Mass Effect 2: The Stage Review
I’m not a hard-core gamer. Sure, I subscribe to gaming magazines, build my own computers, listen to game music from ocremix.org, but I work a normal 9-5, I don’t troll through forums, and I certainly don’t talk[ about video games. Why the disclaimer? I was inspired by Corey May’s article in Game Informer[1][/b] to write a critique of Mass Effect 2, precisely because I don’t hang out in chatrooms with fanboys’ throw-away comments and juvenile flamebaiting . How does this help a game developer know what his/her audience is really thinking? I can only hope that a cohesive, constructive critique for Mass Effect 2 might better guide Bioware’s talented team when developing Mass Effect 3.
Interaction with Crew-Members.
Hands down, one of the greatest strengths of the ME series is the interactions between Shepard and her
crew. Hours of gun-fighting might not be memorable, but a player will be quick to remember the unexpected and charming thirty-second stint of Mordin singing Gilbert and Sullivan. For this reason, the following three interactions are crucial to making the ME series a success:
Friendship, Loyalty, and Romance. Love is tricky. With the wide variety of crew members, love easily blooms, and it is at once too easy and far too difficult. It is difficult because if you say the wrong thing to a crew member your chances of being romantically involved with them are shot; you may actually lose their loyalty.
You may risk your life on their side-quests, but one conversation could end their friendship, loyalty, or interest.
Some instances of this are embarrassing Talia or choosing sides between Jack and Miranda. These relationships are too binary, whereas real world relationships are complicated. If loyalty can be gained through a mission, how is it lost with a word? In addition, there is no way to regain this loyalty when it is lost. While I want to form relationships between all of my crew members, I don’t want to be forced between either a romantic
relationship or nothing at all.
Character Expressions. In ME1, it was an refreshing experience to hear one of your crew members give you an opinion you didn’t ask for, both in conversations (upheld in ME2) and in the real world (forced click in ME2). These comments help enrich the world – I want to hear Talia talking about the slums or Garrus bad-mouthing C-Sec. In
ME1, if you wanted to talk with a character, you could click on them and hear their thoughts. In ME2, you have to
click on pre-determined map areas. A component of relationship-building is hearing others’ perspectives, regardless if you want to hear them. For this reason, I hope that future crew members (at least loyal ones) will feel at ease enough to express their thoughts when they feel like it. One of the great surprises is hearing how
different characters encounter the same scenario (making replay a real blast). In addition, it’s entertaining
and enlightening to hear your crew members interact with each other without prompting (ala Dragon Age).
Previous Relationships. In ME1, I had a relationship with Liara. The dialogue pulled me in, making me care a
great deal for this pixilated creation. She spoke of devotion, of dedication, so I waited with bated breath to
find out how our relationship would bloom in ME2. I was greatly disappointed to find that these characteristics completely vanished – that I was viewed more as a tool to her than a passionate lover. One of the goals of ME’s developers, I suspect, is to not only engage the player, but also to have them invest in the game, emotionally.
ME2 primes players to expect quick, easy relationships that could come or go at the drop of a hat. If I have a
crew member’s trust, I want to earn that trust… and in the earning, I will cherish it.
The Mako.
In the March issue of PCGamer, Dan Stapleton said, “BioWare obviously listened to criticisms of ME1, and took a battle axe to aspects of the game that didn’t work”.[2] In the instance of the Mako, the baby was
thrown out with the bathwater. In ME1, the Mako’s handling was problematic, leading to minor frustration. As a concept, however, the Mako was brilliant. Several strengths of ME were lost when the Mako was abandoned.
Decision-making. Riding in the Mako forced players to reconsider their objectives when visiting a planet. If they brought a tech-savvy crew-member, they might be able to access valuable information, minerals, or reports (or survive that damn Thresher Maw), but they might not have enough brawn to handle the FPS-aspect of the mission. I would stare at the screen trying to determine who to choose for the mission – these were wonderful, agonizing moments that I missed in ME2. In fact, in ME1, when I made the wrong decision, I would be forced to revisit the planet, adding to the fun.
Battle. Riding in the Mako meant more than just getting to the objective. It meant the possibility of falling into a trap, picking up minerals, or fighting off the Geth. While playing ME1, I kept thinking that I should be able to upgrade the Mako’s weapons and armor just like I was able with my crew. By expanding the available enemies (there were a ton of idle vehicles… but none that I could steal, salvage, or fight), the Mako levels could have been extremely successful.
Firewalker Campaign. While the Firewalker DLC is a step in the right direction, it doesn’t live up to its possibilities. Its mobility is vastly superior to the Mako, but at a significant cost: Where the Mako had a status indicator, two weapons, and the ability to be repaired, the Firewalker has no status indicator, one weapon, and cannot be repaired. Battles are underwhelming – the vehicle hovers a mile away from a stationary enemy and
launches missiles until the enemy is subdued. Sadly, the Firewalker Campaign suffers from the same issue of most DLC – it feels more like a tacked-on module rather than an experience that enriches the whole game.
Mini-games and Scanning.
It is interesting that, in the context of Dan Stapleton’s previous comment, Bioware not only decided to stick with mini-games, but didn’t improve their fun-factor. And while scanning for minerals had a minor tranquilizing effect on me, it more often than not just made me upset that I had to waste time looking for precious Element
Zero.
