the universe, I loved how rich and detailed and dynamic it was, I liked my character customisation options, that I get to make my Shepard and not someone else's. I liked that I could rest safe in the knowledge that, for the most part, my choices in this game would be respected in the future ones. And most of all, I really, really, really enjoyed exploring, I just fell in love with the scope of the game, how it makes you feel there is an entire universe out there to be found and explored and lived and interacted with. No other game has done as much for me in that respect, and it is here that ME becomes unique for me. It is also what makes it so bittersweet that ME1 was the first and only game of the trilogy to explore that aspect, as ME2 and ME3 focus far more on the story and characterisation, really taking those elements into their own, but loosing the awe and wonder of ME1's "open universe".

 

All in all though, I can now safely say Mass Effect is easily and without a doubt my favourite sci-fi RPG. If anything, I so regret not having played it earlier. With the Mass Effect trilogy coming to an end, I am really looking forward to seeing what Bioware come up with what promises to be another exciting and engaging journey.

 

[ChancellorKremlin]

Reserved.

[ChancellorKremlin]

DISCLAIMER: This started off originally as a "Review" and eventually developed into much more than that. I've delved in depth into the plot, characters and ending segments, as far as coming up with my own set of endings to address where I felt the originals fell short. I also address the IT theory, and many other topics. It is long. I will not blame you if you choose to read segments of interest, or address specific points. Having said that, if you do read it all, I hope you like it.

 

"A complicated love affair"

 

 

 

 

 

First Impressions:

 

When I first started playing ME3, I have to say I didn't have my hopes too high. There was already the whole "ending" controversy, which as I've said before, I managed to isolate myself completely from and thus had no information other than that the ending apparently sucked quite hard. But besides that, I also remembered reading a somewhat illuminating gaming article on the web somewhere about how, in gaming franchises, the "third" title almost never lives up to expectations and the logic underlying this is pretty simple. The first title is always something of a "shot in the dark" because the assumption is developers never have anything prior to base their experience on. If it is a success, as ME can said to have been, they can then capitalise on that success and more-over, see what the flaws and criticisms of the first installment were and work to improve them. Because of this, there is usually (but not always) a huge jump in quality between the 1st and 2nd title. However, by the 2nd title, the devs more or less already have a "modus operandi" of what works and what doesn't, and sticking to the norm and the established becomes the way to go. As a result of this, the "jump" between 2 and 3 will never be as significant as the jump from 1 to 2, and so people are bound to be disappointed. In many ways then, you end up with a "2.5" product, rather than a full on 3. While this is theory, it is something that has stuck to me since I've read it. It's the reason, for example, that I'm cautiously optimistic about The Witcher 3, and will be cautiously optimistic when they decide to finally release Half Life 3, too. It has served me well in the past.

 

Furthermore, I try not to let myself be won over by the pre-release hype that publishers/devs always build up (and from what I've seen and read, a lot of players let themselves willingly be taken in by) and in this case, because I'm playing the game so late, I wasn't exposed to any of that. None of the promises, only a cinematic or other. If we add to this the fact I wasn't overly impressed by ME2, and that I was in fact, expecting "more of the same" then its fair to say that, when I began playing ME3, my expectations weren't overly high. I was hoping to be "pleasantly surprised" as they say. And in time, I was.

 

Anyway, to the first impressions. I was a little underwhelmed by the introduction. In fact, I was confused. I say this because the only video/cinematic I saw before playing ME3 was Malukah's excellent "Reignite" tribute video, which I would seriously recommend because it is such a damn good good song. In any case, there are a number of awesome cinematics embedded in it, from the "Take Back Earth" trailer, so before I started playing the game, I held two assumptions. That those cinematics (with the little girl playing in the fields and the Reaper darkening the sky, London burning, the attack, the awesome return with Shepard and Ashley battling the husks with Makos/Hammerheads, etc) - I thought those cinematics were actually going to feature in the game, rather than just be used as a trailer. If anything, I thought the "extended cut DLC" would have added them in. The second was that, obviously earth is invaded, but I thought this happened towards the end of the game. Whatever happened to me disrupting the Reaper's plans (twice now) first at ME1 with the Citadel conduit to dark space, and then with ME2 and the "Arrival DLC" - wasn't the point of both those missions to force the Reapers to return from Dark Space the hard way?

 

So I was very surprised that first, the intro to ME3 was both a little lackluster, and that the invasion happened anyway. I seriously questioned the point of what I had achieved in the past titles, I mean, it was like what... a few weeks to a few months between ME2 and ME3? You're telling me I killed 300,000 people for that? So that was surprising, and as I said, I was very disappointed (or misled) into thinking I was going to be treated to a really cool cinematic at the beginning only not to be. (This becomes even more disappointing when you realise none of those cinematics actually reflect the game, more on this later...)

 

The one saving grace of that segment, personally, were some of the effects (like the lighting and the general atmosphere with the huge reapers in the background and that Frigate getting destroyed and exploding in the air) and the scene where Shepard evacuates and the two shuttles get blown up, when "Leaving Earth" starts playing on the piano and you know all is lost, with the debris falling down in flames towards earth and leading to the start menu. Now that was an awesome, emotive culmination to what was otherwise a rather abrupt and flat-feeling sequence.

 

 

 

Gameplay:

 

 

 

- Combat:

 

I didn't immediately notice much of a change in this department from ME2 to ME3. The game mechanics remain pretty much the same, with some tweaking and slight improvements. The cover system now works slightly better (even though I am still constantly getting stuck or blown up by grenades trying to disengage from cover) but I did notice that combat was both shorter and brutal, which I feel makes for a much more satisfying and realistic experience. I hated coming into those rooms in ME2 with "cover objects" liberally scattered about (and they were pretty obvious in ME2) and thinking "oh goody, I'm going to spend the next 10-15 minutes here, bogged down behind cover and fighting waves of enemies" so I was happy to see that wasn't so much the case in ME3, with there being few occasions where enemies "respawn" and the crazy long firefight scenes being more spaced apart than they were in ME2. I also welcomed the fact the annoying "minor bosses" of ME2 (like the constant, never ending Mechs) and gunships have become much rarer. They are still there, and very much in the position of "bosses" but nowhere near as often as they were in ME2, prolonging the firefights unnecessarily in a repetitive cycle.

 

Guns also handle a lot better, with accuracy and recoil handling better (Compared to the first two installments) and differing more between guns. I also liked the re-introduction of ammo-less weapons, like the particle beam or M7 Lancer, even though you *have* to get the DLC's to acquire them, which I thought was a really underhanded way of getting back at the number of players who, like myself, hated the transition from weapons with cool-down periods to weapons with ammo. On that front at least, ammo is much more common, and many weapons have much higher magazines, which when coupled with how much faster combat flows, means you don't exhaust all your ammo in a single firefight and have to resort to melee or running from cover to cover to acquire ammo clips as some people had to do in ME2.

 

In most other ways, combat is virtually identical to ME2 with only a slight shift in quality and tempo, both for the better. The combat portion of the "game" has however, unfortunately in my opinion, become a purely third person shooter with little semblance to an RPG. Skills and levelling up are purely combat-related traits now, and any other game-changing effects (like paragon and influence) are only obtainable in the non-combat sections, permanently separating the two, and ensuring skills and leveling will have no effect whatsoever outside of combat. In short, the one element of "role playing" present in the game are the myriad of choices available to the player and the "moral paths" the player can follow. That being said, the sheer scope and breadth of different choices and consequences the player makes and lives through between the three games does a damn good job of allowing you to "role play" even if some of the more basic (if integral) elements of RPG gaming are long gone. RPG purists may be offended, but if your looking for exciting combat, with an additional focus on story, characterisation, plot and immersion, then ME3 delivers, combat "streamlining" notwithstanding.

 

 

- Enemies:

 

The enemies of ME3 have basically been reduced to two factions - the James Bond-esque evil villain Cerberus organisation and the series' ubiquitous "Reapers". In many ways, though the number of factions you're opposing has decreased dramatically (from ME2's Blue Suns and all the other Mercs) I feel the actual number and "quality" of the enemies you end up facing has increased markedly. The Mercs in ME2 were all the same sort of enemy with different names, and on harder levels, an engineer/biotic/commander type enemy got introduced. But at the end of the day, with Mechs (both the Mecha type and the stupid robots) they were roughly who you faced 2/3 of the game, with the Collectors, the main antagonists, being notoriously absent for most of the game.

 

The scale is now closer to 50/50 regarding Cerberus and the Reapers, though the difference in enemies presented makes for much more interesting gameplay. The AI now advances much more willingly towards you (instead of always being content in staying behind cover) and quite frequently flanks you too. Enemy grenades are always present and always forcing you to relocate and pay close attention to your surroundings. In large numbers, even troopers pose a sufficient threat if a handful decide to pin you down with suppressing fire while another group flanks you. Cerberus also now makes use of riot-shield guardians which slowly but surely advance towards you, snipers (which are appropriately deadly) and even cloaked "phantoms" in addition to their hardened "Centurions" and the occasional "Atlas" Mech.

 

I was a bit surprised by the "Reapers" conducting war the old dirty way though, with ground troops and methodically having to conquer districts, cities, countries and planets. It somewhat takes away from their monolithic titanic-like entities that just mow everything down from kilometers away. Like Ashley says in the first game, what good is her rifle against Sovereign, or the "Reapers"? When you're first introduced to "Reapers" they are these huge gargantuan spaceship/creatures, not a "Faction" with gargantuan like spaceships. Even the "Collectors" weren't "Reapers" but more like a cast aside subservient race. So when you start playing and oh, actually, it turns out Reapers employ ground troops and frigates (destroyers) and air support (harvesters) and all that just like the rest of us, I felt like some of the mystique was lost. I suppose there was no real way you'd be able to fight a "war" just against Reapers, and that two of the most pivotal moments of ME3 are pivotal precisely because you're almost single handedly (at least on one occasion) taking one down, and the sense of scale and "against the odds" returns, but that you could not realistically base a game on that alone.

 

The "Reaper" enemies are diverse enough, and on higher difficulties, quite deadly, especially the Harvesters, Ravagers and Brutes, which force you to constantly stay under cover, seek new cover and shift your fire away before they close in. In sufficient numbers, I found "Reapers" made the most deadly enemies. On Insanity, don't even get me started when "Banshees" start pouring in. They were not only deadly and annoying to kill, but legitimately quite freaky too, which adds to the nature of the "Reapers" and which I found fitting. Once more however, I still miss the "real" biotic attacks of ME1, which could seriously screw up your day even against lower enemies.

 

All in all, while I think the enemies of ME3 have been "streamlined" I do believe the quality of what you encounter on the field has markedly increased, in terms of AI, challenge, and just legitimate fun.

 

 

- Level Design:

 

I've made peace with the fact that the huge maps of ME1 have gone, never to return. Occasionally you are treated to a large vista or a map that simulates being large, but its still just corridors throughout. Still, there is an improvement in the scale of these "corridors" compared to ME2, with maps being significantly larger, both horizontally and vertically. All the levels feel more or less unique and different from one another, with the "Priority" missions taking center-stage in terms of design and graphical appeal. Tuchanka, Rannoch and even the Geth "Matrix" in the fighter mission serve to impart a particular sense of awe and wonder, and the former two especially given the emotional overtones that accompany them - Tali for example really brings "Rannoch" to life, which is all together another reason to keep her alive in ME2. Some of the maps in the "Leviathan" DLC were also pretty interesting, especially the underwater visuals, which sadly didn't last long. Likewise, the Citadel returns in all its glory, far grander and more interesting than it was in ME2, even if it seems the "Praesidium" of ME1 looks to be unsurpassed in conveying a sense of majesty and splendour. The "endgame" level on the Citadel/Crucible I actually quite enjoyed (in terms of aesthetic design) despite its inherent simplicity.

 

As I've said, having seen Malukah's and "Take Back Earth's" videos, I was really expecting some sort of "big return" to Earth where I've amassed the might of the galaxy behind me (war assets) and unleash the combined fury of the countless nations and species I've united under my banner against the blight of the reapers... which is why I was very, very disappointed that none of that matters on the field in the end. I'm "treated" to a generic, "destroyed city" rubble map, with vehicles making a cameo I just know aren't going to go anywhere and are going to be destroyed in the next few seconds... I was like "This is it?" This is the big assault? Needless to say I was disappointed. You don't get to see any of the many clans, mercenaries, planets, conglomerates, organisations, flotillas or anybody else you supported coming in to help you. No huge war map with tanks and IFV's and air support and just huge guns firing up everywhere. I mean, you don't need an ME1 map to convey something like that. Does anybody remember the original Call of Duty? Some of those single player maps were spectacular, and you really got the feeling you were fighting a war and not just a minor skirmish.

 

But no, it's just more mindless shooting through rubble corridors, with nothing even remotely reflecting the scale and awesomeness of the video. Given some of the "other" more extraordinary promises Bioware/EA made before releasing the game, I can see why a lot of people were disappointed by the end and the events leading up to it.

 

 

- Misc Gameplay Elements:

 

-- Planetary Scanner & Exploration --

 

While I will forever mourn the passing of the actual planetary exploration of ME1, I'm glad they did away with ME2's "planetary scanner" mini-game, if you could call it that, more like a mini-chore if anything. At first I thought ooh, this is interesting, its actually like scanning a planet. Then I realised that, actually, scanning planets probably isn't very fun. And it wasn't. Perhaps more annoyingly is the fact that now, not every system has anything in it for you to scan, but the galaxy map bizarrely doesn't tell you that. It does when you've scanned everything on a system (and cluster) that has (topping it up to 100%) but on some systems you'll never know if you just haven't found anything or if there's nothing to find if you don't look it up outside the game, which is slightly immersion breaking. That, and for some reason, explored planets don't maintain their names on it, so you're constantly having to travel to planets just to see if its the planet you're looking for, if for whatever reason your codex or journal doesn't tell you it. It seems like such an illogical back step from the system on ME2 where planets became charted with their names on each system when they were explored and made navigation so much easier.

 

So on that note, while the "planetary scanner" process has been simplified, actual navigation has become needlessly burdensome.The irony, of course, is that a lot of the stuff your scanning for ("war assets" most of the time) has a ridiculously negligible and at times nonsensical effect on the ending(s).

 

 

-- War Assets --

 

In fact, the entire idea behind the "war assets" seems flawed to me. The only way I could see them playing the role they are supposed to is if we ended up with some big debacle over and on earth, but preferably "on earth" where you see the full scale of all your resources put to use. But you don't, not even on the battle over earth. All you end up with are changes as to how the ending progresses, like if the crucible is damaged or not, and how each ending unfolds, and (spoiler on possible character deaths ahead) if your followers are zapped by Harbinger's beam on the run towards the conduit. I mean... what? Why would "effective military ratings" and galactic readiness have any impact whatsoever on those two individuals? It just doesn't make sense.

 

I mean, compare to ME2, where if you failed to upgrade shields, weapons and armour for the Normandy SR2, you'd pay for that in the Suicide Mission with hull breaches, explosive decompressions, being outgunned, etc - all resulting in the loss of squadmates. That makes sense given the context of what you're asked to do, which is prepare as much as possible for the final battle. Likewise, if you take too long to rescue your crew, they start dying off. That presents a dynamic, compelling and believable mechanic towards keeping your followers alive. Whether you got the Shadow Broker's Wet Squad or the SSV Nairobi for the final battle should make no difference whatsoever as to whether that laser zaps your squadmates or not.

 

 

-- Multiplayer Required for 100% "Galactic Readiness" --

 

And don't get me started with the fact that, originally (pre Extended Cut DLC) you could *not* get the highest possible Effective Military Strength (EMS) without playing online. I mean.... making the "best" possible ending compulsory on having to go online and play... I'll just say it the one way I can, but WTF is that? Under no circumstances should a player be forced to play online if he doesn't want to. In fact, I've never understood this constant need to forcefully include multiplayer components into games that just don't need them. Unreal Tournament? Always a multiplayer game, likewise say Quake III, or (eventually) CoD. But ME? ME has *always* been about the single player experience. Why the fuck would they screw that up and force a player to go online to acquire assets to complete a single player campaign? It's just insulting and insensitive to say the least. Its a cheap gimmick coming to us from a world where being "connected" and "sharing" and just being in each other's businesses twenty four seven, seven days a week appears to be the way of things. Took a dump? Tweet about it! Saw a hobo on the street? BOOK IT ON YOUR FACE! Want to complete this game? Only with the thousands of other playing it!

