Both Parties At Fault in Mass Effect 3 Debacle

Mass Effect has slowly become one of the most beloved franchises in video games, garnering incredible critical praise and selling millions of copies. The series itself has grown from a single game into a massive media empire, with action figures, books, comics and even board games. As March 6 approached earlier this year gamers were rife with anticipation for Mass Effect 3, the conclusion of the main story saga of Commander Shepherd and his fight against the sentient-life ending Reapers. Part of the reason Mass Effect became so popular was because players were able to choose what their character did and said, which affected how the entire story flowed. Mass Effect slowly became a part of the player, allowing them to become Commander Shepherd, and forcing them to make difficult decisions that were morally ambiguous. This deep connection with players ultimately made ME3 one of the largest releases of the year, if not in video game history. Critical reception from trusted reviewers such as IGN and GameInformer were expectedly positive, giving the game high marks all around. What wasn’t expected though was the backlash that the gaming community had against this beloved franchise. Gamers across the globe began discussing their dislike of the game and how EA and Bioware, the publisher and developer of the game lied and used them. The communities criticisms were focused on three main topics: the inclusion of day 1 downloadable content, the lack of importance of pervious choices, and the ambiguity and poor execution of the ending of the game. Players have been so upset over ME3 that some have actually complained to the Better Business Bureau, and some tried filing lawsuits. Finally, after weeks of criticisms, Bioware finally relented and announced their decision to rewrite the ending of the game. How this will actually be executed is still unknown, though. This decision does no good however, and sets a dangerous precedent for developers in the future. The gaming community serves no purpose in whining over these matters, and is doing themselves a disservice as a whole. It’s difficult for me to completely condemn the detractors of ME3 because I do understand where they are coming from on a few issues, but the way they are going about it is wrong.

With the increasing popularity of Downloadable Content (DLC), it wasn’t unexpected to see that ME3 was going to include content to help prolong the life of the game. What was unexpected however was the timeframe that it was to be released on. The DLC “From Ashes” was unlocked on the same day as ME3 was released, which set off a storm of controversy in the gaming community. Because DLC is regarded as extra content, it is usually a taboo for publishers to release it soon after a game is released. It is looked at as content taken out of the game that could have been included but is slapped with a price tag to make an extra buck. From Ashes itself included a new character and mission that shed further backstory on the game universe. Because Mass Effect is based off of character interaction, many saw this as leaving out a vital part of the main story. I personally do not look at it this way though. I bought From Ashes with the full knowledge that it was first day DLC. But I didn’t just buy it because I felt it was a necessary part of the story. I bought it because I wanted to and because I wanted to support the developer. I also bought it to increase my emotional investment with the game. The same set-up of downloadable characters was included in Mass Effect 2, with the DLC released further after the release date though. When I played through Mass Effect 2 with these new characters, they always felt out of place, as if they really didn’t belong there. This made my experience feel disjointed and awkward. By getting the DLC on day one, I made a better experience for myself.

Another aspect that drew gamer’s ire was the fact that many of the the choices made in the previous games seemed to become hollow and did not have the impact gamers hoped for. On this issue, I feel a tad torn between what I wanted and what I know should have been expected. I was a computer science major for two years, and I know the amount of time that goes into coding small programs that perform basic functions. I imagine programming video games to be astronomically more complex and time-consuming, and the amount of code and time that would have gone into making every choice the person made viable and effective would have meant no ME3. I disagree with the use of the galaxy at war system and the idea of War Assets, but they do serve their purpose. Perhaps a little more closure with characters I met, creatures I saved, or sacrifices I made would have been nice, but in terms of doing the most with the time they had, I feel Bioware performed admirably.

The biggest source of anger aimed at Mass Effect 3 however centers around the ending of the game. This has been the largest aspect of argument and frustration for fans of the series. I won’t ruin the ending of the game for those reading, but I will say that for this argument the gaming community is acting like a group of spoiled children. I myself have been a fan of the Mass Effect series since the first installment. It gradually grew to become my favorite series, not only because it was fun but also emotionally and psychologically stimulating. I really grew attached to characters and struggled with making heart-wrenching decisions. I slowly became Commander Shepherd, acting as a sort of guiding hand for the character in the game. That is why it disappoints me to see so called “fans” so upset over what they feel was a slight against them. Constantly hearing about how Bioware lied to them or let them down has grown tiring and repetitive very quickly. I understand that games mean a lot to people. I count myself as one of those people! But I don’t regard games as something that was made to my specifications. Games are a creative vision of the developer, made to fulfill a story or entertainment aspect they want. Many are upset over the ambiguity of the ending, and I can relate to that. But I also thought about the ending and realized that I don’t have the say over everything I read or watch. Part of the reason video games are so wonderful is because they give people the opportunity to imagine past what they see, and to think up their own connections and meanings. By whining and complaining over this situation, they are ruining the experience of ME3 for no one but themselves. This isn’t to say that Bioware isn’t at fault as well, though. By giving in, they lost a lot of respect in my eyes. They should have stuck behind their story, but now they are placing themselves at the mercy of a group of people that want things to work out their specific way. They showed that their own faith in their writers and designers isn’t as strong as the opinions of the masses, which is a damn shame. I never once felt slighted during ME3, because I knew that (cliche alert!) the journey I experienced was much more important that the destination I arrived at. I took it for what it is, which is a fantastic game and series that still is an achievement of quality writing and gameplay. Because of the community’s sense of entitlement though, and Bioware’s lack of faith, it has become a series of division and ultimately disappointment. 

