Mass Effect Trilogy - You require a DLC to read this

Since Cent wouldn't write one it falls onto me, again. What is Mass Effect? Well it started back in 5 years ago about a man(or woman), Commander Shepard, out on a quest to save the galaxy. A sci-fi game taking place in the near future where humanity found artifacts on mars that led to a 10000 year jump of technology or something of that sort. Upon arriving at the Citadel they discovered that every specie uses it as their central hub of communication. When I first played the game and stepped onto the Citadel I was struck speechless by it. I admit I enjoyed the first game. Combat was a little lacking that is true. The storyline was ridiculous beyond belief. The characters although somewhat whiny are fairly likable and memorable. But what I remember most was the world. Traveling around the galaxy meeting the species, talking and listening to the history, and seeing the epic tale of Shepard take place. It wasn't perfect, but it wasn't bad either. I would consider it a pretty good game.

During this time, Dragon Age came out and Bioware learned how stupid their playerbase really are. They learned that people loved romances and shitty stories. They also learned that every loser out there would buy every single DLC available. So when Mass Effect 2 came out what we got was an Action FPS RPG that focused more on the combat. They added the cover system where you duck behind cover and leap over when you press the button again while holding forward. This causes a lot of problems because you have to use the spacebar to duck, exit cover, interact with object, leap over object and picking up other guns. That shit is horrible. Can't we separate them? No of course not. Consoles like the same button for everything. In ME3 this is even more stupid because pressing space will let you jump in the direction as well as jump from cover to cover. You can also press space to climb ladders. So half the time you are flying in every direction trying to climb the ladder or duck behind cover while getting blasted by guns. I just wanna get behind the cover but apparently I didn't click spacebar at the right area and I am doing somersaults in front of the wall.

ME2 was made so that anyone who didn't play ME1 would understand what ME2 was about. While that worked there were still a little bit of info missing. If you didn't play the first one it automatically picks the important choices for you and you cannot get the best endings or choices in ME3 because of that. Same goes for ME2 choices for ME3. This sucks because you'll miss out on most of the game. But that is fine because if you don't buy DLCs you will miss out on even more of the game. Unless you read up on Mass Effect Wikia, none of the shit you find out in the next game would make sense.

http://www.gamespot.com/features/who-the-hell-is-james-vega-6366008/

Important parts of the story are explained in DLCs. Why? Because they want to milk more money from the fucking idiots who buy their games. And of course they also add day one DLCs. As I have said before in a previous post, day one DLCs are the biggest bullshit to gaming. Anything they wanted to add could be added before its shipped or patched in. Of course they wouldn't do that because they'd miss out on the 10 bucks. Their excuse was that after the game is ready they had time to make DLCs before it ships to you. But everyone knew that wasn't the case when the leaked script that was out 5 months before it was out had the DLC. The DLC is also included on the game disc and the 10 bucks was just to unlock the content on the DVD. Really? Bioware and EA are fucking giant greedy dicks. So what happens if you never downloaded them? Well you don't get the story! Because it continues the game expecting you to know that. ME3 pretty much requires you to play ME1 and ME2 to understand. That also includes all DLCs. Not to mention choices aren't available to you if you don't.

In ME2 you join up with Cerberus one of the villain groups in ME1. Why? Well its part of the story. I never trusted them but Cent apparently did. If you did any of the side quests in ME1 you would see a ton of shit they done and would never agree to anything they could possibly do in ME2. The storyline revolves around getting a group of people and doing a suicide mission. There is really not much story to the game you just keep collecting people then head off. Because of that I wasn't so sure if the game would be terrible or not. I was waiting for ME3 to finally end the game once and for all. In ME2 they introduced a wide cast of characters which most of them are stupid. Every single person has problems and its up to Shepard to save them with his magical penis. You can romance almost everyone on your team. The people are different for a male or female Shepard. The characters are whiny, the storyline is weak and inconsistent to ME1, and the world is a billion times smaller. One thing I really hated was that we cannot really explore anywhere. In ME1 you can walk around listening to conversation and find out little snippets of information about whats going on in the galaxy. In ME2 all of this is replaced with people from the first game coming back in some way. It felt cool at that time because it was the first game I heard of that had persistent progression between games, but nowadays its so common. Outside of those five lines of dialogue, they do nothing to add to the world but say exactly what they did in ME1 for the people who didn't play. Also they butchered the returning characters pretty badly for example, Wrex in ME1 was a wise Krogan battlemaster with his the best interest of his species at heart, in ME3 he is a hotheaded fucker thats wants to breed with all the women. Why? Because his counterpart if you left him to die on Virmire (the default choice for people who started in ME2 or ME3) is a hotheaded fucker that wants to breed with all the women.

