Review: 5 things that sucked in “Mass Effect”, and how “Mass Effect 2″ can be better

Some praise (albeit some of the most lavish) showered upon Mass Effect (BioWare, 2007):

“Mass Effect is a transcendent experience.” -Official Xbox Magazine

“A towering achievement that surpassed my expectations on every level.“ -G4TV

“It’s more of an experience than a game.” -GamerNode

“I can honestly say that the universe Bioware created is the best I have encountered since George Lucas created Star Wars.” -Gamezone

What the hell were these reviewers thinking? They weren’t the only ones who must have been high off their asses during their time with the game, either. Mass Effect has a whopping score of 91 on review aggregator site Metacritic.

exploring space in the Normandy makes you wonder why every planet looks the same

I just completed my first play through of the game, and as you may have guessed by now, I do not share the hyperbolic sense of miraculous wonder that many reviewers inexplicably experienced after playing this good, but by no means great, Xbox 360 game. Has the bar really been raised so high since 2007 that I, spoiled as I am by the marvels of “modern” gaming, am unable to garner the same eye-opening, life-changing, pants-crapping experience that reviewers described less than three years ago?

Video games are evolving pretty rapidly, of course, but a simpler explanation is that I am just jaded. An even simpler explanation is that many reviewers, though we hate to say it, exaggerate the best parts of games while offering few criticisms, in order to avoid the wrath of fanboys, developers, and assassination squads.

But that’s neither here nor there. This article is about what was wrong with Mass Effect. I guess I should also mention that Mass Effect was, overall, a very enjoyable game, though littered with dozens of persistent annoyances, hang ups, and extremely poor design choices. You can read about the good parts in someone else’s review (there are enough of them, trust me).

Repetition, Repetition, Repetition

Any RPG fan will tell you that when it comes to side quests, more is better. I would like to remind BioWare, however, that quality is important too, as they seem to have forgotten. Quests that fall outside the main story arc should augment the plot, provide interesting background information, further character development, or be otherwise not completely pointless. An impressive number of planets to explore, drive around, mine resources from and shoot aliens on doesn’t mean a thing when almost every single one looks and feels exactly the same.

Even worse are the building interiors; On any planet that is not visited as part of the main story quests, interiors take on one of three possible layout: crowded warehouse with a ramp, medium sized cave, or underground lab with slightly more rooms than the other two (four rooms). Such extensive lack of variation is completely unacceptable, and is proof of either laziness or impossible deadlines.

Luckily, BioWare seems to have given side quests more thought in Mass Effect 2. Via Joystiq: “Now when you find mission[s] out there in the uncharted worlds, there are always missions where something special happens, and you get really good handcrafted gameplay and art that you can’t see elsewhere in the game,” project director Casey Hudson told VideoGamer.com.

Stupid A.I.

In a squad-based game that gives players minimal control over squad mates, i.e. go here, use this ability, stay put, etc., A.I. is extremely important. Why is it, then, that I have had to watch my allies stand toe to toe with enemies, who prove even more moronic, exchanging shots in a futuristic game of rock-paper-scissors until one of them crumples to the floor? Why do I bother to revive my teammates when I know they will simply continue to stand in one place, absorbing fire like a sponge until they die? Granted, telling them where to go is easy enough, but in a game where you’re occasionally under fire from over a dozen enemies at once, keeping yourself alive can be difficult enough. Is it so much to ask for friendly A.I. to be able to find cover on their own?

Enemy A.I. is, of course, even stupider. Flanking often turns out to be the best strategy when there are only a few enemies left, as they will often remain glued to the side of a column, unable to shoot or move, peeking their heads out and waiting for you to come out from behind the box you used to be hiding behind. The A.I. in Mass Effect 2 needs to be a lot more dynamic for combat to live up to its full potential.

oh shit

Combat

Speaking of combat.. well, actually, I rather liked the combat. On normal difficulty, most firefights play out exactly the same: forget about your squadmates, run into a room and blast anything that moves with a shotgun. It is mindless and fun. Of course there are a few problems with this analysis, however, such as the fact that higher difficulties obviously require players to use more strategy. Playing on hardcore makes running into a room guns blazing a much less viable option. The fact is, however, most players will play on normal, which means most players should find combat oddly mind-numbing compared to the relatively complex RPG elements like inventory management and dialogue navigation.