Next Generation Consoles Shouldn't Punish Gamers

If you've kept up at all with video games the past few months, you've no doubt heard the surprising number of rumors floating around for the next generation versions of the Xbox, Playstation and Nintendo's Wii U. With E3 coming up in just a few months time, the rumor mill has been working non-stop, gathering up as much information as it can. And what a swirl of info it is. Stories have jumped from topics that make sense, such as the new Xbox using blu-ray disc drives for storage, to those that seem to come out of left field, such as news that Sony is dropping out of the race entirely. One of the more controversial topics covered though ties in with the format of how the games will be purchased. Many outlets report that the new systems will not allow used games to be played without a fee, and will require a constant internet connection. For many gamers, including myself, the idea of being forced to buy new or else is one that isn’t very rosy.

One of the major topics facing the game industry today is the issue of used games. For many enthusiasts, the main way of obtaining a game is by purchasing it from a local retailer, such as a Gamestop or a Meijer. I have shopped at Gamestop for a number of years, and although I disagree with some of their values for trade-ins, I’ve never had a particular problem with shopping there. I actually enjoy the opportunity to be able to talk along with people who enjoy games as much as I do and being able to fall into a ten minute discussion over a scene or boss with the salesperson working the counter is one of my little joys I find in life, because in actuality the idea of a “gamer” is still one looked at with a stereotype. Unfortunately though, the existence of Gamestop is a source of frustration for many of the main forces in the industry. This frustration primarily arises from the issue of used games. You see, Gamestop itself is an entity that serves no purpose higher than being the middleman. It is a venue for the developers to sell their games to the largest audience possible, because the amount of effort needed to sell the game on their own would put many developers out of business. 

Gamestop makes a large portion of its money from selling used games, or games that were traded in by previous owners. This here is the issue that drives developers and publishers crazy. Because it is a game that is traded in, the game itself is sold cheaper than newer, unopened copies. Also, because the copy wasn’t purchased by Gamestop from the publisher, any profits gained from the sale of the used copy goes to Gamestop, without developers or publishers seeing a dime. In one way, I feel for the developers, because obviously they are trying to compete with people selling their product at a cheaper price, and they don’t gain anything from the sale. But the measures the industry is taking to prevent this practice seems almost like it’s trying to fight a fire with an atom bomb.

This atom bomb comes in the form of a system block on used games. Many outlets have reported that the next generation Xbox and Playstation will have a system block in place against used games, which will not validate them or let them be played online. A great example of this is seen with the game Homefront, which was released in the Spring of 2011. When first bought, it used a code to validate the mulitplayer component, which allowed players to play online. This code was a one-time use though, and if someone bought it used they would have to fork over another $15 to buy a new code to input. The problem is though that it seems this practice is slowly becoming the norm across the industry, and is being used in more and more popular titles such as Mass Effect 3 and Battlefield 3. The problem I see with this set-up though is that it basically can open up Pandora’s box in terms of how much power developers have over their clients. For many people, used games are a much better alternative than laying out $40-$60 on a new copy of a game. Games do not deteriorate in value quickly, and some of the more popular games can still hover around the $50 price range well past a year of their release. With the economy the way it is, it is much more viable to buy used games opposed to newer ones. With the lock though, the industry is basically forcing consumers to buy what the publishers want them to buy. The main fear is that this lock escalates from just multiplayer components to entire games. What happens if publishers decide to charge for single-player as well? Or what happens if it devolves into specific levels? By placing the lock in systems, consumers are placed in a difficult and unfair situation. If they want to fulfill their hobby, they have to play along with the publisher. 