 

No. Okay? No. Just stop it right there.

 

Thankfully, the world being as it is, there are ways around that and you can edit the game files to just "skip" that requirement, giving you a full 100% readiness rating (which you still can't achieve even with the EC DLC or modifying the game files) and allowing you to make use of all your military assets. Not that those matter much, but still. It's just bad practice and something that should be nipped in the bud.

 

 

-- User Interface & Inventory --

 

In this regard, I was unsurprised and disappointed to see very little had changed from ME2. While I found there was a greater variety of weaponry, each with its own perks and traits and a myriad of weapon mods (more closely resembling ME1, which I liked) unfortunately the generic and unintuitive UI system for arming and modifying these weapons leaves you at a loss as to how a certain weapon compares to another, which is really disappointing. The player is forced to constantly shift back and forth between weapons and mods to gauge effectiveness, which is shown in bars rather than say, numbers which are far easier to memorise. It doesn't seem like a panel which shows the selected weapons vs whatever other weapon you happen to be browsing (like in ME1) would be too much to ask for, but apparently it is.

 

And while I very much welcomed the ability to customise my own armour (even if a lot of it was through DLC and pre-order gimmicking) I still found there to be a disappointing shortage of armours in the game, at least compared to the first title. And again, while I welcome the ability to change my followers clothing to slightly different apparels, I would have preferred to armour them as I see fit. This is yet another "RPG element" which I believe to have been needlessly thrown away. What really irked me though was that, after acquiring nearly all the armours available in ME2, I found they were still pretty much the only armours available in ME3 as well, with only the odd different one here and there, but the clincher was that I had to repurchase all of them again for 50,000 credits each, even though I already had them in the first place! If it had at least been a whole new set of armours, then fair enough, but to bankrupt me of like 250,000 through the course of the game for something I shouldn't have to pay for... again was really annoying to say the least.

 

I also found it very strange that so many of the "extra" armours were all Cerberus one's, but not even devoid of their original markings or colours. Given the "shift" you experience from ME2 to ME3 regarding your allegiance to them, it seems really bizarre that that's not the first thing you'd change in a set of armour belonging to them, especially as you go around shooting them up pretty frequently, and at one point your own squadmate calls you out for working for them. It would be fun if during the "stand-off" between you and Ash, your armour (whether Cerberus or not) influenced that dialogue, or made it harder to convince her. It certainly would have made Udina's claims a lot more believable. "I mean look at him!" is all he'd have to say.

 

 

-- The Damned 50 Save Limit --

 

Quite why they didn't bother to fix this for the PC version after ME2 (which suffered from the same problem) is beyond me. What I find strange is that the ME saves aren't even large (compared to other games), I mean, a single save of mine is about 200kb or so? TW II and FNV's are about 5-10mb per save. So its not like the saves are large by any calculation. In ME2, simply using ME explorer and changing a hex flag would allow you to save as many times as possible, and apparently on ME3 this was also the case, though I could not get it to work for me. But if its something that can simply be changed through a hex value, why was this not added to the PC version?

 

And no, I don't care if you only need three saves. The world doesn't revolve around you. Sometimes I like to replay conversations differently, or save before major missions to replay them later, or I like to save before pivotal moments or cutscenes. You'd think I wouldn't have to explain myself about this, but the sheer amount of idiots I've seen on the net questioning why this is an issue just makes my blood boil, especially given how easy of a fix it is to apparently implement on the dev's side.

 

Anyway, moving on...

 

 

 

 

Graphics:

 

 

 

One of the first things I noticed when I began playing ME3 was how unequal textures could be from one another. On the one hand, you have things like Ashley's uniform/suit thing, which is really well done and looks good, and then on the other, you have Udina's "admiral" garb which was ridiculously pixelated. Hands are another example, especially during cutscenes - a lot of them were just plain terrible, and really detracted from a few cinematic moments. This trend seemed to repeat itself throughout the game even on the highest settings, and it was something I found puzzling to say the least, because only a handful of textures stuck out, but when they did they did so like sore thumbs. This became particularly problematic towards the end, where a lot of textures became re-used, sometimes to disturbing effect, like having the "rubble" near the Conduit be made up of Ashley/Kaidan body textures, or the Mako's wheels making the inside of the Citadel, all on the last level. A lot of people see this as evidence of the "Indoctrination Theory", that is, that Shepard is basically hallucinating the end-sequence. More prosaically, I favour a more realistic and "Occam's Razor" approach - the evidence that the ending was rushed is overwhelming - and re-utilising textures is to me, just another sign of that.

 

Besides that though, the game's graphical fidelity is enough to carry itself. It's not by any means the most amazing graphical experience I've had this year, but then again, as I've said countless times before, it need not be. Graphics alone don't carry a game, but the game does pack a punch where it counts. Even with textures, if you're playing on the PC version as I am you are free to install a HD texture mod which will patch those problems right out as I did. But when it comes to lighting and just the general atmosphere and gritty feel of the ME universe (with the signature blue lens effect) your left with a stunning, beautiful and stirring range of visuals which compliments the excellent story-telling aspects of the game perfectly.

 

Tuchanka, for example, with its Krogan pyramids and ancient, dark (and I mean dark!) crypts, and its limitless, desolate and barren nuclear landscape, culminating in that epic fight, or whether its on Rannoch with those beautiful oceans and canyons, and that lovely setting sun, with Tali visualising where her home will be. And again, the "Boss" fight... the visuals really deliver when it comes to immersing the player into the rich and dynamic worlds of the ME universe. Even the conversation cut scenes are done really well and manage to give depth to a character's reactions and emotions even though facial expressions are fairly basic in nature (Shepard smiling for example). In spite of this drawback, the different shots and angles are all very well done (Miranda's ass can testify to that!) and the actual cinematics in the game are also of top-notch quality and really serve to ramp up the tempo between missions. If only the cinematics from the trailer got included in there too!

 

All in all, the dated nature of the graphics in no way affected my immersion into the story. Rather, I found that given the drawbacks, the devs have managed to make the most of a relatively limited and ageing engine which delivers where it counts and actually performs really well even on high settings with extensive graphical mods and numerous enemies fighting simultaneously. Without a doubt one of the better sides of porting a console game to the PC? Playing at 120 FPS constant.

 

 

DLC:

 

 

If you ignore all the promotional DLC crap and extra gun here and extra armour there and all that nonsense that has become the bread and butter of any EA release, the actual DLC's released that adds single player content beyond the purely cosmetic is, for the most part, of generally good quality. Out of principle, I have a strong dislike of DLC's and I'm personally against the model, I believe if its content, put it in the game before release.

There is, however, one DLC (Citadel) which I actually think is far more suited to being an "extra" and available on a 2nd playthrough rather than being included in the game outright because of its jovial tone and nature which doesn't fit with the darker ME tone.

 

The first DLC I played was "From Ashes" where you encounter Javik, the last remaining Prothean. I actually really enjoyed it, because it added a new character and he adds a lot of depth to the ME world regarding the Reapers, the Protheans and in character interactions. The mission to acquire him is pretty short, but its his nature as a follower which makes it worth it. I did struggle to get over his "accent" initially, because all I saw after first hearing him was a black Nigerian/Ghanaian man under that character. This isn't out of any racial bias, only that his accent is very distinctive, and it takes getting used to. However, it eventually becomes very fitting of his "alien" character (its not an accent you hear every day - no idea how people got "Jamaican" from him) and I found his personality a nice counter-balance to everybody who is always praising Shepard. Like Ashley, he's always questioning things and in a lot of ways he's a bit of a jerk through circumstance, though totally understandable given what he's been through.

 

He also has some fairly interesting interactions with Liara, and makes quite the party guest in the Citadel DLC.

 

I then played "Leviathan" which I also enjoyed because, for the most part, it was a sort of "murder mystery" setup, which was a nice change of pace you can just pick up between missions and gives you some padding between the major missions and some of the less interesting N7 sidequests. I suppose it also forced me to use EDI along as a companion, which I rarely ever did, and it was quite pleasant. I enjoyed the new maps, especially the water-world one at the end, and the visuals were pretty stunning. As for the actual "Leviathan" itself, well, yeah. I'm going to make a major point of this later, but I'm not a fan of novels/films/games/media that "explains" stuff just because it almost always inevitably does not live up to what you imagine, and you're left with a "so that's it" sort of feeling. It basically explains the origins of the Reapers. Personally, I would have rather not known. I like the mystery, in fact, I prefer it. You've played the games - the "Reaper" story and motivations just don't make any sort of sense. Wouldn't you have preferred to just not know what they were about? I certainly would. I would have liked it if Harbinger kept his promise in ME2 that they are simply beyond our comprehension. So while I appreciate the foreshadowing with the Leviathans and a little bit of back story to the mythology, I do think some parts of the ME mythology should remain mysteries.

 

Moving on to "Omega", as briefly as I can, it just reminded me far too much of ME2, and not in a good way. It was just one long slog through a Cerberus infested space station, one fire-fight after the next, four hours and hours and hours. In sum, it was boring as hell. If we'd at least get extra content after the DLC was finished, like being able to visit Omega, having extra shops, new arms, armour, side-quests, or anything remotely resembling the Omega from ME2, I would have been happy. But no, once you've finished it, that's it. You get a few fleets for your war assets, and sadly, that mechanics is pretty useless, really.

 

Now, I know the "Citadel" DLC has met with varied responses. I actually have to say, I really, really enjoyed it. True, the "tone" of it just doesn't "fit" with the dark, grim ME universe, and for once, I think its the only piece of content that should not have been originally included in the game. You should definitely play it during a 2nd playthrough, or at the very least after finishing the game. Because fundamentally, Citadel is light hearted, and is all about seeing the humorous and funnier side of your companions when they are exposed to situations they haven't likely been able to enjoy during the last three years, like a party, or going out, or just hanging out with Shepard when he's off-duty. A lot of it is genuinely very touching though, like when you invite Liara over and she just works at your apartment and plays the piano, or discussing presents with EDI. It's definitely a chance to bond with the game's many colourful characters. And while I would say the DLC is worth it for the "party" alone, the lead in mission is actually pretty entertaining in and of itself (with a rather challenging boss(es) ) and what is somewhat ironic, has a far better "end sequence" than the actual game's, where you are in a situation which resembles ME2's suicide mission a lot more - with the whole squad together and an actual boss enemy to fight, rather than the disappointing "final mission" of the game. One person even came up with a theory that the "Citadel" DLC is actually a post-game DLC and that you're basically in heaven, in a subset of the "Indoctrination Theory" theory, hinting at various words and imagery used in the DLC. While I don't believe in the theory, it would be nice - being together with your friends forever, throwing parties, getting to know each a little better, shooting things in the range, living off the royalties and drinking at the bar, just like Garrus said it would be.

 

It's by far the most fleshed out DLC, with new weapons, armour, a ton of extra content which can you access whenever you want and between missions, even if it is goofy in nature. Personally, I found it funny, challenging, entertaining, moving and long, and what else could you ask for from a DLC?

 

 

 

 

Music & Sound Effects:

 

 

More so than ME2, I think ME3 music (much like the original ME) really brings out the scope and magnitude of what you're trying to achieve, and exactly the odds you're fighting against. I've always been a firm believer that a good soundtrack is essential to a good title - I can't think of a single game or movie that I've thought, wow, that was a great game/movie that didn't have a memorable soundtrack to go with it. The right piece of music at the right moment, whether it be in the midst of a fight or that slow, tense buildup, or the culmination of an emotional moment... to me, it makes or breaks a game. A moving scene that doesn't have the score to go with it quite often falls flat, much like a joke that is good but just is told by that one person who inexplicably can't tell jokes. You know who they are.

 

Which is why, when that Reaper at the beginning starts shooting down the transports and Clint Mansell's "Leaving Earth Starts" playing, and Shepard winces, its not the animation that carries the scene, its not the actual emotional distress of the scene itself, or just the score. Its the synergy created by all three that really draws out the awful reality of what is going on and the pain that accompanies it. Using a heavier, distorted version of that same song during the dream sequences to illustrate Shepard's trauma and his feelings of helplessness at not being able to stop such senseless loss of life - that was just genius which sent shivers down my spine. Likewise for Priority Tuchanka, with "A Future For The Krogan" - you just knew that mission was going to be epic, and it was just one of the most intense and emotionally gripping levels in the ME universe. The end, when the song played against as a certain someone did what he had to do... it was so, so sad, But so inspiring, so moving, and that's down to just how amazing that track goes for that particular moment. ME3 is literally littered (oh no he didn't!) with moments such as these - Grunt's stand, the stand-off with Ashley, the fall of Thessia, the end itself (yes even the end) all made all the more poignant and moving by the excellent music that accompanies them.

 

In the sound effects department, no complaints either. Hearing a Reaper fire his main gun with surround sound speakers and the bass turned up - nothing quite like it. All in all, ME3's music and sound effects really do a great job of conveying the immensity of the decisions you're making and the sheer intensity and grim reality of the battles you're fighting. It is perhaps, with a few good contenders from ME1, probably the best soundtrack of the entire franchise.

 

 

Plot:

 

And now, fair maidens and pirates, we come to the real colossus of the ME universe, the story and its characters. I don't think there is really any room for discussion when it comes to saying that Mass Effect's intricate story line and well developed characters form the backbone of the series' success. I mean, we all love the expansive, beautiful, grim and utterly engaging universe of Mass Effect. We've come to love the people who make this world what it is, some more than others, but ME would just not be the same without them.

 

So on that note, how does ME3 compare to the other titles? Personally, and the ending aside, which I am going to do a separate section for, I think ME3 is by far one of the best games I've ever played when it comes down to character development and story. You can feel free to disagree with me on this, there are just so many angles to cover and so many things to consider, that I will do my best below to explain why I think this is the case.

 

For starters, ME3 reintroduces the cosmic scope of events that made ME1's story so resonant. The "big" decisions have returned. In ME1, you were saving the galaxy from an existential threat. In ME2, you were saving human colonies whilst working for a Nazi-like organization, and preventing the Collector threat (again, pretty much simply against humans) and the creation of a "human reaper" which again, is just one reaper, which as we know in the grand scheme of things, is nothing. The only thing of note you did in ME2 was kill 300,000 batarians in "Arrival" to stall the Reapers and even that didn't seem to do much good.

 

All in all, ME2 was a holiday, and your choices were all pretty much inconsequential to the galaxy at large. The only choices that were important, that really mattered, were those you made with your squad mates. ME1 was about the galaxy, but ME2 was about you, and those who still had the faith to follow you, and how you developed them from there, if they survived.

 

ME3 brings both those aspects back in an epic fusion of story-telling and camaraderie that spans an inter-galactic war in which the stakes are survival and the extinction of every space faring civilization in the galaxy in a cycle that has been going on for at least one billion years. Those are the stakes! Admittedly, the transition isn't seamless - there are a lot of angles and plot devices which were either poorly brought over from other titles, or not at all. As I've said before, plot wise, the ME2 "Arrival" DLC makes absolutely no difference whatsoever. I'd like to say "in the grand scheme of things" but it makes no difference "in the small scheme" of things either. You're left wondering what was the point of all that sacrifice, if all it took the reapers was like 6-8 weeks to return from Dark Space. Added to this is the fact that, actually, destroying the Collector base in ME2 or keeping it intact have virtually no effect whatsoever in the way ME3 unfolds. In fact, one counts for 10 more EMS than the other. Nothing big will change because of that. Similarly, saving the Rachni queen in ME1 or killing her make close to zero difference.

 

Unfortunately, for these "loose ends", EMS explains it all away. That's all those decisions count towards, or against. And if you accumulate enough EMS, none of it matters in the end, which is quite a sad turn of events, unfortunately. So there are plot casualties along the way, as of course I imagined there would be. Having said that though, the sheer complexity and dynamics of the plethora of different possibilities open regarding which characters survive ME1 and ME2 and you bring along to ME3 is staggering.

 

Cutscenes, dialogue and complete story-arcs are present for characters that may have died in ME1. The same applies for ME2, in fact, especially ME2. As it turns out, this does however work out as a double edged sword though, because so much of the emotional investment present in ME3 depends on certain characters still being alive. Quite a few of those awesome "scenes" I mentioned elsewhere in this review will probably not be the same without the same characters. Now, I've mentioned this before, but I feel it needs to be mentioned again - the freedom and sheer scale of choices and possibilities offered by the importing of save system, from the small decisions to the big ones, from ME1 to ME2 all the way to three, makes for a game which I feel is quite unlike any other in this regard. I feel Bioware deserve a lot of credit for this, because none of their games is really "water tight" as you can affect it through previous choices. Many of the characters you meet in ME3 and their reactions come from direct interactions you had with them prior, if you choose to import a save. Anyway, I digress. This is more about the plot "mechanics" than it is the plot, but I do feel it is an important point nonetheless and one that is too frequently overlooked in most reviews.