Mini-games. I see the allure of using mini-games to hack information or open vaults, but there are so many instances where this needs to be done that the mini-games quickly become tedious, rather than another fun
part of the adventure. One suggestion might be to bypass the mini-games in lieu of stat combining (like in ME1, if
your party has enough tech points, you can access certain areas), or to simplify the mini-games to the point that they are quick and painless (ala BioShock’s needle system). Another suggestion might be to create different mini-games chosen randomly that really test thought or skill.
Scanning. In ME1, if you ordered a scan of the planet, you could collect artifacts or information. In ME2, you have to literally scan the surface of the planet for mineral spikes or distress calls. I keep thinking, “What is the captain of the Normandy doing this dredge work for? Don’t we have an AI?!” While I appreciate that different minerals
allow for different upgrades, there is no way to tell what minerals are on what planet. One suggestion, then, would be to have an initial scan pinpoint what minerals (and perhaps, the percentage of those minerals) could be found if further mining ensued. If the Mako were resurrected, however, minerals could be retrieved en route to a mission.
Weapons, Upgrades and Crew Powers.
While ME1’s inventory system was a complete mess, it was forgivable in the context of freedom and specialization. I could upgrade my weapons, armor, grenades, etc. I could
sell things I didn’t need. Although upgrades are still available in ME2, they are disappointingly both fewer and
generic.
Weapons. In ME1, your class limited your weapon selection and upgrade ability. This decision had an enormous impact on the entire game, making your class important. By placing weight on class-selection, the
player became dedicated to their class, weapons, and abilities. They became specialists. In ME2, by allowing players access to all weapon types and upgrades, their class became much less important. By de-emphasizing class, players are more likely to feel that their character is generic. In the words of Syndrome from The[/i]
Incredibles[/i], “When everyone’s super, no one will be”. Character classes should have significantly different sets of strengths and differences so that players must achieve their goals using different strategies.
Upgrades. While the upgrade system of ME2 was less complicated than ME1, what it gained in simplicity, it lost in diversity. Different guns could have completely different ammo, making weapon and ammo selection an important aspect of the game. For instance, while my favorite sniper rifle has combustible ammo, it might be less effective than an upgraded pistol with shield-reducing ammo. Decisions have to be made on who gets what limited upgrade, making this process more engaging (and crew-selection more intriguing). Multiply this upgrade process by several crew-members, and you might create quite the diverse crew, whose strengths and
weaknesses make or break a battle. In ME2, upgrades are spread to every crew member, reducing each crew member’s complexity.
Crew Powers. Crew powers suffer the same fate as upgrades in ME2. By having so many crew members,
it often doesn’t matter which tank or tech you use because their powers are similar. One concussion shot is as good as the other. I ended up choosing crew members based more on their personality (Jack, Talia, and a female Shepard make one hell of girl-power team) than their special powers. While personality should be considered when choosing crew members, distinct powers make each mission more engaging. By increasing
crew members and standardizing special powers, their presence in missions is less impactful.
Charm vs. Intimidation. Paragon vs. Rebel.
In ME2, the charm and intimidation skill were subsumed by paragon and rebel categories. This meant that Shepard could either be a charming paragon or an intimidating rebel. As with the upgrades, this simplification process stole the nuances of being a hero. Either you were a “good” hero or a “bad” one, devoid of complexity. In addition, in ME2 during actionable scenes, players are forced to either act as a paragon, or don’t act at all, to act as a rebel, or don’t act. Regardless of how many points are in the opposing category, players can’t choose a paragon action when a rebel action is being prompted. With the presence of charm and intimidation skill, it makes sense that you don’t have the ability to charm/intimidate depending on your skill evolution. However, it doesn’t make sense that you are forced to engage in a paragon/rebel action simply because you don’t have enough points in that particular category. Shepard is nuanced – sometimes she needs to be political savvy and
sometimes she needs to be ruthless. Limiting these actions based on a “moral” point system pigeon-holes her
character, reducing the player-character connection.
Messages and Cerebus Network.
Receiving messages, reading Cerberus Network (CN) briefs, and listening to Galactic News (GN) are great
ways to immerse the player in the ME universe by feeding the player information in real time. The critical problem with these inputs is that the player can’t respond to any of them. After reading a message, I’d like to either
respond (perhaps earning me paragon/rebel points) or at least talk to my crew members about the messages that correspond to them (either on a personal level, or because they joined me in that particular mission). In one instance, I sent the Alliance the recovered Cerberus encrypted data, hoping that Anderson would loosen up and give me more support after he sent me a message confirming receipt. No dice – that was not a conversation
option. In addition, when I learn that something is going down in some part of the universe through the CN or GN, I would like the option to go to the appropriate location and check things out for myself. It would force me to really
engage in the news and give me the opportunity to participate in interesting side-quests.
It is because Mass Effect 2 is such an amazing game and the team at Bioware is so talented that I felt the need to provide some constructive criticism. It is my hope that these suggestions help the team develop a third Mass Effect game that rivals its predecessors and cements its place as one of the best game series ever created.
[1] May, Corey. “Failure to Communicate,” Game Informer, February, 2010, 50.
[2] Stapleton, Dan, “Mass Effect”, PCGamer, March 2010, 46.
Modifié par JStager, 03 avril 2010 - 06:16 .
Retour en haut