What is the point of romances in Bioware games anyways? They can never get them right but everyone hails them as the best romance writers ever. In ME1 you get the space racist or naive Asari child. In ME2 you get the whiny pathetic "perfect engineered" human, the psycho whiny emotional wreck, or the whiny Quarian waif. In ME3 you get all of those plus a gay dude who probably happens to be the best written and some dumb chick with an assdress from IGN that was added into the game for nerd pandering. These romances just randomly and magically appear with no buildup or anything. They are awkward and poorly written.

When we finally get into ME3 that was when shit hit the fan. First starting the game you'll notice that you have no fucking clue what is happening because it continues the story from a DLC in ME2 and a comic book in between the two games. It is NEVER explained. The only way to find out what the fuck happened is to read it up online. That is bullshit. It completely invalidated all my choices in the previous two games and decided to shit all over it. They basically went "I know you did this and that but since we decided to go this way with the game we're gonna change everything for you and pretend nothing happened." As you're going around going why the fuck is this happening? How the fuck is this happening you realize the biggest fucking flaw in the game. The story has been completely retconned. In the first game you stop the Reapers, a race of sentient synthetic warships, from attacking the Citadel and rendering all species lost without communication. In the third game the Reapers decided they're not going to do that like the past several milennia, instead they'll directly attack Earth and let Shepard and the rest of the galaxy gather strength. That is fine if you really want to retcon the story BUT DON'T CHANGE IT BACK AT THE END. At the end they decided they liked the original story and the Reapers magically moved the Citadel to earth (yes it can move why didn't they do it at the start of the game who fucking knows) but at that time its too late. The galaxy has been united because the Reapers are stupid. That brings me to another point, the Reaper's had a reason for culling the galaxy of organic life but it was considered "too complex" for you to comprehend. Obviously that wasn't true in ME3.

In ME3, Cerberus returns to being evil again and starts working for the reapers. It is a complete 180 from ME2 when Cerberus was helping you defeat the reapers. Why? I don't know it was never truly explained other than the reason that the person behind it, the Illusive Man was indoctrinated before he even formed the Cerberus organization. SO IT MAKES EVEN LESS SENSE? How do you fuck that one up so bad. Although there were some great missions and having returning characters from the previous two games most of them are terrible. Again they retconned most of the choices in ME1 and ME2 so that people who played neither of those games can get ME3. If you killed off a character in ME1 going yeah this is going to bite me in the ass! Someone appears in his/her place and the story is unchanged. So basically what you're telling me is what I did or didn't do in the previous games meant nothing? It was just an illusion tricking me into thinking I had a choice in what I was doing but in reality everything is set in stone already.

I didn't think they can make ME2's exploration even worse but they managed to do it. It is the most tedious and horribly constructed thing ever and I am not going into detail. To summarize you go around clicking scan on a random pocket in the galaxy and if you scan too much reapers come and blow you up. Yes its as dumb as it sounds. Side quests also involve scanning the galaxy. There are no longer mission side quests. Unlike ME1 where you ride the Mako around and explore you get quests that says "find and rescue the Elcor forces" when you talk to the Elcor ambassador. All you have to do is fly over to a planet hit scan and it says "anomaly detected" you fly over click on it click scan planet/moon drag your mouse around launch a probe then at the bottom right a pop up appears "Elcor fleet acquired." I finished the quest right? Then you look at your journal and you see the side quest magically grayed out. And you walk over to the war room and look at what you acquired. You gotten 40 extra military strength from the Elcor fleet! They managed to make everything worse and worse as the series continued. Combat got worse, storyline got worse, side quests got worse and the worst part of all, the sexism seemed to get worse.