 

Anyway, we were talking about the "stakes" of the ME3 story. The big decisions are back. Now, we're brokering a truce between implacable enemies which have been at each others throats for centuries. We're finding out the causes of wars and how nothing is at it seems, and that perhaps, sometimes, the persecuted deserve their fate. We're putting the past behind us and moving forward as an inexorable enemy which cannot be reasoned or bargained with which threatens the existence of the entire galaxy, we're exploring the ruins of ancient civilizations that went before us and reviving their last living soldier - the very embodiment of vengeance and resurrection. We're curing the genophage, giving hope to billions across the galaxy, forging together an alliance so massive and powerful that as one it stands to stop the reapers and all they stand for. Even the endings themselves (with the "fixed" Extended Cut DLC) have massive repercussions for how the galaxy's fate unfolds.

 

In sum, the weight of your decisions and the scope and scale of what you're doing in ME3 dwarfs even what you do and accomplish in ME1. Entire species hang in the balance, and their own extinction is something you have direct control of. This is what I loved about ME1, that you had to decide humanity's place in the galactic community, that the stakes were high, that the sacrifices you made and the battles you fought were for something. And boy, does ME3 bring that back. Sacrifices will be made, and the odds have never been higher.

 

If there are two things which I feel, are the essence of Mass Effect, the main themes so to speak, they are hope and sacrifice. That, to me, is the embodiment of everything that makes ME great, and boy, does ME3 deliver on those fronts. There's a rumour on the interwebs that Shepard's red stripe running down the length of his shoulder-plate and arm on his N7 armour represents the blood he's had to shed to save the galaxy and to get where he/she is now. Personally, I find that fitting, because unless you made the "perfect" choices in ME1 and ME2, you have to lose a lot of people along the way, especially during the "Suicide Mission" in ME2. In ME3, you're going to lose people whether you like it or not, and that is, I believe, pretty much inevitable. It was also why I wasn't so emotionally devastated by the "fixed" EC ending - if you read between the lines, basically the whole of ME3 is leading up to that moment. I knew it was going to happen, in fact, I knew that's how it had to happen.

 

In any case, I've prattled on long enough about the "story" of ME3. Yes, I've not referenced anything specifically, because I gather at this point most of you have played the game, and for those of you that haven't, I don't want to spoil it for you. You're fighting the reapers and finding a way to save the galaxy, that pretty much covers it. Obviously, I can't talk about ME3's plot and story without referencing the ending, that would just be sacrilege now, wouldn't it? I'm coming to it, I just want to cover another thing which makes ME3 great, and that is the characters, and in particular, character interactions, which have seen a significant evolution from the previous two installments.

 

 

- Characters -

 

 

 

 

 

Right, well, where to begin. I think I'll start by saying, one of the things I think is amazing about ME3, is that they've made me like characters I previously didn't care for. Hell, by the time the game is coming to a close, I even care for characters I initially disliked. (I'm looking at you, Vega) I mean, I was never really big on Garrus Vakarian. Or Wrex for that matter, and they've been around since ME1. But as often is the case, things change, and in ME3 if there's one thing they've really nailed down to a T, its character development, I feel. You're given a chance to interact with these characters, to communicate, to hang out with them, and perhaps more interestingly, they hang out with each other. I mean, yeah, I know its scripted sequences between missions, but it goes so much further than ME2 did with it. For the most part, your crew members and squad mates are no longer static objects waiting to be interacted with, they move about between missions. They talk to each other, they interact with one another between and during missions, increasing the value of replayability. They don't all like each other, (Romance Tali in ME2 and try and get back with Ash in ME3 to see what I'm talking about) and even though you know they aren't actually "roaming" the ship, the illusion of it is still pretty damn good. It gives you a nice reason to roam the ship between missions, which further extends gameplay time, and it does actually make you care for the characters. The fact your followers also interact differently based on whom you bring onto missions and what exactly happens furthers the incentive to play the game again - to give a few examples, I'd recommend bringing Liara/Javik for the Thessia mission, and most definitely your love interest in the final mission, which I made the mistake of not doing the first time around. The dialogue and the scenes which follow from this are absolutely worth it.

 

As I've said before, there is somewhat of a double edged sword in Bioware's "redundant" approach to character deaths. Basically, it means that by far the best emotional moments you're likely to experience in ME3 absolutely depends on certain key characters being alive throughout ME1 and 2. Tuchanka will just not be the same without Wrex and Mordin, nor will Rannoch without Tali and Legion. You can more or less forget the "party" at the Citadel DLC if you've lost most ofreven half of your squad in ME2. And to be honest, I managed to bring them all to ME3 and experience it "as it was meant to be" I suppose, but I struggle to see how someone could truly enjoy ME3 if their "squad" parishes beforehand. Take Tali for example, who's accompanied you since ME1. Throughout the trilogy you've been through so much, and in ME2 you even have a chance to romance her. It's not obligatory, but her presence is pretty much required if you decide to choose on side over another during one particularly critical mission. Mission spoiler - on Rannoch, you're basically forced to choose between her and Legion, the Quarians and the Geth. If you don't have enough influence with her/the Quarians, she kills herself in one of the most poignant and moving scenes in video game history I've ever seen. Mind you, for me to feel that, I had to go through everything we'd been through ME1 and 2. That was the culmination of two game's worth of effort and well over a hundred hours of gameplay. Its even sadder if you're in a relationship with her, because she does it all the same. Galactic survival has just taken a very, very heavy toll.

 

That was the possible death of one major character. To say I was moved is an understatement. But to give you an idea of how characters come to mean so much to you in ME3, lets take Kelly Chambers as an example. The pretty flirting Yeoman from ME2. She was my secretary. I flirted with her, innocently enough, and she flirted back. We went on tons of dangerous missions aboard the Normandy. And then, she went through a traumatic ordeal in ME2, being kidnapped by the Collectors with the rest of the crew. But I saved her, together with all the rest of the crew, because I made the right choices, in the right order, and I got her back from that hell. She thanked me, and we flirted some more, and then she left because she said she couldn't serve on the Normandy anymore because of the nightmares she got. I meet her again in ME3, helping refugees tackle their own mental problems (she's a shrink of sorts) and I commended her. She asked me if she should continue helping the refugees or change identity because of her past association with Cerberus. I told her she didn't have to worry, because I was a spectre, and everybody valued her work with the refugees, and they needed her. Which was why I was shocked to hear later, from a generic NPC, that when the Citadel was attacked by Cerberus (before I knew they were turning up to be a James Bond-esque villainous organisation) they lined her up against a wall and shot her right between the eyes. THEY KILLED HER IN COLD BLOOD! And I remember hating everything about them for that. It was such an undignified way to die. It was like fighting your way through to hell to save an innocent life only to have her die on the way back to a flu. That honestly made me want to destroy an organisation in more ways than any other games have made me feel hatred in. She was such a minor, superfluous and irrelevant character, and yet, the things we'd been through... I hated myself for that oversight, for getting her killed, but it also made me think... wow, this game has just made me experience that hatred, that longing for vengeance, that feeling that I've failed a human being that does not exist. I had to take a step back then.

 

So you can imagine my pain when Kai Leng [spoiler ahead] put his sword through Thane and basically kills him. I was even more irate when it became very possible that he may in fact have killed Miranda too. At that point, I hated him, Cerberus and The Illusive Man more than I hated the Reapers. Thankfully, Miranda was still alive, and in that particular iteration, I didn't have a romance with her, but I still felt like she was one of mine, and I was going to be godamned if some bitch ass assassin was going to off her.

 

These are just some examples of the emotions that ME3 managed to conjure in me while I was playing the game. It was a hell of a lot more than I could care while playing ME1 and ME2, though I believe ME2 was necessary for me to foster those relationships in the first place. In many ways, it acted as a springboard for the relationships you have and develop in ME3. I was particularly impressed by how much Liara grew as a character. In ME1, I avoided her as a Romance because she seemed far too "young" and a little bit naive and silly, siding with Ash. But in the meantime, she becomes a Shadow-Broker and really evolves as a character. She gets meaner, more cynical, takes on real responsibilities, and really bonds with Shepard, even if you're not in a relationship with her. In ME3, you experience a lot of scenes with her where you really get to value her as a friend. She becomes a legitimately moving character, like when you talk to her on the Citadel, or she makes the time-capsule, or after the "Citadel" party.

 

What I also like about the quality of writing is that a lot of the real quality and grit of the game takes place during minor conversations, or at unexpected moments. For example, meeting Tali up at the Citadel and her whole story with the clerk, it was a totally inconsequential but beautiful scene which really brought out her growth as a character. Or Samara after the Monastery mission. Even EDI towards the end, asking if Shepard has anything he wishes to discuss about "flawed creator father figures" before the end. I found the dialogue was just right for the most part, being crisp, gritty and feeling real without being over dramatic or pretentious. EDI was in fact one of the characters whose writing I liked the most. I particularly liked her epiphany about the Reapers being "repulsive" and how she would defend her "humanity" to the death.

 

In a lot of ways, the characters in ME3 "grow on you". Liara is already somewhat loveable and just becomes all the more mature and likable, either as a companion or love interest. Wrex and Eve just become the sole hope for the Krogan and you thank the Gods they're both on your team. Joker continues to crack Jokes. EDI basically wrestles with the meaning of life and what it means to be a machine in more sophisticated and engaging ways than I've seen in feature length multi-million dollar films. It's a truly existential and philosophical discourse that I think I can say I'm proud has found its way into a video game aimed at casual gamers and young adults. You get that lovely chat with Doctor Chakwas and the old Turian brandy, and her own Chat with Engineer Adams and his remorse at not having joined you in ME2. You get the banter between engineer Daniels and Donnoley, and their eventual hookup. You get Miranda, and Jack, and Jacob, with all their human cares and menial existences. These aren't superheroes, these aren't gods, there human beings who just want to live through the next day, who just want to get on with their lives. You've got Mordin, quite possibly one of the best game characters ever written. You have Tali, with that cute accent and masked face, that sweet little girl you've been looking out for over three games. You have Vega, that jarheaded grunt whose huevos rancheros you come to love, and even Javik, that detestable Prothean, with his "primitives" and his superiority complex.

 

At the end of it, you have your crew, and they have you. ME is all about the journey, not the destination. Its about your struggle to unite all these various people, with their different races, their inherent prejudices, the very fabric of their being - whether they are organic or synthetic - among a myriad of other differences and bringing them together against a greater evil, a greater threat. And in the end, you come to love them, and they come to love you, and each other. And in itself, that is a triumph, and the way that transpires between all three games is perhaps one of the most beautiful things I've ever seen in the video game medium. In a lot of ways, the evil you're fighting almost becomes secondary to that struggle.

 

There are a few issues, unfortunately. For example, if Miranda is your LI imported from ME2, if she dies during the "Horizon" mission, Shepard's reaction is sadly lacking. Literally, all he says it "Damn it Miranda!" followed by "What's our status?" to one of his squad-mates. I found it oddly... terrible really, and I'm surprised nobody went over that scene with a fine comb. I was especially pissed off because aside from her being my LI, I really liked Miranda and I'm not just talking about her sweet juicy arse. Hmmn...

 

Likewise, the whole "Tali's Face" controversy. I mean... what were they thinking? What I found particularly strange about it though, is that they apparently put quite a lot of thought into it. This only makes the decision to go ahead and use a terribly photoshopped stock GETTY image even more puzzling. I mean, reading around interviews and publications and such, they apparently really debated whether her face should have been included at all, and whether to make her really alien and on a lot of levels, hideous so as to highlight her other features, like how beautiful I think she actually looks just in her suit, or her cute voice. Or, they wanted to maker her look pretty, sort of "girl next door" while still emphasizing alien characteristics, which I think, matches her personality perfectly. So for them to then just decide to take a stock photo of an ex Miss England with two minutes of photoshop touch up was not only bizarre and completely out of line with their previous caution, it was also a terribly missed opportunity at making the Quarians look like a unique an interesting race. Oh, they're just like Humans. Just like the Asari. And quite a few others, it could be argued. I for one, hope they never bring Tali back into any other games. I just don't want to think that behind that mask what we're given in that picture is canon, and that's what's lying behind it. Why... just... why? I'd rather never have seen her face.

 

And then... there is Ashley Willians. Or more specifically, Ashley Williams in  ME3.

 

I LOVED Ashley Williams. I just did. I loved her in ME1, because she was one of the most complex characters back then. In fact, she is one of the most complex characters full stop. People who level her as being racist and bigoted... well, they are not paying attention to her full character. She says on countless occasions how she despises the bigoted humans who show outright hostility towards aliens. She comes to consider Tali a "little sister" to her. In fact, she's pretty much the only character to give you consistent shit about working for Cerberus, the one and only bigoted/racist/Nazi organisation of the ME world. Everybody else just overlooks that like it never happened. But man... you never hear the end of it in ME3. As for people calling her a "catholic fundamentalist"... guys, have you ever even met a fundamentalist? Ashley Williams a fundamentalist? Are you friggin kiddin me? ARE YOU?

 

In any case... she was my love interest for ME1. In ME2, I played a "virtuous" playthrough, where I romanced no-one, event though I wanted the panties offa both Tali and Miranda. But I said to myself... no, I'm going to keep myself strong, even though she made it pretty clear on Horizon that she basically doesn't trust the player. The most heart-wrenching and moving part of that playthrough was, just before entering the Omega 4 relay, you in the commander's cabin, staring longingly at the picture of your love interest. To me, it was one of the most subtle yet most engaging romantic scenes I've seen in a game. Your love interest isn't even there, and yet, the silence and intensity of that moment would never be lost. Even though she's lost faith in you, is confused, and isn't with you, you still lover her. It was a beautiful and sad moment both.

 

Which is why in ME3, I wanted us to get back together so bad. I watched the "Take Back Earth" video from which the image for this review comes from, I saw us taking back earth together, and I just thought this was going to be our time. And how wrong I was. I mean... I get it. I get it that she is the only character that actually questions how human Shepard still is, and how he can still be trusted. I like that. I like the fact she's so scared that she lost me long ago and that this is some clone or cheap knock-off. And that I worked for the space-Nazis. Seriously, it is refreshing to see at least one character to question my motivations. And I love it that it has to be my main love interest.

 

But there comes a point where I feel she should have made a decision about that, and I have to say, it should have been long before the ending of ME3. In the first mission and prologue, she is still mistrustful, even though she outright corners you and asks you. She gets beaten to hell, and you rekindle your love interest in her when she is in the hospital by getting her a collection of her favourite poetry, in a really moving scene that is somewhat ruined by how ridiculously large they make her boobs compared to the size they were in ME1.

 

 

 

There is another shot where they do a "Miranda's Ass" thing and really take the piss zooming in during a really touching scene. Basically, it rendered the whole moment worthless. There was simply no need for that, and what would otherwise have been a really engaging moment was, to me, distracted by how unnecessarily they meddled in her physical appearance. In any case, there you can tell her she's the only one and you want to continue things, if you indeed stayed "loyal" to her in ME2. She then gets promoted to Spectre status, an attack on the Citadel occurs while you're away, and she's tasked with protecting the Councillors.

 

That. That right there, is the defining moment. The stand off. The moment when she pulls a gun on you because she suspects you might still be behind Cerberus and thus behind the attack and willing to kill the Councillors. That is a pivotal moment in the game where, if you can't convince her otherwise, you end up killing her. (Or one of your companions does.) It's a really tense, moving scene, but also one that has many things wrong with it. Thankfully, I manage to convince her otherwise, that I am with her, that I am no longer with Cerberus, and she puts her gun down. It's a scene that seems perfectly set up for if you happen to have either Garrus or Liara (or both) with you, you should be able to convince her by default. Neither would ever work for Cerberus, and neither would shoot Ashley in cold blood either. Strangely, Garrus does just that if you can't convince her, and I find that mighty strange, and even more of an "opportunity wasted" because later, given the circumstances, it seems like an excellent scenario to have some proper interpersonal conflict with him, like "How the hell could you have just shot her like that you fucking bastard!" type of conflict, but nope, all you just get a "It has to be done" speech. At the very least, the game could have realised if you are wearing "Cerberus" armour (another weird thing, why on earth would Shepard not bother to take off the colours and emblems of that organisation of his armour) - imagine that, if because you're wearing that, she doesn't believe you, or has a harder time believing you. Wouldn't that have been cool? But no.