Another issue that arises from this lock is the need for a constant internet connection to “validate” the person’s game. To protect against piracy of games and the modding of game code, developers have begun using what are colloquially referred to as DRM, or Digital Rights Management software. The basic premise is that in order to play the game, not only will you have to initially validate it, which depending on internet speeds can take as long as 10 minutes to hours, but you also have to constantly be signed into a server to continually validate that you aren’t playing a pirated copy. This practice has been around for a few years, and has met with some disastrous results. The most well known was back in 2010 for the game Assassin’s Creed II. Initially the software performed its job well, and gamers played without experiencing many issues. But, problems began to crop up when servers or internet connections went awry. Because it needs a constant connection to validate, any time a person’s internet went down they would be locked out of playing the game until the connection was restored. Also, when when servers on the publisher’s side went down, gamers encountered the same issues and could not play their games. For reasons out of their control, gamers basically were given a $60 game that wouldn’t work half the time. It’s of no surprise that hackers were able to break the DRM locks on ACII, which rendered the whole system basically obsolete. The whole endeavor gave the publisher of ACII, Ubisoft, a lot of flak and wasted a lot of money. And ultimately, what of the people that don’t have internet? Video games are a great medium because they offer so much entertainment without the need for an online connection. There are so many genres that offer so many hours of gameplay that can be experienced in a single player format. This experience becomes something special and personal, and by forcing the online connection that experience is lost.

Obviously, the industry has the final say in the way that games are distributed. They created the games, and it is up to them to do as they wish. But as a lifetime gamer, I have to admit that the way they are going about this is wrong. The need for constant internet connection treats customers like criminals, forcing them to shell out money for a product that might not even work half the time. The gaming community is one of the most unified and friendly ones out there, and for the most part we feel the same way about hackers and pirates as developers do. So please, don’t lump us in with them. Our sense of community pride is one of the greatest things we have going for us, and the kinship that comes along with that pride is something I personally treasure. By locking games from consoles, developers are basically eliminating the years of trust and respect that we as a community have grown. It shows a lack of trust and respect for the consumer, which can do nothing but hurt the gaming industry. In these times of recession, the superfluous purchases are the ones that are first cut. I make it my choice to use my disposable income on video games because I trust that I will find something that brings me joy and entertainment. If I have to pay more just for the privilege of playing a game, then I honestly am considering taking my interests elsewhere.

Mass Effect 3 Review

Rarely does a series come along in this day and age that completely revolutionizes the industry. For many, the final entry in the Mass Effect Trilogy is not simply the ending to a beloved game line-up, but also the finale to one of the most well written and engrossing stories that has ever been seen in games. But, with all this fanfare comes expectations. The question is, does Mass Effect fit the bill?

With Mass Effect 3, players are tasked with taking the role of Commander Shepherd, a soldier in the Alliance Military in the year 2185 (Think Star Trek meets Star Wars). Without spoiling too much, the basic premise is that earth is being attacked by a vicious menace, and the only hope that it has is that Shepherd can appeal to other members of the galactic community to lend their assistance. As he progresses though, he realizes that it is rarely that simple. Mass Effect deals with difficult issues that always seem to plague society, such as population control or racism. It is through dealing with these issues that Shepherd will ultimately decide the fate of Earth, and ultimately the galaxy itself. 

With the number of games that are present in genres like RPG’s and Shooters, it is somewhat refreshing to have a game that succeeds in combining the two together. Mass Effect was one of the first series out there to really tie in the excitement of building up your own created character to unstoppable status along with the frantic and heart-pumping engagement that comes with the shooter mechanics. In terms of the series, Mass Effect 3’s gameplay is the best. The gunplay is frantic, difficult, and above all, fun. Fighting enemy forces feels like a challenge, as it should. When you’re fighting for the fates of billions of people, it won’t be a cakewalk. The combination of the stellar gunplay along with the tactical effectiveness of the “biotic” techniques(think the force, but with science) really adds a variety to the game. There are multiple ways to take down enemies, and it is up to you to decide how you want to use them. 

Although gameplay is a key component in any game, the real meat of the Mass effect series lies not it gunshots or powers, but conversations. Mass Effect has always had some of the most engrossing cutscenes in video games, placing the relative “voice” of Commander Shepherd in the hands of the players. Through these conversations players can unearth more of the incredible universe behind Mass Effect. I can’t recall a series that has had more backstory than this one. The variety of the alien races and the unique stories behind each character combine to immerse you into the experience. You want to fight for the galaxy because you find yourself caring for the people inhabiting it. As a veteran of the series from the very first entry, the death of principle characters left me grieving. You gradually allow these characters to affect you on a personal level, and it’s hard to imagine any game out there that can do this so profoundly. 

As well as all of this ties in though, it must be said that the story feels a little lacking. Although excellently written, it seems much more linear than the other entries in the series. Although this is understandable, the Mass Effect series is one that prides itself on player choice, allowing the the player to make decisions on everything down to the tone of how their Shepherd responds to other characters. This feeling of straight-forwardness does take away from the experience a little, but not enough to ruin it. 

In the end, I cannot say more about this game except that it is a masterpiece. Rarely have games been regarded as thematic engines, but Mass Effect deserves this distinction. It is one of the best looking games out there, boasting breathtakingly beautiful locales, incredibly believable aliens, and emotionally relatable humans. The amazing writing and engrossing story leaves you on the edge of your seat the entire time, and the gameplay always keeps the game lively. In the end, it more than surpasses expectations: it shatters them.