I've mention Bioware being sexist as fuck and I will say it again. Bioware is sexist as fuck. A whole specie of all female prostitutes? Seriously? Clothing that are impractical as fuck? Its basically the space version of a chain mail bikini. No one should be walking around with a slutsuit with a huge camel toe. The worst part of it is the male gaze. The camera automatically pans around so it zooms in on their ass while you are having a conversation. When they walk away the camera pans and focuses on the ass as they walk off. Shit like that. Why? Why do we need that? For people like Cent who likes to zoom in on their crotch with a high powered sniper rifle? So they wouldn't have to do it the game would do it for them so they don't look like some kind of pathetic sick fuck?

All of these are nothing compared to the massive failure of a ending that the Mass Effect trilogy has. Not only is it disconnected from the main game, all three ending are exactly the same. To even unlock the ending you would need to get over 5000 Effective Military Strength. to get 5000 EMS you would have to play multi player and grind points. There is no way around that unless you modify your EMS which I did. Why do you force us to play a shitty multi player for our shitty single player? Fucking separate that shit. Is it to stop pirates? No they can mod that in. Is it because they are so fucking proud of their multi player that they want everyone to give it a try. Yes thats probably it. I can imagine it they sitting in their office jerking off to the multi player mode that they made while high fiving each other going "How do we get more people to try this fucking awesome shit we made?" Then one guy jumps up and goes "LETS MAKE IT REQUIRED TO GET THE ENDING!" And everyone blows their load from the perfection that is that idea. MULTI PLAYER AND SINGLE PLAYER SHOULD NEVER AFFECT EACH OTHER. Never.

So you modded your game got 5000 EMS and went well what does it really do? There are three endings one is paragon which is the choice that the Illusive Man wanted. The renegade ending where its the choice Anderson wanted and then the neutral choice that only appears if you have high enough EMS. All three choices involve dooming the galaxy and killing Shepard. There is no way around it. You basically use the Conduit from ME1 that magically got retconned and moved to Earth from Ilos. Then you meet the God AI of the Reapers that control them in the Citadel and he's all like "you're the first organic that reached here so I'm giving you three choices and all of them are terrible. Enjoy your ending." But before that he tells you why the Reapers appear every time organics reach a peak of their civilization and harvest them to create more Reapers. Organics and synthetics cannot get along with each other so they appear and kill the organics before they can make synthetics that kill them like the species that created the Reapers. What the fuck? Apparently the ending is so bad that there are petitions to get it changed. A vote on the Bioware forums has 98% of the votes saying the ending is bad. And there is even a charity donation to raise awareness of how terrible the ending of ME3 was. It raised up to $7000 in a day and as I am writing this it is at $32035.

The best part of the ending is after the credit screen, a pop up appears saying that there will be more DLCs. Bioware developers on their twitter accounts say that there is more to the ending don't go apeshit. So basically they either gave us a shitty ending and expect us to pay 10 bucks to get the best ending or they're trying to save their ass and lying to us, again, and pretending that shit is terrible on purpose. They could fix it and admit their mistakes which I think they shouldn't. If you're going to make an ending then stick to it. Don't change it because people whine about it. It is your story, you have the power. But keep in mind that people won't like it. So they're basically stuck here. They're fucked either way. One thing that seems to be happening is that a portion of the playerbase are in denial and think that the ending was all a dream after being blasted in the face by Harbinger's laser. If people rather accept that it was a dream than the ending that was given to them what does that say about the ending? Which brings me to another point. The main villain of the series is the Reaper leader called Harbinger. He never speaks and doesn't appear in ME3 until the very last minute of the game to blast your entire army to death including you. You don't even get to fight him. The real ME3 boss is Kai Leng a Cerberus assassin spaceninja using a spacekatana. All he does is do spaceflips with his spaceponytail and spacesword taunting you. When he beats you he lets you go then sends you emails taunting you. He's like those stereotypical retarded villains that wait until the good guys collect everything swoop in to take it then leave you alive so you can come back and beat his ass. Why? I don't know. Whats the point of his existence? He's evil for the sake of being evil.