 

The saddest part is what she actually says to you if you failed to convince her or convinced her but failed to take the paragon click (which saves her life). It is a really sad, tense moment where you realise you've just thrown away someone's life for nothing. This is compounded by the fact that, rather than Cerberus (or preferably, Kai Leng) coming out of the elevator as you said they would, it turns out to be C-Sec. Personally, I thought that would have made the perfect place for a Boss Battle, and for it to be proven once and for all that you're no longer with Cerberus. In any case, you manage to convince Ashley - maybe her Specter duties got to her head - and she joins your crew. You talk on the lift before she enters the Normandy, but not much else.

 

That's it.

 

Literally, that's the culmination of your romantic involvement right towards the end mission. Later, she asks you to join her for her sister's memorial service, which she asks you to do anyway, even if you are not romantically involved with her. Eventually, she asks you to meet her at a cafe where the two of you have a chance to express your love for one another once again. You do that. And once more, nothing happens. In that entire meantime between the stand-off and here, you've had a number of lovely chats and cutscenes with Garrus, Liara, Tali and quite possibly some of the other squadmates, only for her to just give you generic dialogue on the Normandy. In fact, her line after you re-express your love for her at the cafe is "Good to see you commander." - I'm sorry, but that just doesn't cut it. What the hell? We've been through so much in ME1, I loved you then, I loved you throughout all of ME2, I stayed loyal, and this is all I get in ME3? I was really heart-broken at this. I get that the writers and devs tried to keep her at a "safe distance" and make her a bit more mistrustful, but I feel they went a little too far, especially if you've been loyal to her during ME2, surely that should have made her a little more amiable? As it stands, it makes no difference whatsoever, and you end up having better "relationships" with your "friends" than you do with her, which I think is a travesty. There was so much I wanted to talk to her about, so much I wanted to tell her, to discuss, like we did in ME1 after every mission, or like I did with most of my squadmates in ME2 and even ME3. Sadly, she wasn't part of that.

 

This hilarious few seconds of footage captures the feeling you get perfectly. (Jump to 1:18 if it is being annoying.)

 

What killed it for me was when I found her in the lounge, curled up on the floor in the corner, because she'd "let her hair down" the previous night with Vega. I was like WTF, are you for real? I've been coming here after every single mission and you go and interact with HIM? Urgh... fuck him, and fuck his Huevo Rancheros. I was so miffed. It was so starkly in contrast with the zero interaction she, and she alone, gives you as a squadmate. You get more moments with Dr.Chakwas than her, and man, I lover the doctor, but she is not my LI. The icing on the cake was when, in the Citadel DLC, if she's not your LI, she ends up with Vega. I wanted to kill that guy then... but mostly, I wanted to kill her more. This isn't how romances are supposed to be.

 

And when she did finally become part of it all, at the end, well, by then I felt it was too little too late. Not for her, or by her, but by the writers and the people who'd made her this way. I was angry, and I felt betrayed. The look she gives Shepard in the "Take Back Earth" trailer implied a lot. It implied love, and that they'd been through a lot. Both in the past, and in ME3. But the sad truth was, we'd been through damn little since ME1, and I regret ed that. And it was now ME3, and it was the end. The feeling I got just as I evacuated her from the Conduit with my other squad mate ( and it was a really touching moment) - it was a feeling of love, but also a feeling of loss - I felt the way the devs/writers had handled this romance for me had more or less soured it. She'd always be the love of my life for this game, but it could have been handled better. Had it been Liara, given our previous interactions (which the devs pulled all the stops for in ME3) it would have probably made it a lot more fitting. As it was with Ashley, it was disappointing. The overarching problem with her, both as a character but especially more so as a LI, is that there is simply no catharsis whatsoever after the coup. While ME1 had you pandering back and forth to her, and where you really got to know her, ME3 lets her down in all the departments that made her special, while needlessly emphasising others (like her cleavage) and that just makes it all the more bittersweet.

 

At least it was the end. And boy, the things I have to say about the end....

 

 

The End:

 

 

 

I think the first thing I need to make clear here is that I played the "Extended Cut DLC" ending(s), which apparently "fixes" a lot of the "issues" present with the original endings. Truth be told, when I played them (and I did all three to be thorough) I struggled to understand what the original backlash was all about. So I investigated to see just what exactly was "wrong" with the original endings, and after doing some research I just have this to say. Wow. I mean... how did... why did... how... why did it ever get released in that form? I could and generally do agree with Bioware and the writers (just the two of them in this case, more on that later) that there is nothing inherently wrong with the original endings. But the execution of those endings just kills it. Totally kills it. I mean, I liked the endings themselves, but there was such a huge plot-hole in the delivery of those endings that yes, regardless of what you choose, the outcome was one and the same, and the complete lack of closure and some inexplicable happenings basically ruined the whole thing.

 

For the record, I do think the EC fixes most of those problems. Are the endings, as they stand post EC, good? That's up for debate. Does the Indoctrination theory make sense? I don't think so. But before we discuss any of this, I'd like to just bring your attention to a few things I'd like to discuss before we dig in to the "ending" proper,

 

 

- The Crucible:

 

 

OK, so right from the start, we basically all know this is going to be a deus ex machina weapon, right? Its fairly apparent that you can't defeat the Reapers through conventional warfare, and thus, something more "radical" is required. So you spend large parts of the game acquiring resources to build this weapon, which by the way, nobody is actually sure what it does. Doesn't that strike anyone as odd? That the Alliance and the galactic community in general are willing to throw away their money, resources and combined military efforts towards developing an artifact they have absolutely no idea what it will actually do? For all they know all it could do is ooze a planet sized ball of ice-cream with a sprinkle of smarties in the shape of a Reaper giving you the middle finger. I mean... what if that's how the Reapers have been winning every cycle (and there have been a lot of them, apparently) by fooling the major civilizations of each time that there is a "super weapon" that they can only build if they put all their resources into it (thus neglecting the real war effort, or at least substantially detracting from it) only for it to turn out to be a dud? I just found it far too convenient and I just played my game hoping that, in the end, it would be a dud, or that actually, it didn't do jack. Sadly, that turned out not to be the case, and I was really disappointed.

 

But lets just ignore all that, and say OK, it is a super-weapon. Well then, why the hell are we advertising it everywhere? I mean... there's a huge holographic schematic of it sitting right in the middle of the Normandy's war room, and the Goddess forbid anybody fumble for the off-switch as Krogan and Quarian dignitaries pile into the room to discuss their own problems. "Quick! Turn off the giant display of the ultimate superweapon nobody is allowed to know about, but which somehow, everybody knows about!" And I mean, a lot of people know about it. You basically speak about it for most of the game, to just about anybody, people on the street of the Citadel, leaders of other civilizations, salvage crews, biotic candidates, aliens, bicycle repair men... just about anybody you come across is someone who might have something to contribute towards the crucible and thus someone to tell them about. Throughout the game, considering the number of people you "let in" on the secret, and the number of "war assets" you bring forwards towards the project, it just strikes me as odd that the Reapers, who have indoctrinated agents all over the place, and which the game lore (through Javik especially) tells us are experts in infiltration and sabotage, never come to learn of this "super weapon". It's just very, very odd.

 

And don't get me started on the fact that, at the end, the "Catalyst" totally has the power to just basically kill you/prevent you from doing what you're supposed to do, and never actually set off the Crucible in the first place. The excuse it gives about the "Crucible" being developed over countless cycles and that now it can't be stopped just because you got this far was just laughable. In fact, this was my reaction when I heard it.

 

That's right, I died laughing. I mean... why just not let me die from blood loss in the bottom chamber, struggling to get the console to do things it couldn't do from there? Why help me bring your plans to ruin by actually bringing me up to the level where all three "control panels" are that will allow me to basically succeed? It's just stupid. The Reapers have basically eradicated all evidence of advanced alien life for eons, except for a few smoldering ruins with little to no actual technological evidence for their existence, (see the Protheans, for which we have lots of archaeological evidence but no remaining technological or computational capacity) except oh, actually, the one thing that happens to survive is this incredibly detailed schematic for this super-weapon, which has in fact, survived countless cycles, and the Reapers were never astute enough to delete, sabotage, misinform or just plain eradicate from existence...

 

I guess what I'm trying to say is that, the Crucible, as a plot device, is just far too convenient, and incredibly unbelievable method towards delivering an "end" to the Reapers. Like I said, it was so heavy handed I actually legitimately played the game thinking "you know what, I bet it fails at the end. I bet this is what players are annoyed about. In fact, I bet you end up having to use these war assets for a huge battle instead..." - I'm not kidding, that's what I was hoping for. I was like "there's no way some indoctrinated scientist somewhere hasn't leaked this information" ... and the number of people and factions you "get in" on the project is quite staggering. But no. Instead, you get the ultimate irony, a Deux Ex Machina in a Deus Ex Machina...

 

 

- The "Catalyst":

 

 

So yeah, "The Catalyst." Or "Starchild" as it is also known. Well, like I said, I think I deceived myself. The moment you open that archive on Mars on like the first mission, you more or less know the game is going to end with a deus ex machina plot device. Maybe you just hoped it wouldn't be that literal about it. Or maybe, like me, you hoped this was some clever ploy by the writers to throw you off? Nope. (Unless you're with the IT (Indoctrination Theory) crowd, in which case, you're crediting the two writers responsible for the ending far more than they deserve).

 

So yes, here comes the AI apparition in the form of the child you saw die earlier in the game tell you that, actually, there are three ways you can "fix" the problem that are the Reapers. The funny thing is, it seems a little sad and reluctant at having to do this, despite the fact it was responsible for actually getting you to the the part of the space station where you are actually able to stop its plans. It just doesn't make any sense. But before I dwell on that, I just want to comment on how absurdly ridiculous the whole story and motivation behind the reapers is.

 

 

 

-- Why I *HATE* Closure --

 

There are two types of people in the world. There are those that love the ending to Lost. And there are those who hate it. There are those who think Prometheus ended just as it should have. And there are those who think it answered nothing and war far too pretentious in basically demanding a sequel. In short, there are the people who like clear cut, explained endings, and there are those that revel in the mystery, and prefer to ask questions they known not the answers to.

 

For the record, I am firmly in the second camp. You want to know why? Because, more often than not, the answers to the questions you seek are overwhelmingly and disproportionately disappointing compared to your expectations. I've never once come across a book, film or game where I've been waiting towards the end for my questions to be answered, and then been legitimately impressed or surprised at the answers given. Not once. It's always been that feeling of loss and disappointment, that whatever explanation is given, just isn't good enough to justify all that has lead up to that point. Inevitably, they end up being anti-climatic, underwhelming and quite frankly, disappointing. And how many of you can say you didn't feel that way about the ending to ME3?

 

It just made no sense whatsoever. Creating machines, to destroy all galactic life, to avoid machines, destroying all galactic life. Mindraped primitive says what?

 

I mean, never mind the circular logic. Disappointing circular logic is a trope of games these days (see Eden in FO3) but seriously, they didn't even try to pad it out. People have countered that it goes 100% against the experience of ME, where actually, you show organics and artificials can and do exist in harmony, like the Geth and Quarians (if you solve that conflict in ME3) or EDI achieving independent thinking and basically becoming a fully fledged, living being perfectly capable of living alongside her creators and "organics". I agree, it does go against the evidence. But the "Catalyst" doesn't even try to argue otherwise. It could have said anything, along the lines of "Do you think you're the first one to broker a peace between living and machine" to "In the end, the peace always fails and war always prevails" to "Eventually, even benign machines achieve a level of consciousness existentially at odds with organics" or anything along those lines. True, it would have been hard to swallow, but it would have been something. It would have added context to this apparent "titanic struggle" of AI vs organics, which were are left thinking is understandably completely avoidable. If anything, it would have totally justified Javik's inherent paranoia and constant warnings that AI's are not to be trusted, and give weight somewhat to the Catalyst's claims that Organics and AI's are like matter and anti-matter waiting to destroy one another.

 

And then there is the whole under-explored claim that, actually, the Reapers are doing what they are doing to "preserve" each civilization, which they presumably do by "ascending" qualifying candidate species into some sort of collective mind matrix of "harvested specimens", which either become destroyer reapers if they are a "subservient" race of the cycle, or "capital Reapers" if they are the apex and genetically dominant species of their cycle, as "Humans" were supposed to be for the current cycle, as the "Human Reaper" of ME2 seems to allude to, and Reaper interest in Humanity seems to further reinforce. Given that Reapers and their extinction cycles have been around for 1 billion years, as the "Leviathan DLC" seems to indicate, and that each cycle takes place approximately every 50,000 years, then there are roughly 18,000 "Capital Reapers" in existence, that is, 18,000 apex races have existed, with an unknowable number of other "lesser" races absorbed/harvested/ascended into "destroyer" reapers. This does not account for things such as attrition and other factors, but it does give us some numbers. Yet, this angle is totally under-explored in the end, and you're left wondering just what the point is of "preserving" these civilizations and allowing other species to rise to dominance. The Catalyst/Starchild hints that it is to allow other civilizations to arise (again, for what reason, it is not revealed, perhaps jut to be harvested) and given that both Sovereign and Harbinger in ME1 and ME2 insist on saying "they are bringing order unto chaos" you are left none the wiser about this secondary motive, which comes to make even less sense than their "primary" motive of avoiding synthetics destroying organics.

 

You know, there is a lovely scene in ME3, where after a certain mission in ME3, Ashley Williams says to you something along the lines of, "You know, I just don't understand how Cerberus could possibly do the things they do. The things I've seen, I just don't understand. And you know what? I'm glad I don't understand. It means I'm still Human. I hope I never understand."

 

That, that right there, to me, is the reason that the Reapers should have perhaps never been explained to us. As I've said, in on the camp of those that think closure basically just ruins things, and after the ending of ME3, I'd be willing to bet that, at least in this instance, that is the case. You know what? When Sovereign and Harbinger consistently whined in ME1/ME2 about the fact that "Our motives are beyond your comprehension" and so on, I wished the writers had abided by that. Because, were that the case, then there is no way a Starchild/AI could explain their motives to me during the course of a single conversation, as indeed happens during the end of ME3.

 

Do you see now why closure is the enemy? Wouldn't you have preferred if actually, we have no idea why the Reapers do what they do, only that they have to be destroyed? Me too. And that's why the reasoning behind the iconic enemies of the ME universe sucked ass.

 

 

- The Actual Endings:

 

 

Right, so now as to the endings of ME3 themselves. Like I said, with the "EC" DLC, I didn't have much to complain about the endings themselves. As I've said, yes, they were delivered in an utterly deus ex machina style, but with all the EC "fixes" I thought they were actually pretty good - I've played few games where I'm allowed to either survive outright after completing my mission (if your EMS is high enough), become a God, or basically re-write the very fabric of existence itself. I mean... returning to the whole scope/depth points I've raised earlier, that is a pretty epic way to seal an ending. With the EC, I can't rightly agree that they are "exactly the same ending" either - I mean, wiping out all synthetic life in the galaxy (including the Geth and EDI), controlling the Reapers yourself and becoming a divine avatar in control of every Reapers or fusing the very code and DNA of synthetics and organics into one and eradicating the differences between the two can't be said to be the same now can they?

 

Having said that, I do understand the initial backlash behind the ridiculously large plot hole(s) left by the original ending, in which every choice basically turned you into a genocidal mass murderer. And by that, I specifically mean the following points.

 

- That each and every Mass Relay explodes regardless of what option you pick, sending each system into a Supernova and basically destroying all life in those systems.

 

- That Joker inexplicably is shown flying away from the huge space battle above earth, crashing on a garden planet, and that somehow, all your followers who were on earth with you only a few minutes ago are now spaceborne with him and end up on the planet with him.

 

I mean, the first point is the real clincher though, rendering any of your choices (destroy, control or synthesise) moot because at the end of the day, you basically wipe all out all life in the galaxy. The second point is jut an example of bad execution.

 

Both these points are "fixed" in the EC, by saying that, actually, the Mass Relays aren't destroyed, only "lightly damaged" (if you have a high EMS) and that Joker and the Normandy specifically pick up your crew during the final battle and then are ordered by Hacket to leave the system given that the Crucible begins firing and nobody knows what it does. So when I played the ME3 with the EC first time round, I didn't see any problems, though having looked the original endings, I can see why people would have been "WTF!".