For the sequel, I suggest that BioWare finds a way to make combat require a little more thought, regardless of difficulty. In addition to making some enemies weak to certain types of ammunition, make them immune to certain types as well. Hell, make them more resistant to certain weapons. That would encourage me to switch from my shotgun at least some of the time. Small improvements like this can go a long way.

Pacing

This may be my biggest complaint. Some of this may fall under the problem of repetition, but I believe the area most harmed by these baffling issues is the pacing, a crucial element to any game.

I’ll start with the elevators. I understand that elevators were used in many parts of the game in lieu of loading screens, which I appreciate to a certain extent, but why do they have to be so long? Maybe it’s my undiagnosed ADHD, but I found myself forced to browse the internet, flip to cable, or otherwise distract myself when I knew a long elevator ride was coming, afraid my brain would simply melt if I merely sat and stared at the screen as the elevator rose higher.. and higher.. and higher.. and higher.. Ahem. Apparently elevator loading screens have been removed from the sequel, so I supposed this is moot.

Another strange design choice is the sprinting mechanic, which has become almost a staple of modern games thanks in part to the popularity of the Call of Duty series. Movement speed seems fine until you realize how fast characters can move during combat, and even then only for about two seconds at a time. Outside of combat characters are relegated to a brisk jog that before long starts to feel like a crawl. Once you figure out that any explosion qualifies as “combat” as far as the misguided sprint mechanic is concerned, you’ll be blowing up barrels and wasting grenades just to get an extra burst of speed. Hopefully Mass Effect 2 will not require this of its poor players.

Lastly, and worst of all, is the button repetition game I will, from here on out, refer to as Virtual Simon. Every time a computer is hacked, a resource is mined, a lock is picked, a security device is disable, a crate is opened, or any other action besides shooting, running and speaking is undertaken, the player must complete a short, simple, painstakingly easy game of Virtual Simon. This involves watching a button light up on the screen and then pressing the corresponding button on the controller. Five times in a row. Or, in the case of defusing a nuke, thirty times. This “mechanic” is so unoriginal, repetitive and ridiculous as to be borderline offensive to gamers. It is quick time events without the quick time (or the events, for that matter). Apparently Virtual Simon is more difficult on higher difficulty levels. Who cares? For Mass Effect 2, take it out. BioWare needs to come up with better mini games like Oblivion‘s lock picking and dialogue persuasion gimmicks, or better yet, just do what they did in Dragon Age and let skills decide the outcome of actions.

"Mass Effect 2" should have more varied environments, smarter A.I., and less terrible, pervasive button mimicry minigames

Inconsistency

The most troubling result of all these faults is that a game that could have been great, could have even been a masterpiece, is simply a good game. It is definitely worth playing. Characterization is exceptional, and exposition and narrative content is refreshingly mature (see this high quality Fox News story from 2007, titled “SEXBOX?”). The game’s classes are varied enough to warrant and even require multiple play throughs (just skip the side quests). The graphics are top notch, and the simple and understated film grain effect really heightens the cinematic feel of the game. Next to everything BioWare did right, the faults become even more glaring. There is no such thing as a perfect game, and anyone who says otherwise is either an idiot or getting paid. Mass Effect comes within reach, just close enough, in fact, to beg for a better sequel.

BioWare has a long history of good (and occasionally great) games, including Baldur’s Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Knights of the Old Republic, and, more recently, Dragon Age: Origins. The Mass Effect trilogy will likely, after all is said and done, prove to be their crowning achievement as a development studio. It really depends on the steps they take to push the final two games from good to great. Hopefully all the praise directed at the first hasn’t gone to their heads. Mass Effect 2 will be released this Tuesday.