 There is also the fact that to fully understand ME3 you have to have played ME1 and ME2. An interview with Casey Hudson, the lead developer of Mass Effect, he stated that since ME3 is the finale there will be bigger choices and everything Shepard picks or does will have MAJOR AND DIRE CONSEQUENCES to the end of the game. Really? This is the straightest line I have ever seen. And the ending happens regardless of any of your choices so there is really no reason to pick anything. From what I have heard all but 2 of the 6 writers remained after the original Mass Effect so they had to hire some new writers. They hired a couple fanfic writers on the ME universe and thats how you got a shitty downhill slope. I like how in ME1 you get to interact with the other races and learn so much about the galaxy. In ME2 they expected you to know everything and you were being shepherded into the right path forcing you to ignore everything. In ME3 everyone expected it to offer something more like ME1 since we are visiting the homeworld of every specie and also helping them. But no, its more like ME2, infact its even worse. There are absolutely nothing to do. You don't even get to talk to Hanars or Elcors or anything. If you didn't play ME1 you wouldn't know anything about those two species. Although I do like how people move around the citadel and your ship the Normandy after every mission as if they have a life of their own instead of sitting in their respective rooms.

The worst part is anyone that enjoyed the game is so soured by the ending that it completely ruined the series for them. They do not feel like replaying the game again or even stand looking at the game. It is that bad.

Players vs Spectators

What makes a game successful and popular? It is the players? Or the spectators? When the same question is applied to televised sports, the spectators generate the most revenue and the most interest. But video games have almost always had a larger player base than a spectator base. This hasn't been a problem for decades, but with the rapidly growing strive to reach televised esport status, the need for more spectators is clear.

Games like Quake 3, Starcraft, Counterstrike, Street Fighter, DOTA have all been televised before, and largely commentated and spectated, yet a controversial topic was brought forward by a Korean community member recently: Starcraft was the only sport to draw a significant number of spectators who have barely played the game, while all others have spectators who have at least played it at an amateur level. He believed that this characteristic distinguished Starcraft as a genuine 'sport'.

While his stance is still heavily contested, games striving to achieve tournament and esport recognition should place heavy consideration into making the game fun for spectators, and not just the players. Even in real sports, the respective associations consider and apply rule changes to make the game more exciting for fans to watch, even if it is as the expense of the players. Baseball had different bats approved to increase the rate of homeruns to entice more watchers. Hockey changed passing rules to quicken puck turnarounds and increase frequency of scoring. After all, for these games built primarily around competitive play, it is the fans that will bring in revenue, and the more people who are interested, the more pros will want to pick it up.

That isn't to say any casual drivel can be accepted as a tournament game as long as it is easy to watch. It must be largely recognized to be a deep game requiring mastery and training. But the gameplay should be easy to comprehend for new watchers, smooth to follow for cameramen, quick to tell who's winning and why, fast paced enough to stay interested, long enough to be satisfying, and short enough to not get bored.

If you make a game for tournaments, think about the spectators. I'm looking at you MOBA.

The small details should be missed.

Whenever I think back to previous immersive gaming experiences, the main factor that I find neglected are the small details. Perhaps it's something comedic that's happening in the background. Or a faint, passing sound in the distance. Or the tiny gouges in the wall that are omens for a greater nemesis. Or the hint dropping for a masterminded scheme in shadows. These elements, while small, synergize with primary gameplay and setting to accentuate a brilliant game.

Games in the 90's started to have the technology and capacity to harness and manifest these masterful details, and while not every game that did this were financially successful, they all became memorable experiences and left unforgettable legacies. The progression and modernization of gaming has not discarded these fine touches, and the resurgence of success of heavy-immersion games with significant atmosphere has only strengthened this philosophy.