 

And to answer the IT crowd who level the "Why didn't Harbinger shoot down the Normandy as it stopped in front of it to pick up Shepard's wounded squadmates" I say this:

 

1- The Normandy has a state of the art Cyber-electronic warfare suite overseen by EDI which is said to make hundreds of thousands of calculations per second, directly interfering in enemy scanners and tech designed to pinpoint the location of the ship.

 

2 - It does have a Reaper IFF (Identify Friend or Foe) technology installed, which allowed it to navigate the Omega 4 Mass Relay, which was Reaper controlled and otherwise destroyed all other ships attempting passage through it.

 

3 - Harbinger does seem to be concentrating on targets moving towards the Conduit rather than non-combatants which pose no threat of reaching the Conduit and disrupting it's plans.

 

4 - At the end of the day, in addition to having state of the art cyberwarfare electronic countermeasures installed, it is also a stealth ship specifically designed to avoid detection by the enemy unless specifically "seen" by the enemy, as is shown to be the case countless times during the ME universe.

 

With that in mind, I can sufficiently suspend my disbelief and ignore "Harbinger" ignoring the Normandy and concentrating on other more worthwhile targets while you evacuate your wounded squadmates. On that note, it makes absolutely no sense why your EMS would impact whether Harbinger's beam either just wounds or outright vaporizes your squadmates here. Like seriously, if there was an EMS rating for giving your followers extra armour or something like that, or reducing the effectiveness of the Reaper's beams, I would understand. But as it stands, unlike ME2's "ship upgrades" which had a direct affect on the survivability rate of your crew and which made sense given the context, here the EMS simply works as a completely random number whether to determine if your squaddies live or die. It's an interesting game-mechanic, but sadly one that is heavy handed and simply unacceptable given the level of detail and sophistication for exactly the same mechanic, only handled far better in the previous game.

 

In any case, I digress. I guess one of the reasons people were also so annoyed at the way the endings unfolded was because of the extensive promises BEAware (A friend of mine came up with that, and as far as I'm concerned, its a perfect way to refer to the Bioware/EA relationship, and the inherent dangers!) ... in any case, BEAware made a number of promises about how the ending would unfold, basically meaning - they would be different based on each and every choice you made along the way, from ME1 to ME2 and forwards. Well, like I said, I played ME3 from a vacuum, I had no expectations based on promises, other than that there was apparently something wrong with the end, and that if the trailer was to go by, I would have an epic end battle...

 

So, for the most part, I never exposed myself to these promises. And I have to say, I'm glad I didn't. I mean... seriously, guys, maybe its better if you don't either. Developer promises before the game comes out almost always never live up to the end product. That's the whole point of propaganda. In any case, I won't hold you up to it - they lied, and they dropped the ball on that. I'm just saying, don't expect Devs to live up to these sorts of promises, because they have other agendas besides pleasing you. The fact EA was involved somewhere in that line should have prepared quite a few of you for what was to come. But OKAY, they lied. Like the trailer lied about the ending mission, which I thought was going to be an epic finale, only for it to be a pretty generic rubble-war level filled with waves of monsters, with no end-boss.

 

Now, don't get me wrong, I actually do legitimately enjoy games with no end game bosses. I don't think "bosses" need to necessarily be a thing. But c'mon, if you're going to do that, then at least make your last few levels interesting! I mean, while the final levels may have been challenging (at least on hardcore) they weren't the lest bit interesting[/i]. It was jut more of the same, a good ol' rehash of throwing enemies you've already fought against you, only in waves, and in pairs. It was so bland and unimaginative.

 

And it is here that the whole "EMS" thing really comes into focus. Basically, it is just a number. It is nothing through which you can actually visualise your achievements (or lack thereof) throughout the game. In the end, all it means it whether your "Crucible" gets damaged or not, whether or not the option to control/synthesise is available (in which case all you get is "destroy" and with terrible consequences) and inexplicably, whether your chosen squadmates get vaporised in the final mission, but otherwise, having the Krogans, Geths, Turians, Quarians, Volus, Asari, Elcor, Batarians, Leviathans, Salarians, Renegade Cerberus and everyone else makes no difference whatsoever, and where the game commits a cardinal mistake. As I'll cover in the last section, the EMS feature was a wasted opportunity, much like the "end level" missions themselves. But before we discuss how those missions could have been different, lets first look at the actual endings.

 

As for the endings themselves, as I've hinted to numerous times, I think their execution was flawed, terribly flawed, but I don't actually dislike the endings themselves too much. Let's take a look at why. Well, firstly, I think the scope and implications of the endings is in keeping with with the grandiose nature that is the ME universe. Seldom have games given me the option to be come a supreme God like being, or to re-write the nature of existence as we know it by synthesising organic and synthetic, or just plain do what I came here to do and destroy the Reapers. You have to hand it to them, its ambitious. So lets take a look at each ending.

 

 

-- Destroy --

 

This would have been the ideal ending for me, were the cost not so high. If you outright reject the Catalyst's claims that Synthetics and Organics are poised to annihilate each other and that they eventually will fight again even after you've destroyed the Reapers, then this could just be the perfect ending, especially if your EMS is high enough so that you survive at the end. The problem is - the Geth and all other synthetics - read EDI - will be wiped out as well. I simply could not dishonor Legion's sacrifice, and all the work I'd done to preserve the Geth and have them living alongside the Quarians - to inflict this level of genocide on them. I could not betray EDI this way - her last lines of dialogue were far too fresh in my mind for that - "I am alive." - she said to me. Not to mention I felt surviving at the end is a complete cop out, and totally at odds with the themes of hope and sacrifice I discussed earlier - through my death, I give others hope, but it will be through the ultimate sacrifice on my part, and one which, to be fair, the whole of ME3 and the last mission especially, have been heavily hinting at and alluding to. To dishonor myself by surviving that while simultaneously condemning the Geth and EDI to destruction, asking for their deaths rather than mine, just felt treacherous and unworthy. There had to be another way.

 

 

-- Control --

 

So, apparently the Illusive Man was right, you can control the Reapers. You have to sacrifice your humanity to do so, but apparently you gain immortal life and unlimited power (or at the very least supreme executive power) and an army of Reaper minions to order about as you please, helping rebuild and just generally being nice guys if you're a paragon, protecting the galaxy and so on if you're a paragon sort of guy, or just repressing everybody and settling old scores if you're leaning more towards the renegade end of the scale. I was sort of... indifferent about this option. It just felt... strange. If I was an IT believer, then the "control" option definitely would be the option I'd say conforms to the theory. Even the things my paragon Shepard was saying as he controlled the Reapers and set them about rebuilding the galaxy didn't sound like things he'd say. In fact, it was as if the Illusive Man himself were saying the words through my mouth. If there was one ending which I could genuinely agree stuck out like a sore thumb from the ME story, universe and feel, it was this one. Even a renegade Shepard at no point entertains the notion that controlling the Reapers would be a good thing. As a choice, it feels like there should have been more foreshadowing towards accepting that option, or it even becoming available, like say, having to say certain things to the Illusive man during the various arguments you have with him over the course of the game, like maybe agreeing with him that control is possible, but that he is already controlled, or anything like that. Basically, anything that alludes why Shepard would consider taking this option at all. It was all very out of the blue and out of context with the actions and behaviour of Shepard in all the ME games, which is again why I say, if I believed IT theory, then this would be the clincher. But I don't, so on to the next possibility.

 

 

-- Synthesis --

 

Of all the options, I found this one the most interesting. In terms of scope and repercussions, this one is obviously the most drastic change the universe has ever experienced since life one day decided what a jolly good idea it would be to exist and forever changed the face of the universe. As the Catalyst puts it, it is the pinnacle of evolution for all species in the galaxy. Through unknown means, it is basically fusing and re-writing organic DNA and the essence of synthetics into a new one which will forever rid the universe of the endless cycles of conflict and destruction between the two which have plagued it, and make things like immortality and omniscience possible. Oh, in addition to that, all the countless species, civilizations and individuals harvested and ascended into Reapers which have been preserved will be along for the ride. Their knowledge and their essence would not be lost, which means their deaths may not have been entirely pointless after all.

 

All that it requires is your sacrifice. Given the gains, how could I possibly refuse. For the record, this will always be my "canon" option. Apparently, since you're organic and synthetic anyway (since Cerberus rebuilt you) and generally just you (as in Shepard, a human being like no other, and the only one who could have gotten this far) you are the only one that can make this happen, by dispersing your energy into the Crucible. Side effects include skin that occasionally flashes in the shape of computer conduits, and green glowing eyes (Which the IT crowd claim as irrefutable evidence everybody becomes indoctrinated). I also just don't get the people who stand by the assumption this is like some kind of cosmic rape of the most evil proportions. I suppose when all those different amino-acids got together and decided how swell it would be to form something greater a lot of minerals and inorganic materials must have been pretty pissed off too. Or when that amoeba decided to develop gills and fins, and I imagine forming tentacles and legs must have been met with equal sulks and tuts from all walks of life. To be fair, the people barely even seem to notice or be bothered by it. And then there are those that say it would lead to stagnation and even holocaust, without having any idea how this system would work, or what exactly changes and how it changes, because the game doesn't elaborate on it. How it works is, quite frankly, inconsequential to my enjoyment of it, much like a lot of things in the ME universe. And to those that say it is a "hippy" ending while praising the Happy Ending Mod, because that isn't hippy at all...

 

What I like about this option, besides the aforementioned benefits, is that it doesn't require me to believe the Catalyst's assumption that war between Organics and Synthetics is and has always been inevitable. The benefits alone are worth it, and solving that problem becomes almost superfluous. To me, one of the main selling points was that the long lost civilizations could be brought back to life, meaning their sacrifice was not in vain. The fact the Reapers would become benign beings capable of helping was a bonus. Unlike a lot of others, I didn't have a problem with the "space magic" aspect of it.

 

I mean, c'mon. This is a universe where FLT travel that defies or at the very least substantially bends out understanding of the laws of physics is commonplace. Where you can (or could, in a security upgrade that pissed off a lot of people) slap some omni-gel on a lock or computer and force it to reveal to you its most intimate secrets. Where medi-gel heals even the most grievous of wounds instantaneously, where all you have to do to revive a dead squadmate is stand over them and wait for a circular bar to fill up. Shot to the head? Medi-gel! Had your nervous system's circuitry fried by being mind-raped by a Banshee? Medi-gel! ... Where explosions happen in a vacuum. Where ships behave as if in dogfigths even though there is no air resistance in space. Where people are brought back from the dead despite apparent atmospheric re-entry (I'm looking at you, Shepard.) Where Alien species are surprisingly alike. Where FTL communication is possible. Where telekinesis (though mass effect fields) is entirely possible and even commonplace. Where complex, self-aware AI's exist, and are perfectly capable of interfacing virtually with organics, and vice-versa. Where thoughts, memories and the very "essence" of beings can be transferred to one another via conduits or through physical touch, in the case of the Asari. Where Alien creatures thousands of meters high appear every 50,000 years and harvest entire civilizations worth of people, by systematically dissolving their bodies into liquid whilst somehow preserving their "essences", thoughts, memories and "self" into some form of wider, hive like collective that survives as a new Reaper.

 

Oh, but synthesis? Now that's just science fiction!

 

Right...

 

 

 

 

 

For these reasons, I don't particularly have anything against the post EC endings to Mass Effect 3. Sure, they are "out there" and one in particular seems a bit improbable (or two depending on how you look at things) but then again, ME's universe is an improbable universe, but it is also grand in scope. And the endings, as far as I'm concerned, are just as grand. With the fixed versions, I can't agree that they are "all the same" either. They clearly present very distinct and existential ramifications depending on which one you choose. I also like the fact that you're allowed to end Shepard's adventure as you see fit. For me, he always had to die at the end, so I sacrifice myself, and my journey feels complete. Others (apparently quite a lot of people, in fact, the vast majority of people I suspect, which claim to have no problem with not being given a happy ending...) prefer Shepard to live. This to me, explains the popularity of the Mass Effect Happy Ending Mod (MEHEM) which I played and just found far too sappy. If that had been the end, I think I would have been far more irate than people were with the originals.

 

My problem with it is that it fixes nothing I think are the real problems with the ending - which is basically, the feeling that it was rushed, and that it is missing the climatic tension and emotional buildup that made most of the other Priority missions of ME3 unforgettable. It was just bland, uninteresting, badly written and poorly executed. In fact, I felt Thessia was a lot more engaging than the final battle at Earth. And while I'm not a huge fan of the Crucible and the Starchild, MEHEM unfortunately only fixes part of the problem for me, while adding others in and of itself.

 

I don't think the EC fixes everything, but it does make the ending(s) far more palatable. I'll never understand the people who vehemently rail against the endings (and BEAware by extension) with the fundamentalist zealotry that would make the KKK Chapter of The Anti-Zionist Aryan Brotherhood Against Infidels proud. It does close the aforementioned plotholes which made all the endings the same. And while I agree the "Normandy flying towards the stars" scene is lame, they probably added that with the dual intention of doing the "flying into space" thing in addition to showing that, actually, the Normandy and its crew aren't stranded on this weird planet as they inexplicably had it happen in the original ending. It also, unfortunately, doesn't fix the bit right at the end after the credits, with the grandpa and the Kid, wanting to hear more adventures about "The Shepard" (cringe!) and how there's still time for "another story". I can only imagine how bitch-slapping it must have been to then see the pop-up about DLC's... that whole scene is for me, irrelevant. In fact, its a waste of Buzz Aldrin's voice, that they added him in such a superfluous and inconsequential bit can only be regarded as one of the biggest VA wastes ever.

 

As I see it, neither the EC nor the MEHEM are enough to fix what's wrong with the way the ending is conducted in ME3. Notice I'm not saying the endings themselves, simply the execution. One fleshes it out without actually adding any emotional depth or climatic catharsis that the ending to such a fantastic series deserves, while the other simplifies it falls short in the same area. Clearly, something else was (or is) needed.

 

But before we delve into that, I just want to explore why I think they got it wrong so badly, and in many ways, why I can't adhere to the IT theory.

 

 

 

-- What Went Wrong? --

 

 

Personally, I blame the poor execution and inconsistency of the end segments in terms of writing, plot, dialogue, map design and pacing compared to the rest of the game on two, maybe three things.

 

1 - Running out of time.

 

2 - Fear of leaks.

 

3 - Because of 2, a closed creative process and no peer-review.

 

 

(1) Running out of time is a common problem in the gaming industry. Time after time, games are released where it becomes fairly obvious the end segments taper in quality compared to the rest of the product. The third act of The Witcher 2 illustrates this point nicely. The more cavalier of Developers go as far as admitting this is the case some times, like CD Projekt Red with the aforementioned TWII. Common features are short, uneven or limited maps (when compared to the rest of the game), a lack of interactive content, dialogue and writing which differs in quality, depth and availability and depending on design choices, either an unchallenging/non existent boss. Besides the boss part, which may or may not have been intentional and which doesn't bother me too much, I think we can all agree ME3 ticks all the boxes there. I mean, compare it to the endings of ME1 and ME2. You can instantly tell there is something off about the way ME3's ending plays. It's not so much what happens as how it happens. To give you an example, I didn't like the ending of ME2 (the whole Human-Reaper thing) but I thought the leading up to it and the execution of the gameplay up to that point to be spot on. It was new, it was challenging, it was interesting, it was tense, it was engaging. ME3's final levels had none of that.

 

Given the parallels to other games where the devs run out of time, and EA's infamous reputation for adhering to schedules and pushing for the release of games, regardless of how finished or buggy they may be (thankfully ME3 wasn't at all that buggy) I think its fair to say ME3 may have suffered from a significant rush in development towards the end. It shows. Even textures get re-used in the final levels, like using Kaidan/Ashley body armour decals for what I assume to be piles of corpses, of the wheels of the Mako as support struts for the Crucible/Citadel. IT fans all claims this is part of an elaborate plot to illustrate that the player is dreaming or hallucinating.

 

My explanation is far more prosaic - they ran out of time, and they got sloppy.

 

 

(2) I feel this is increasingly more likely a possibility if we take into account that in November 2011, a lengthy story-breakdown of Mass Effect 3 (and its ending) was leaked. In fact, ME3 suffered from a lengthy process of leaks even prior to that. It was confirmed at the time by then Bioware co-founder Ray Muszka that following the leaked ending (originally written by ME1 and 2 writer Drew Karpyshyn and concerning Dark Energy and a galactic cataclysmic event) they changed the ending. By how much I don't suppose we'll ever know, but apparently the original writer (and his script) were on the way out (to work on The Old Republic instead) even before this, so it is quite possible a rift in how the ending should go ahead happened even earlier. If this is the case, it would explain the lack of direction the ending and the events leading up to it seem to be possessed of.

 

 

(3) With this in mind, it is perhaps understandable why Bioware executive producer Casey Hudson and lead writer Mac Walters decided to "close" the final chapter of ME3 to peer review by the other writers. Maybe it was fear, maybe it was hubris. Maybe it was combination of both. This information about the creative process was in itself "leaked" by ME writer Patrick Weekes. The most interesting and insightful piece of information here is that, unlike every other chapter in ME3, the final arc was not peer reviewed by the other writers. I think this is fairly apparent by the qualitative drop in pretty much everything after Horizon. While I enjoyed the fight against Kai Lang on Cronos, I couldn't help but feel maybe that part should have just been with the same mission as Horizon, if only to give "earth" a bigger role in the overall story. In any case, I feel the lack of feedback and criticism by the other writers probably explains a lot of the plot holes in the original ending, if not the entire loss of drama, tension and plot fluidity that followed.

 

None of these reasons, by themselves, are perhaps enough to explain the sheer number of discrepancies that begin to occur towards the ending of ME3. But when you take them together and start actually looking into the fractious creative process concerned with the game's final segment, and how it compares to the rest of the game, I think it goes a good way towards explaining what went wrong. This less than ideal development process is also one of the reasons I don't much credit the IT standpoint. To me, it doesn't add up within the game, and when you look outside the game and at the creation process, the far simpler and more likely explanation is that the writers screwed up. If anything, they're probably thankful a zealous group of fans were so heart-crushed by the original endings so as to wish it away with a conspiracy theory so intricate and extensive it puts the Baby Eating Shapeshifting Reptilian Lizard Overlords cover up to shame. If anything, to be an IT supporter is to be the ultimate BEAware fanboy, the ultimate apologist.

 

And from an outside perspective, these are the reasons I believe the ending(s) are how they are, and why the IT concept holds no water for me. But seeing as its become such a popular topic, here are also a few in-game reasons I also don't think it works.

 

 

 

Why The Indoctrination Theory (IT) Doesn't Work For Me:

 

 

1 - All cases of indoctrination in the ME universe seem to be the result of continuous, sustained exposure over a period of considerable time, not the sort of short, sporadic episodes Shepard experiences. In fact, "Rana Thanoptis, an asari neuroscientist on Virmire, goes into more detail. She describes indoctrination as a subtle whisper you can't ignore, that compels you to do things without knowing why. Over days, perhaps a week of exposure to Sovereign's signal. In fact, some people seem highly resistant to Indoctrination, like one of Kirrahe's men which is able to leave Vermire without problems, unlike the others. You can both argue Shepard has never been continuously exposed to an indoctrination source of a meaningful period of time and/or that he could also prove resistant to it.

 

2 - Shepard experiences no hallucinations, headaches or voices outside of dream sequences, or towards the very end of the game, when the Illusive Man is able for a short period of time to influence (but not outright control) Shepard through his Reaper implants, and all the symptoms vanish the moment the Illusive Man dies.

 

3 - If you play ME2's "Arrival" DLC you can actually survive the Beacon's onslaught right to the end and be unconscious for only 30 minutes as opposed to two days.

 

4 - In ME3, the Prothean VI "Vendetta" specifically shuts down when it detects an "indoctrinated presence" (Kai Leng) - and does so again on Cronos. If Shepard was "indoctrinated" by this point (and IT supporters say his dreams and seeing "The Child" at the beginning of the game goes to show) then there is no way Vendetta would speak to him.

 

5 - Claims that the end sequence doesn't make sense - like Anderson getting to the Conduit after Shepard yet beaming ahead, weird scenery and slow motion and the the radio claiming "Nobody made it to the Conduit" can be explained respectively by A ) Rushed and isolated development without proper, collaborative QA, B ) Extensive injuries gained from a near miss by one of Harbinger's "lesser lasers" which are the one's he uses to fire at the troops/MAKO's running into the conduit and C ) The Chaos of the battlefield and the fact Shepard did momentarily go down.

 

6 - Claiming that the "Control" option is the only "real" option and the other two are "tests" or lead to a Reaper victory - I could just as easily claim that too is a hallucination and that they're making you think you blew them up and "survived" when in truth you're just dying of blood loss by the Conduit or worse still, being probed while a Reaper whispers the lyrics to Huey Lewis' Hip To Be Square in your ear. Clearly, trying to pick one option over another (like Control = victory, Synthesis with shiny eyes = Indoctrination) becomes problematic if you accept the IT/death theory, because all of it could be a dream/near death experience, or none of it. So saying things like "control proves IT" or Synthesis proves IT and so on becomes problematic.

 

7 - BEAware engages in "plausible deniability" about IT. Again, that doesn't prove it either way. Why would they confirm/deny a fan phenomena which serves as a very handy smokescreen and splits the fanbase right down the middle? As long as we're fighting each other, we're not questioning them, which coming to think of it, is exactly what a Reaper would do. Note to self, BEAware is actually a reaper. All IT supporters are themselves indoctrinated - This is a joke, by the way.

 

Of all of these, I think 4 is the real clincher. Even without looking outside the game for answers, the evidence presented to me in game seemed entirely speculative and inconclusive at best and wishful thinking at worst. But when I pair that with what I've discussed above, regarding the flawed creative process in the development of the ending and the likelihood that the game was rushed, I just can't in good consciousness adhere to this theory. Unfortunately, I think it is a misguided, escapist, apologist delusion which ends up only obscuring and excusing what is an otherwise unpalatable and uncomfortable truth - that even Mass Effect's writers can be guilty of fault and hubris, and that even they can screw up.

 

After all, they're human, just like the rest of us.

 

 

 

-- How The Endings Should Have Been --

 

 

 

 

One of the biggest "wastes" in regards to the ending is the whole EMS thing. You spend large swathes of the game acquiring these "war assets" presumably because they will be of help during the final segment of the game, or during some big battle. To a large extent, if we ignore the actual story and plot of the decisions you make throughout the game, I think this is at the core of players complaining none of your choices matter in the end. Besides playing the peacemaker, solving conflicts and bringing the galaxy together to fight against the Reapers, in the process you gain huge amounts of EMS, which is presumably why Shepard is playing the diplomat once again - because fighting together gives us a higher chance of survival. Sadly, all this translates as is as a number, that affects how certain cutscenes play, if your squadmates die during the final run, and if you get extra choices besides control, and whether they work as they are meant to, and not with huge collateral damage (like destroying earth).

 

That's it. What, you thought during your final battle you'd be charging into the maws of hell with Krogan, Major Kirahee's STG, Geth Primes, Quarian marines and half the galaxy at your back? Nope. All you get is a space battle, which while pretty epic, goes nowhere near conveying the scale and sheer numbers that getting the highest possible EMS would dictate is possible. The final battle for earth is big, (the space battle at least) but it isn't huge. The Quarian fleet alone has fifty thousand ships. Now add to that the Alliance fleets, the Turian, Asari, Terminus (courtesy of Aria), Batarian (remnants of), Krogan, Elcor, Hanar, Drell, Volus, Salarian, Geth, Rachni and Leviathan forces, and you're looking at one huge fleet. Maybe one of the biggest ever pitched in single battle against the Reapers. Basically something like this, only not as comical and substantially longer to reflect the sheer number of races, ships and assets I managed to acquire:

 

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGr7lXlyK3Y

 

 

 

I know they have something like that with the whole "x fleet reporting in" but between lowest EMS and highest there is almost no difference whatsoever between the two speeches, which isn't exactly the kind of buildup this scene deserves.

 

This would of course raise the issue of how to get all those ships to the Sol system at once, with the Codex explaining that the Quarian fleet alone could take days to pass a single Mass Relay. I don't know, maybe have a midgame side mission where you recover ancient data that would allow you to harness the power of more than one Mass Relay, focusing their combined energy at a focal point in another relay, allowing for far larger number of objects to be fired through. Or I don't know, a war asset that allows you to "upgrade" the relays, whatever. I'm sure the vast majority of players would be willing to overlook this so long as it was fitting to in game lore and delivered them the tense, exciting, epic and climatic space battle the end of such a fantastic series deserved. Everything you've done over the course of the series, all the dozens, hundreds of hours played, all that attachment and emotional investment, leading up to that moment. A colossal campaign to take back Earth, like the trailer alluded to, taking place in space, in the skies and on the ground.

 

Given the technical and visual quality of the trailer, and its length, I was expecting nothing less of the final battle cutscene(s). To say I was underwhelmed is to put it mildly. Besides a few Asari dreadnoughts, countless inter-species Frigates that all look the same and a liveship here and there (and then not in the actual battle), and a few wings of fighters, I failed to see how that could have been the culmination of the galaxy's might. You don't even get to see a single Reaper getting destroyed! The Codex states a Reaper struggles against 3 Dreadnoughts, and can be destroyed with 4.It goes on to describe a number of tactics battleships can adopt to outmaneuver a Reaper. If anything, the opening salvo when Shepard says "fire" seems to indicate organic vessels have a substantially longer firing range than Reapers. I was expecting at least one Reaper to blow up. But nope...

 

C'mon! I wanted to see entire wings of Frigates closing in on the Reapers in formation and breaking off at the last moment as a diversionary tactic while a bunch of Dreadnoughts pound the crap out of it from a distance. I wanted huge swathes of the sky to be blanketed by swarms of fighters as they give it all they've got with every missile, torpedo and thanix projectiles they can fire as beams of every color streak the sky. Suicidal Batarians flying shuttles filled to the brim with fission weapons right into the red glowing maw of a Reaper seconds before a red beam and the whole thing goes off in one huge eyeblinding blue supernova of an explosion. A desperate human female captain ordering her frigate with less than a minute's worth of life support to engage the FTL engine's and heroically sacrifice it all as the ship plummets into light speed straight into a cluster of Reapers frantically firing ruby molten metal laser beams in a vain attempt to stop her, all as Shephard watches from the bridge of the Normandy and winces at the colossal scale of the sacrifice and waste of life unfolding before his tired eyes. Attack ships on fiya off the Shoulder of Orion! Harbinger firing his main beam right through the middle of the Destiny Ascension and cutting effortlessly through another two dreadnoughts in one, clean clinical burst as the whole thing collapses in two and silent Asari get blasted out silently into space. Earth carriers launching hundreds of weird orb-like artifacts at a flanking fleet of Reapers, only for an ear splitting roar coming from the depths to echo ASSUMING DIRECT CONTROL as Leviathan forces a Reaper to pick up a smaller destroyer Reaper and uses it to batter another Reaper to death in the slow motion of zero gravity as it collapses in a bright red implosion. The Geth and Quarians suddenly appearing out of nowhere behind Earth and the Reaper fleet in a hammer and anvil tactic, with the Geth swarming the vast Reaper fleet while the Quarians land a vast inter-galactic relief force of Quarians, Krogans, Turians, Salarians, Vorcha, Asari, Elcor, Drell, Geth, Rachni, Leviathans and Humans to liberate earth once and for all.

 

OK, it got a bit silly with the mortal kombat bit between the Leviathan indoctrinated Reaper and the evil Reaper, but still, that is the kind of scale I'm talking about. If anything, that is the sort of scale the trailer alluded to. They should have shot the one huge long cinematic you get if you ally all the races and get all the EMS, and then cut it appropriately to reflect things like you failing to get races involved, or low EMS scores, etc. Basically, the less you have, the smaller the fleet is, the shorter the cutscenes, etc. But the one big fight we were all hoping for should have been something of that scale. And the fight on earth...

 

Here's two levels. And some rubble. And grey, lots of grey. Oh, and a handful of banshees, brutes, and the odd ravager. In waves. Yep, that'll do it! THAT is the final level to the Mass Effect Series. The culmination of all that time played, that sense of awe and wonder, the scale and magnitude of your achievements, the emotional investment and sheer thrill and exhilarating excitement, reduced to that.... it's just, it's sad. It's poetic. It's poetically sad.

 

People had a problem with the endings. I didn't. I had a problem with this mission. WHAT THE HELL was that about? THAT'S IT?! THIS is what you've been building up to?

 

No. Just, no.

 

Personally, I think the entire final mission should have been a story arc. That is, a series of connected missions spanning a significant period of playing time. To that end, I feel the "Cronos" mission beforehand breaks that pace. I didn't really care for it, right up to the end - that last bit with the star room, and fighting Kai Leng, to me that was the only part that was worth it, and even then - both times I played the game as a Soldier - my squadmates killed Kai Leng before I even got to fire a shot. It was... underwhelming. In many ways, that mission epitomises Cerberus in ME3 - a distraction. As I said earlier, that mission could have probably been twinned with Horizon and shortened (and all the effort + cinematics used put to better use for Earth) and I would have been happy. I hated Kai Leng, I hated Cerberus, I wanted both dead, but not at the expense of the flow of the story.

 

In any case, the final battle is not only far too simplistic and underwhelming, it makes little sense. Assaulting the conduit - why don't the Reapers not just shut if off when it becomes clear that is the resistance's target? The Reaper Destroyer and the Thanix missiles - oh the targeting sensors are being jammed - well why not just aim the damn thing manually then? The target is huge, constantly firing beams all over the place (thus exposing itself to a directs shot as the "beam" is the weak spot) and it's just standing right there between the land and the sky. Or we could have just done what you did on Rannoch and laser paint it for a part of the fleet in orbit to shoot it down? Again, it takes 4 dreadnoughts to destroy a Reaper capital ship, it would take far less to destroy a "Destroyer". It would have been an excellent use of that part of the "Take Back Earth" trailer where the Normandy is seen in the skies of earth together with a handful of Frigates and fighters - to have a dedicated air support fleet for that purpose. Hell, the intro showed it was possible, and was far more cinematic and engaging, with the Frigate blowing up in the sky. That segment at the start basically shows that kind of scenery is possible. Hell, all of that awe you feel at the start basically disappears at the end. The only interesting part is the Reaper cannon at the beginning, and that's only because he is lighting up the sky and you're hearing that incredibly loud gun going off and distorting your aim more than anything. In every way, the last "boss" of ME3 is the Reaper on Rannoch, because that epicness, that emotional crescendo and the repercussions of your choices, that is the last time you'll feel any of that when fighting the serie's iconic enemies. It was the perfect boss, and in many ways, the perfect end boss.

 

So how could the "Taking Back Earth" mission(s) have been better? Well, if it even remotely mirrored the trailer it's based on, it would have been a start. The End Mission should have been a campaign, not just a single mission. Anything similar to the structure and execution of the Suicide Mission in ME2 would have done - include the whole squad, make you feel you are in this together, really put their lives in danger, hell, maybe even make you choose between some of them. I know it sucks to lose people, I know some people would prefer they all live (maybe through some choices or high EMS ratings) but even having the risk of loosing people heightens the emotional tension for missions like that. And when I say "use EMS ratings" I don't mean like it was used in the final run to the Conduit and you lose squad mates if it is low (which makes no sense) but contextually, like if you didn't get enough of those "Frigates" war assets from the random planets to assign as an escort to a shuttle with say, Vega in it, it gets shot down. You're then asked to either mount a rescue mission to save him, or reinforce Tali and her Quarian marines who are being annihilated elsewhere.

 

You'd have to make a choice, and like Virmire, the one you leave behind dies. Here, you're being given options based both on choice and EMS, and they make sense. Or, for example, if you didn't assault that Cerberus fighter base earlier in the game, and you didn't get a high enough EMS score specifically in the "Ex-Cerberus" score, her and her entire squadron of fighters get wiped out as you call her in for air support during a key part of the assault mission. Again, making the right choices during the game and having high EMS scores perhaps should be enough to save them all, and this would achieve two things. It would have added weight to the developers promises that the choices you make in the game shape the way it ends, and it would have made sense of the EMS mechanic in a way that is both rewarding (if you make the right choices) and adds an emotional hook to the game - you don't want your people to die.

 

It would also make your final fight with Harbinger that much more rewarding. I've said time and time again, not every game needs an end boss, but ME3 absolutely needed one, and it has to be Harbinger. If you lost followers on the way, it would have made it that much more personal when you stand before the behemoth, shouting at the top of your lungs:

 

"The line must be drawn hiar! THIS far and no further! And I will MAKE YOU PAY for what you've done!"