Yet, something is lacking. Notably so. Almost to the extent of crippling the entire effort of the responsible developers. Only recently did I come to pinpoint what the problem was: the developers didn't want us to miss the details. They tried too hard to make sure players would notice and experience every fine detail. They would move to camera and zoom in on exactly what they wanted us to see. They would stop the gameplay so that players could hear that faint squeaking. They would make characters audibly or visually respond to the details. Protagonists would commentate on the fine detail he noticed, just in case the player missed it.

The producers find this reasonable, and I understand. If they paid a developer to add in content, this content better directly attribute to raising the game's score and quality. Leaving it to the chance of whether or not the player was perceptive enough to receive it is a bad gamble with an investment.

But when the extras are forced into the game, shoved into the players face, you don't feel in control. You don't feel the need to be perceptive. You don't feel frightened or intimidated. You don't feel like there's anything you may have missed, and you don't want to play again. Every time I reread a book or rewatch a movie, there are fine details that I glanced over at first, but then come to appreciate on subsequent views. If immersion is crucial, then part of that immersion is to be believable. And in a believable situation, you will miss some details, and you'll only be able to see everything you should if you let your imagination run away with it. The mind and imagination are the strongest weapons a developer can harness against us. With them, they can make us see what isn't there. Or believe things that were never true. Or shock us when we are the ones revealing the untold truth to ourselves. The only way to do that, is to let our minds be free, and stop guiding us with painfully exposed and over-elaborated details. We'll become more perceptive, allowing our minds to wander into the depths of the game.

Saving - Turning the simplest things into something complex

Saving is something that I noticed recently that we've taken for granted. Sure it sucks when you can't find a save point or you have to go to an inn or something but it could be so much worse. Depending on the game saving could be like a JRPG where its only available in set locations or inside inns. Or it could be like a PC game where saves are available at anytime. Then theres the retarded fucking bullshit of console ports where saves are fucking autosave only and won't let you save. Everything is saved automatically to the account you logged in as. So the only way to save is to keep going until you reach a checkpoint and look for the spinny autosave shit at the bottom corner before quitting the game. Of course it warns you that quitting might lose all unsaved progress like an asshole. Like it'll make a difference? You never gave us a save button or option we have to guess if it really works or not.

Lets look at some games with bad saving system. Alice: Madness Returns have you create a profile and then log into that profile. After logging into the profile you can edit options, check unlocks and other shit. Even quitting the game requires you to select a profile too. Say you clicked your game and then realize oh shit I gotta go time to quit. NOPE THERES NO QUIT. You have to select a profile log in select quit then it asks if you wanna quit then you can quit. Sure its minor but its a simple fucking thing like quit to desktop. They shouldn't have you log in first to quit the game. How does this have to do with saving? Well you don't get to save ever. You have to keep an eye out for the autosave clock at the bottom right corner. I suppose its because it didn't want you to save after completing something minor like a jump or puzzle so if you die you have to start over. But what about safe areas? Why do we have to wait 10-20 minutes of content to get to an autosave?

The sad part is there are more console ports that do the same shit. Alan Wake does the same shit but at least the save points are more common. Now L.A Noire is the biggest pile of shit ever. Not only are the saves far from common it never tells you when it saves or not. So all you can do is hope that it saved and quit or wait until you finish your case and start a new one. Which could take anywhere from a hour to two. Fucking bullshit. Who decided to not include saving? What about the worst console port ever in the history of games, Fable 3? Not only is there no menu you have to go into your private room when you click the option button and then navigate the room to the wall where you enter another room to find a save mannequin. After talking to the mannequin you are able to save then you navigate out of the room. To another to quit the game. Fuck you.

Some games make it hard to save while others don't give you the option. What about games that save too much? Look at games like Kings Bounty or the Witcher. The games are good but they autosave way too much. By the time you actually save they already made ten separate copies of autosaves. By the time you're halfway through the game you already have 5 gigs of saves in your save folder. Eventually a patch was released to fix those problems but its still dumb as shit. You wouldn't need 100 copies of autosaves, why can't they be limited? At least they fixed it.

I never noticed how bad saving has become until now. It may be a simple and insignificant part of the game, but it shouldn't be overlooked. Its simple, its hard to mess up, yet a bunch of games do this. Even games that are good do this.