 

You know... but no, he gets his ass down there, kills some people, nearly kills you, and doesn't even bother to say something witty, like "I AM THE HARBINGER OF YOUR PERFECTION!" or "YOU WILL KNOW PAIN SHEPARD" as he nearly roasts you to death. Hell, I would have been happy with just a "DIRECT INTERVENTION IS NECESSARY" as he swoops down from the heavens. But no. You don't even get to be taunted. Jeez, I hated it in ME2, I thought it was way over the top, but right now, I even would have welcomed something like this.

 

Sorry. Maybe not quite like that. It's late and I've been writing this for a long time and I'm tired. Things get fucky when I get tired. But still, the point stands, they've just taken the most iconic, annoying and bad-ass villain in the franchise and made him completely indifferent to you. Its the ultimate insult, to be ignored. I suppose that just makes me hate him even more.

 

Anyway, wouldn't it be nice if the end segment was in itself a sort of tactical mini-game, where - like the galaxy map - you've given locations to assault and liberate, all leading to some central Reaper controlled "base of operations" which you have no idea what it does. You'd have a tactical map, you'd have your armies and resources - nothing fancy on the map, but indicating what resources you'd see actually show up in the missions - and you could maybe even have a few different ways of achieving the objective, like a direct assault which would be quicker but likely to cost more lives, or a more flanking attack likely to last longer but involving more stealth elements, or "sacrificing" certain forces to act as distractions while you concentrate your forces elsewhere. All choices would involve gathering your squadmates, putting them into teams, assigning squad leaders and generals - Tali and Garrus and Miranda - for example, because of their high military ranks among their respective forces, could be given big responsibilities, which would also put them right in the the thick of the fight and more likely to get them killed. You'd have to weigh the success of the mission against not wanting them to die. If you're totally unprepared, say with a terrible EMS and you make terrible decisions, maybe all your missions fail and you're forced to fight a retreat. Anything along those lines would have been a good way to bring all the cast together and make you feel like you're really fighting a war rather than just some skirmish. It would also have given the final mission(s) a much higher personal and emotional stake.

 

As for the missions themselves, where are all the Makos? The Hammerheads? The Gunships? The aerial dogfights? Even if it has to be scripted, which most segments in ME3 are, it could still be like CoD 1 (back when the franchise was fresh and any good), with those huge maps where you're fighting as the Russians and you see dozens of tanks rolling across the map, with planes providing air support and whole squads of men advancing down the lines. Where was that? Where was the Normandy, the fighters and the Frigates hovering in the sky and providing air support? Where were the dozens of Capital Reapers, with their deafening bass-like klaxons, towering above the buildings while STG and Asari commando's laser paint their beams while ground teams and capital ships in the air combine their fire against it, bringing it down in a titanic tumble as it collapses into a group of buildings and lets out a wall of dust and smoke? Who do you want to to join your squad in securing a foothoold in London for the final assault? The Geth, skulking through the buildings and clearing them of husks, with Primes stalking the streets and fighting Brutes hand to hand? Or the Krogan, storming the rubble and mobbing Ravagers while you lead them in a desperate assault to destroy a Reaper Hades Cannon tearing a hole in your air support fleet? But wait, right as you're approaching the target, Samara radios in that she's in trouble evacuating certain refugees in one of the metros - do you pass on the mission to Wrex or Grunt and go help her out, or do you prioritise the mission? Maybe Grunt won't be as lucky this time, or maybe refugees and a Justicar are a small price to pay.... in the end, you and your squad to finally get to the Reaper HQ, with a combined assault of Turians, Asari, Krogans, Salarians, Quarians and Humans takes place, with your squad at the vanguard and you leading from the front as Commander Shepard is meant to do.

 

... whatever, I'm not a writer. I'm just saying, there are a number of different ways the ending could have been made better, and more engaging, emotionally and just plain exciting, to the player. That mission would have sucked even if it was just a generic sidequest, never mind an ending mission. On "reaching the Reaper HQ/Base/Conduit/Whatever" the player re-activates the "conduit" (which the Reapers obviously turned off during the assault). Your squad see a whole cache of Blackstars and M-920 Cains, which they take stock of. You pick one up and it magnetises on your "backpack". Here, Liara gives him her "gift" in addition to a lucky charm, which he can take or tell her she needs it more. Before he goes up, they get lots of radio chatter from the fleet, saying that while the sheer size and ferocity of their attack caught the reapers attacking earth and defending the citadel off-guard, they're sending reinforcements from every nearby system and that even the gigantic galactic fleet will not be able to stave off the combined Reaper forces. They are running out of time. Reaper sabotage to the conduit's power source mean it only has enough energy to send up two people. If your LI is still alive at this point, he/she insists on going up with you. If Shepard has no LI, he/she must go up alone. You Radio the Normandy to pick up the rest of your crew and take them to the Citadel the old fashioned way. (Here onwards, I'm roleplaying this as Shepard/Ash - change it as suitable for your own Sheps and LI's as appropriate.)

 

Shepard goes up to the Citadel/Conduit, has the whole talk with the Illusive Man, who then makes him shoot his Ash before he can be killed. In all cases, if Shepard's EMS score is too low and he refused Liara's gift earlier, the wound is mortal and he/she will eventually bleed to death. Conversely, if Liara is the LI and was told to keep the gift, the wound is not fatal. If your EMS is too low but you accepted the gift, your LI wound is a flesh one. In either state, the LI and yourself then meet the "Catalyst". It doesn't just appear out of thin air, but an "orb" appears and projects it before Shepard.

 

It explains the logic behind it all, the cycles and the inevitable conflict between synthetics and organics, which Shepard is free to refute with examples of the Geth/Quarians, which the Catalyst will claim is irrelevant or at the very least temporary. It will also state that every cycle, someone like him arises, an "avatar", like a king, emperor, religious figure, hero or simply a being of unparalleled willpower, luck and unnatural "essence" (which is what the Reapers harvest), and that because of their potential to rally, unite and lead the cycle's races against the Reapers, they are the first to be targeted for indoctrination, "ascension" or outright destruction. (Foreshadowing) This would explain both Sovereign and Harbinger's interest in Shepard in ME1/ME2. You could also question why, if as the grand Reaper AI, it was always inhabiting the catalyst, why it didn't stop them in ME1, or thwarted the Prothean signal hijack milenia ago. It could say something along the lines that while the Citadel is it's "home", it can no more control it than Shepard could stop his heart from beating, or something like that. It would then go on to state that, because of the creation of the Crucible and Shepard's own continued existence and presence on the Citadel, both of which are firsts in the cyclical cataclysmic extinctions, new solutions have become possible to solve the "problem" - namely Control and Synthetise, and the only options available if your EMS score isn't above a certain threshold. If your LI is dying, the Catalyst also says that the Synthesise option will render the otherwise fatal wound negligible.

 

On the radio, Hacket informs Shepard that the Reapers have used the same trick they used to storm Sol in force and that now every single Raper capital ship has converged on the system in a huge fleet and that he and the combined fleet are going to engage them in a suicidal bid to buy him time to deploy the Crucible before its too late. Additionally, Harbinger himself is making for the Citadel, which now has its arms open flatly as it does before firing.

 

You've run out of time. There is only one panel, and you must choose via dialogue.

 

If you choose control and your LI is mortally injured, Ash falls to the ground and you comfort her, where she regrets she won't be able to be there for Shepard. If the LI is not mortally wounded, Shepard says he'll always love her, regardless of what he becomes. Fleet evacuates, ending proceeds as normal.

 

If you choose synthesise and your LI is mortally injured, Ash insists they don't need to "evolve" and that you don't need to sacrifice yourself for everyone, not this time. You take a few steps forwards towards the bright beam, stop, turn and smile, saying "It's not for everyone, it's for you." before turning and falling into the light. Fleet evacuates, ending proceeds as normal.

 

If you state to the Catalyst you can't accept neither option, or that you don't believe it and that you don't see why a Reaper AI would help you, it shuts off.

 

If your LI is mortally injured, you both sit at the edge of the huge panoramic control room as Harbinger approaches, watching the battle unfold in space, holding each other in your arms. Ash mumbles a line from Tennyson's "Tithonus" "I wither slowly in thine arms, Here at the quiet limit of the world..." before dying, and a red bright light begins to shine in the distance as four huge arms open over you and a red beam engulfs the two of you sitting together stoically...

 

If your LI is not mortally wounded, you both sit there watching Harbinger approach. You lament you were sorry you couldn't save them all. Ash tenderly says she'll always love you, and says she's sorry too, before pulling the trigger to their only sidearm. It jams, and Harbinger hovers over them casting a dark shadow, before two lesser tentacles grab them and the screen cuts to black....

 

... you see Liara's time-capsule playing in a lab with the lights turning on and off. The camera pans upwards, through the ceiling of the bunker and through the ground, which is shaking, before going black. In the darkness, two tiny specks of light interact with each other, with flashes of light accompanying a brief flash of Ssh smiling, or a Shepard holding her in his arms. Other lights start flashing, and a matrix of interconnected light forms, before the camera pans out to reveal a human reaper skeleton inside a Capital Reaper, harvesting yet another civilizations countless cycles in the future...

 

Crucially though, if you have enough EMS, Hacket will radio you to inform you that they have destroyed the Reaper forces over Earth, but that a fleet comprising the entire Reaper capital force has amassed at the Relay and is heading towards them, with Harbinger at its head. They will attempt to delay it as long as possible.

 

You can then argue with the Catalyst that this cycle has gotten furthest than all the rest, and that you alone have destroyed two Reapers, and that they are not infallible (echoing previous assessments by EDI) and that there must be a way to destroy them. He then points a gun at the Catalyst, and demands to know what would happen if he destroyed it and the Citadel. It explains that in addition to controlling them, he serves as a safeguard against some of the harvested specie's more aggressive nature, and also to ensure the Reapers fulfill their primary purpose of "preserving" each harvested civilization, and that if destroyed, Harginber would most likely be free from all constraints and proceed to wipe out all galactic life as the problem of synthetics and organics predicts, and that it and the Reapers would do so without regard to technological level of advancement or harvesting and ascendancy (and thereby preserving) anyone.

 

You then ask what what makes Harbinger so special, and what would happen if you killed it, and it calmly replies Harbinger was made in the image of the Leviathans, and that, being the first, it was made from harvested Leviathans and thus has the strongest indoctrination field of all the Reapers, extending its control over all other Reapers and uniting them in one sole purpose. Deprived of purpose and direction, and aware of their fates, outcomes would be.... unpredictable. They would likely turn on one another, suffer catastrophic neural collapses and shut down or go rogue.

 

"It is irrelevant." it would say.

 

"It cannot be destroyed." it continues, as in the background huge explosions and red lasers indicate the new battle has begun.

 

It could then say something along the lines of wondering why, when already presented with a perfect choice that would present the pinnacle of evolution to all forms of life in the galaxy, allowing all civilizations to live in peace beside one another and, would Shepard intentionally choose to jeopardise that and all organic life on a risky and selfish endeavor destined to fail.

 

"Because..." Shepard, says pulling out his pistol, and aiming it at the Catalyst. "Rudimentary creatures of qubits and metal..." he says, walking towards the catalyst with his gun drawn as it slowly retreats in silence, "... you touch our minds, fumbling in ignorance, incapable of understanding." he says, stopping. "There is a realm of existence so far beyond your own you cannot even imagine it. I've seen what you have to offer, and you don't impress me. I know synthetics far simpler than you... but which I'd much rather live beside."

 

"Confidence borne of ignorance." the Catalyst says.

 

You smile. "I am Commander Shepard, and Iam beyond your comprehension." you say, squeezing the trigger, and in slow motion, and a bullet shoots past him as he looks in amused confusion, passing through him and landing on the orb behind him, disintegrating it into a cascade of thousands of tiny fragments as the hologram disappears into nothing. /Hollywood mode off.

 

"Do you think... maybe... it could have been telling the truth?" your LI asks.

 

You eye a dark mass slowly taking form in the void between the moon and the earth. "I guess we'll never know." you say, "And I guess it doesn't matter now." you add, lifting your eyes to see the gargantuan silhouette of Harbinger forming in the distance between the wards. The time has come for the final battle.

 

You know what I like about good final battles? The end bosses never rely on their annoying minions to distract you, shoot at you, or just generally be a nuisance. No, bosses kill you like a boss, that is to say, with their own bare hands. Which is why I strongly disliked all the fights I had against Kai Leng. Not only was he an annoying, taunting, slippery bastard, but he was also a coward. Have I mentioned without his minions he was also pretty mediocre? On both my playthroughs, Liara and EDI made mincemeat of him before I even got to take a shot at him!

 

So yes, Harbinger arrives in all his tentacly glory, hovering above earth's huge silhouette, as if foreshadowing its very fall into its grasp, towering above the pinnacle of the station as you and your LI look on in awe and only a little bit of fear.

 

 

 

Below are a few scenarios I came up with, together with a few triggers, like EMS and other stuff. The battle would take place over the same place you meet the Catalyst, only it would be much larger in scope, and you'd be at the very pinnacle of the Citadel, right at the point the Crucible "docks" with it - it is basically a huge structure towering vertically above the player with the wards already lying horizontally. The Atmosphere is suspended up to 7 meters above you. (Codex). The earth is in front of you in a beautiful vista, until Harbinger stands between you.

 

 

1) - If you are under a certain threshold of say, EMS and a few ship upgrades to the Normandy (ala ME2, which you'd get earlier in the game or through missions) then the Normandy arrives from earth just as Harbinger does. You are now allowed to use your Blackstar, which is a prototype and doesn't just have one shot, but fires and can then reload from nearby energy pylons. You and your LI separate to draw away fire, and take shots at Harbinger, who uses both his small lasers and his huge area of effect main gun to try and kill you both, alternating between the two and forcing you to seek cover and relocate. Meanwhile, the Normandy flies by shooting all its weaponry at it. You hear Garrus on the Radio, as well as Traynor, Joker and EDI, maneuvering from lasers and aiming shots. The Normandy soon realises neither of you are having any effect on its Shields. There is silence on the Radio, and the Normandy is shown leaving the fight.

 

"They're leaving us?" your LI asks incredulously through the radio. Soon the Normandy is out of sight and Harbinger is so close to the station he's basically eclipsing the earth and casting a long dark shadow over you. Clint Mansell's "leaving earth" starts playing as Harbinger begins to charge up his main gun, looming over you and your LI as his legs clamp down around you. Just then, Joker comes in on the radio. "I was hoping I wouldn't have to repay the favour commander. Thanks for saving me, but this is one fire you won't be getting me out of..." he says. The whole crew joins in on one final goodbye over the radio.

 

 

Diana "For Bekenstein!"

 

Tali "Thanks to you, I've seen my homeworld Shepard. Now, its time you see yours."

 

Vega "Adios Loco. Let's make it count people!"

 

Kaidan "Finish the bastard off, Commander."

 

Javik "An end once and for all!"

 

Ashley "Let's send this bastard straight down to hell!"

 

Traynor "It was an honour commander. Give him the checkmate, for all of us."

 

Garrus "I'll see you on the other side Shepard."

 

Liara "This is for Thessia! Goodbye, Shepard."

 

Chakwas "Don't forget that Brandy. Every year commander."

 

EDI "Collision course mapped. FTL drive engaged. This synthetic must now die."

 

 

"What are they doing?" your LI asks incredulously as a red glow envelops you both. "It's been an honour, Commander." Joker says. "Joker..." you say in morose disbelief. Then, from the darkness of space, a blue glow emerges as the Normandy blue shifts into FTL and a blinding beam of light comes crashing into Harbinger in a huge explosion (like the Frigate exploding in the intro) and a deafening roar as the gargantuan being stumbles and then collapses overhead, falling like a mountain behind you, temporarily disrupting the mass effect field holding in the atmosphere, which rushes all around you with the dust caused and noisily blasts out into space in a thick storm, with you and your LI staying in place through your mag boots, holding each other in awe at the destruction being wrought around you. In the distance, between spirals of steam and dust, you see a small glow of red light, struggling to penetrate the storm. But it is visible.

 

"Shepard." comes Harbinger's booming voice in the distance, though whether from within your head or all around you, you are not sure. "This is not the conclusion." it says as the read beam oscillates with each word.

 

"Now Ash." is all you say, as the two of you fire your Blackstars blindly into the fog, aiming only at the red eye glowing faintly behind the veil. In that awesomely satisfying noise, both guns power up and then release their volleys of unimaginable energy straight into the belly of the beast.

 

"Feels pretty conclusive to me." your LI says, as the last stream of energy is fired. You are barely to seek cover behind an energy pylon as a cataclysmic explosion takes place, pushing aside the dust and vapor in a wave and revealing only the vague shape of a gargantuan wreck protruding from a massive crater in the Citadel's infrastructure. Overhead, large pieces of the Reaper forcefully fly into the Crucible, damaging it irreparably. The atmosphere finally gives out and you have to carry your LI towards a nearby airlock struggling with decompression and no oxygen. As you arrive in the airlock, bleeding heavily, Hacket informs you the fleet is being decimated and that the Crucible is about to implode. "We have failed." he says. "Not yet." you reply, telling him to pull the fleet back. The elevator comes to a hangar dock, where you come across a Cerberus figther. You throw your nearly unconscious LI in the co-pilot's seat, and you fly away as the Crucible implodes and in a chain reaction, explodes its way into the Citadel, destroying the giant space station as its arms are blasted away, some burning up as they enter earth's atmosphere.

 

Cuts to ending scene.*

 

 

2) - If you have over another threshold of EMS, but no ship upgrades, Hacket leaves behind a few ships in addition to the Normandy to stop Harbinger, say the Volus Dreadnought (a war asset) and some other random ships. Harbinger gets into a fight with them, and takes heavy damage to its lesser lasers, and loses most of its shields, but is able to destroy all the escorts. It then targets the Normandy, and inflicts enough damage that it crash lands nearby. In the time it takes to close the distance, you run to the ship and the hatch opens, with all your squad coming out, all armed with Blackstars. They give one to your LI, while another hands you the M-920 Cain. As Harbinger eclipses the earth and looms over you, damaged but still impressive, EDI explains its shields are down by two thirds and that further damage inflicted by at least four Blackstars at different sections would be enough to overload it and bring them down, while Shepard delivers the final blow with the M-920 cain. Your squad separates and runs in various directions, drawing away fire and setting themselves up to attack it from different directions. The idea is to synchronise at least four shots, so four squad members must simultaneously fire at different parts of the ship. Shepard could do this by drawing away fire. In the meantime, Harbinger could do its taunt thing, while your squadmates irritably reply via the comlink, as they do in the "Citadel" DLC.

 

Things would be further complicated by Harbinger randomly killing off two squadmates each time the battle is played. Finally, the four remaining squad-mates are able to line up a shot and let er' rip into four ruby/black explosions outside Harbinger's hull, throwing it back in a shockwave. You then pull up the M-920 Cain, and in a scene simuilar to the one in the original game where you take out the Hades Cannon, the projectile swirls its way into Harbinger's superstructure and detonates in a bright flash of white light, emerging slowly at first from between the tentacles (like when it "Assumes Direct Control") before coalescing into one massive white flash as the Harbinger of your perfection is consumed in an appropriately epic explosion.

 

Hacket gets in touch, saying the fleet is being destroyed and for you to hurry up. You explain to your squad the Citadel needs to be destroyed. Traynor can get in touch via the Comm, explaining overloading the Crucible would cause a blast strong enough to wipe out the Citadel. You program the Crucible to overload in a matter of minutes, giving you, the Squad and the Normandy's survivors time to take the elevator to the docks and evacuate in shuttles. The whole thing blows up behind you.

 

Cuts to ending scene*

 

 

3) If you have over the same threshold, but also have installed all the Normandy's upgrades, things play out a little differently. The Normandy and its escorts are able to destroy Harbinger's shields, and severely damage its weapons systems, but it still manages to overcome them all barring the Normandy. It is briefly incapacitated, allowing the Normandy to quickly land nearby. Seeing Harbinger rising up again in space, you order them to take your LI (who is still wounded and bleeding heavily) even though she protests, but you force her to be taken, explaining there is one last thing you need to do. You salute your Squad mates one last time, telling them to go and to be happy. You look your LI, struggling, crying and kicking to be released, and whisper "I'll always love you." before kissing her for the final time. You run off, and Harbinger arrives just as the Normandy takes off. It's a straight run to the Crucible console, all you need to do is avoid its huge laser, like Rannoch, only maybe 100x harder. You do so, and reach the Console, programming the Crucible to overload.

 

"You cannot kill me Shepard, I always survive." Harbinger says taunting you. "I am the Harbinger of your-" "Go to hell." you say with satisfaction, as you pull out the safety handle from the console, causing the whole station to start violently surging with electricity, before the Crucible explodes and the whole thing ignites in a vast supernova of an explosion that lights the skies as the Normandy escapes the blast.

 

Cuts to ending scene*

 

 

4) "Special Ending" - If you have over the same threshold, have installed all the Normandy's upgrades and told Javik to revisit the memory Shard. The same scene plays as above, only Garrus and Joker insist over the comm on using the Normandy to keep firing on Harbinger. EDI cautions its main gun is nearly online again. You explain for them to come evacuate Ash, and that you can destroy it by overloading the Crucible. They come to take Ash, but as you are saluting your squad the final goodbye and kissing your LI, Javik breaks ranks, and punches your violently in the gut while you fall to your knees. "Ashley, you must take care of the commanda now." he says, running down the ramp. He looks back, before saying "Goodbye, comrades!" and makes off running through a maelstrom of firing lasers, explosions and the superlaser, while you're carried into the Normandy with your LI, cursing and struggling as your squadmates pull you up. A cutscene plays where Javik reaches the console, only for Harbinger to taunt him. "I am the Harbinger of your extinction. There are not enough of your kind for viable re-population. You have failed, Prothean."

 

He looks up at the four shining eyes towering above him, and replies calmly. "Not to repopulate. But enough to kill you." as he pulls out the safety handle from the console, and the whole thing ignites in a vast supernova of an explosion that lights the skies as the Normandy escapes the blast.

 

Cuts to ending scene*

 

 

=====================================================================================================================

 

Conditions:

 

- Obviously if this was my game, Javik would have been in the base game and not in the DLC. Oh, and there would be no DLC. Ever.

- I also recognise I'd have to retconn the whole "ships can't go into FTL if there is an obstruction" in the way thing too, which is really badly explained in the Codex, and find a way why the Normandy is able to do it but other ships aren't. (Upgrade maybe?)

- I also realise these endings aren't completely water-tight, and that the writing could probably be better. I'm not a writer, if I had money, I'd hire one.

 

=====================================================================================================================

 

*All the endings would have the same set of slides after this, with the Reaper fleet suddenly deteriorating into chaos, randomly exploding, firing upon one another, going completely inert, allowing themselves to be destroyed by the galactic fleet or trying to escape only to be hunted down and destroyed by other galactic forces. You'd then be shown either short cinematics, or slides (I'm not totally averse to them) about the fate of the galaxy, like the Rachni being re-given the Suen planet together with the Maskim Xul system as gesture of goodwill and thanks for their efforts in the war if you spared the queen in ME1, Wrex/Wreav and Grunt rebuilding Tuchanka with Eve and trying to foster peaceful relations with the rest of the Galaxy, etc. If anything, the whole Galaxy could come together to build another "Citadel" like Speace station, where they would welcome all life-forms to host embassies and would basically "start from scratch".

 

Hacket and Anderson would preside over the memorial service of those who died if the entire Normandy went down, while you and your LI watch the memorial stone broken-hearted. Maybe one of you could have the picture you took during the "Citadel" DLC, shedding a tear over it. Otherwise, your squadmates and your LI would preside over it if you sacrificed yourself. If Harbinger killed two of your squadmates, or Javik sacrificed himself, you would personally preside over the memorial. There would be no "stargazer" scene in any of the endings.

 

Now, I know this isn't a great ending, and that each set of endings isn't water-tight. I've written this in an hour. Obviously if I was paid professionally to do this and had years to write it I'd come up with something better. The point is, what I like about these endings, is that if you do choose to keep on fighting, even after the Catalyst presents to you his option, one of which could arguably be a "perfect" solution (also the reason it cannot comprehend the logic behind you turning him down) is that if you choose to be stubborn, you can "win" but you pay that price in either the blood of your squadmates, or your own. Sacrifice. Basically, one of the key thematic motifs of the Mass Effect universe. And you're still given hope, which is another key theme.

 

Not to mention, it would put the Catalyst's original choices starkly in contrast with the very slim, sliver of hope that maybe, just maybe, you can defeat the Reapers "conventionally" if only you take out the two intelligences behind them, something no other cycle has ever achieved because they never got as far as figuring out that there is a "Catalyst", what it is, and what exactly its role in things is. You only discovered that by chance as it were, due to the Crucible, and you could argue that discovery in itself overshadows what the Crucible can achieve. But is the Catalyst right? Is it telling the truth? Or is it trying to manipulate you?

 

A key bit of dialogue here is where he explained "avatars" like Shepard are the first to be targeted for indoctrination, ascension or destruction. To me, that would be the key missing piece of the indoctrination theory. It still wouldn't answer it either way, and if this were mine, I'd do exactly what BEAware are doing now and not answer it either - but I think it makes it far more compelling and if anything, far scarier a concept. Or, you could even go as far as wondering whether, actually, the Catalyst is still lying to you when he says you could destroy the Reapers, even though he thinks it is improbable. What if this is a double mind fuck? What if he is egging you on - knowing you will take the bait - only for killing Harbinger and destroying the Citadel to accomplish.... nothing? How do you make a decision like that on the spot?

 

How would you choose? Have enough lives been sacrificed already, and with only one more, you can bring it all to an end and in the process bring about another stage of evolution and galactic nirvana? Or is the cake a lie and yet more more blood is required to be shed? And then, whose blood? There is a certain, intentional randomness to the the scheme I've worked above, to illustrate that you can't always be in control, least of all about who lives and dies. Previous choices influence what happens (to an extent, which I suppose could be expanded) and also EMS, but not just EMS alone. And even then, maybe even these endings suck too, but at least you got a somewhat better final mission at the very least? It's a better culmination to all the emotional attachment, hundreds of hours played and sheer depth of the journey you've been on, that what we got, right? Right... ?

 

I also like the fact that, right before you shut off the Catalyst's VI, you throw back Sovereign's original words to you:

 

"Rudimentary creatures of blood and flesh, you touch my mind, fumbling in ignorance, incapable of understanding. There is a realm of existence so far beyond your own you cannot even imagine it. I, am beyond your comprehension. I am Sovereign."

 

I mean, yeah, its a little heavy handed and perhaps a little too cliche-iy, but serves to put into perspective another key theme which was totally ignored in the end - that maybe, Organics and Synthetics were destined to destroy themselves in the past, but not necessarily so now. And that as far as "preservation" and "evolution" is concerned, maybe you're fine with just the way organics and synthetics are now. "I am alive." were the last words EDI told me, and the last time Legion spoke to myself, it referred to itself as "I" rather than "we". Isn't that enough? Do we need Reapers, or immortality, or ascension, or preservation? And in the same way that the Leviathan, Sovereign, Harbinger and Catalyst harped on to you about how they are order of magnitude beyond their understanding, well, maybe that goes both ways? Maybe in becoming so far removed from us, "puny bacteria", they've lost something in the process? How does one even life in a Reaper, or "as" a Reaper? Do we even need to know? So I thought there was something of a poetic beauty to throwing back that retort at him. It works for me, though I don't presume to think it will for everybody.

 

Anyway, that is how I would have done it. Because its more of an attempt to prove a point rather than professional pitch, I don't expect it to be perfect. You can agree or disagree with it, and indeed, feel free to add to or criticise in your posts if you've read this far. I'd be delighted to hear.

 

So that's how I would have done it.

 

 

Conclusion:

 

 

Well... this has gotten out of hand, hasn't it? See, that's the problem of joining the party late. You end up with so much to catch up on and nobody willing to talk about it and you either find a way of getting it out there or you pass out in the bathroom. So this is me, not passing out in the bathroom. If you've gotten this far, then you're a real trooper and I commend your reading skills and your patience, both talents sadly in decline in modern society. I would also welcome any further discussion you may or may not be willing to have about any of the points I've raised, so feel free to pitch feedback, positive or negative. As I've said, in many ways, this is as much for "me" than it is for anybody else - seldom has a game gotten me this invested in anything, and sometimes I feel the only way to break free from the spell is to give it the proper send off it deserves and thoroughly talk about it. So, if you're feeling kind, help out a stranger!

 

Otherwise, maybe you just TD:LR'ed your way here, and I can't say I blame you. I've rambled on for far too long, so I'll keep this brief. The gist of it is, the ending in its current form is unsavory, even with the EC. Before it was downright inedible, but now it just slightly sours the experience. And why do I say that? I quote "Gabedamien", a random youtuber who puts it far better than I can:

 

Regardless of how good or bad the original ending was, or even how good the actual GAMES were, when this track [AN END ONCE AND FOR ALL] started to play right after I made my final choice... it is simply indescribable how it felt. No other game series I know of ever built up such a weighty culmination of investment, of backstory, of agency, of emotional depth. And in that one instant, you realized... it was all over. the dozens, even hundreds of hours spread over three games, inheriting each of your decisions and relationships – it all came down to this moment. It was a cathartic release unlike anything I’ve ever experienced from any form of media ever.

 

I'm quoting him because I pretty much felt the exact same way as he did. When that beautiful piece started to play, I'd spent a whole month basically playing ME back to back. I knew then that this was going to be the end. And even if the end itself wasn't what I wanted, the sheer journey leading up to that moment was so intense, so indescribably rich and beautiful, that I shed a tear. Nothing, no matter how bad, can ever take away those memories from me, not even the ending. The only other game I've ever played that has given me the same kind of emotional reward and investment of agency is The Witcher franchise, and the jury is still out on TW III. It is one of the reasons I am so cautious about being optimistic about TW III - having seen ME3, I don't want to fall into that same trap.

 

But man, I like ME3. No, I love ME3. The combat has been tweaked, it's not perfect, but then again, ME is not about the combat. It never was. The graphics carry themselves (for the most part). The missions are interesting, emotionally engaging, and unrepetitive. The characters are so rich and allow you to really concentrate on that small cadre of individuals you really love and care for, and even then, even the smaller fish - Chakwas, Adams, the engineers, and many others - really stand out as richly and immersively as they deserve and not just as "furniture". The plot remains to its roots, and for the most part, does a great job at illustrating the complex politics, dynamics and "essence" of the ME universe. You really feel the terror and utter hopelessness of the Reaper onslaught. Sacrifice, as a theme and gameplay element, looms over the gameplay at all times, reminding you just what is at stake. The game trips, as every game does, but it never stumbles.

 

And as for the ending... any way it was handled, I think people would have been disappointed. And while I think they both really screwed up and missing a good opportunity with the ending, I can't get behind the "hate Bioware - never buy anything from them ever again" crowd. I'd much rather have a mediocre ending to a great series than a great ending to an unremarkable one. In a strange way, I'm kind of glad BEAware have been firm on the "closure" aspect of ME3, even if the closure itself isn't what we expected. I respect this because, even with ME4 announced, they're insisting they will not return to Shepard, and that his story is done. I for one am legitimately happy about this. I just hate it when they milk a franchise, or character, or set of characters, for ever. They just lose all their novelty and appeal. The ending of ME3 may have sucked, but the story behind it, the universe it exists in, and the characters we cared so much about still exist. All that still exists, and I look forward to experiencing a new journey in that setting. I want to see that magic which ME brought and which the other two titles expanded brought to life in another journey - why would anyone not want that? If anything, you can be damn sure that, at least next time, they'll pay closer attention to the ending. One can hope, at least. No, I'm glad this installment has come to an end. It quit while it was ahead, and that is how I'll always remember it - those three games that captured my imagination, and made me care for a world that doesn't exist with such force, such intensity, such love.

 

As a game, it could never have lived up to the expectations it raised, when the bar was raised so high, if only because the journey towards it had been so spectacular. And fundamentally, it is the journey that matters. And what a journey its been. I can't rightly recall a game that has left me so sad, not because of how it ended, but because it had to end. Personally, I treated the entirety of Mass Effect 3 like a finale, in fact, the various conversations and interactions you have throughout the game make it very clear what is likely to happen at the end. When it finally came, (with the EC), I felt I had some kind of closure.

 

It might not be for everyone, but I loved it.

 

Thanks for reading.

 

[Arcueid Brunestud]

Wow! I actually read through it all. That is a long and very good review! As always, love your thought on the game. Keep it up for others!