Waiting for Mass Effect 3-D

While reading about Mass Effect 2 presumably being a Xbox-exclusive "at least for a while," it got me thinking about a couple things.

First, while usually being swallowed up by a giant corporation usually results in being creatively kneecapped, I have high hopes that EA's acquisition will actually fix the supposedly-great RPG maker. Bioware's strength is in the writing (although not so much in proofreading for typos), but their technical skills are asleep at the wheel. EA should have plenty of knowledgeable people to handle that side of Bioware's projects so the excruciating loading time and stutterific framerate will not mar the sequels as it did the first Mass Effect.

Secondly, Mass Effect is supposedly conceived as a trilogy. That causes my ears to bleed. Not that I don't wish to have a couple more games in the franchise (Now that they're past the generic exposition of the introduction to the universe, they can get on to more interesting things), I just dislike the notion that being a trilogy is something to strive for. It's just an overused buzzword. Whatever happened to creating something to stand on its own, or allowing this creation to make its own ongoing life to see where it leads. If you set out to make a trilogy, I believe you're either limited your project unnecessarily (what if a new character pops up in the 3rd act that could take the series farther?) or adding crappy filler in a desperate attempt to stretch it out. Either way, it becomes very obvious when you do such things. Games series should be given room to expand as they would naturally and end when they hit their apex. They don't need to be saddled with a Godfather 3 to taint the whole franchise. But I probably shouldn't worry about this. This is EA publishing the games now and they won't stop 'til the money runs out. Even if they have to change the title to Madden Effect.

GamePro Strikes Again!

I think I'll be sad when my GamePro subscription runs out, for I'll have less to read (though not much less.. is there a page minimum that must be achieved to officially be a magazine and not a pamphlet?) and definitely less to gripe about here. I think my last issue will be the May 2008 one, but with the renewal notices that have been bombarding me, you'd think it was much closer. I fear for my mailbox when the real end is near.

So, in the Jan 2008 issue (Do they need to date periodicals so far in advance these days? I'm sure the post-dating had something to do with slower delivery times of the past. Nowadays, it makes magazines look even worse because it's already older than info online the date it hits the stands.) GamePro gives their top rating of 5-out-of-5 to several games, such as Call of Duty 4 and Super Mario Galaxy... how to break this tie to choose their game of the month award? By giving it to a game they only rate 4.75, of course!

Mass Effect wins Game Of The Month in GamePro, despite them complaints from the review about the terrible A.I. problems. And they don't even mention the frequent loading and sparse interactivity that has brought down the enjoyment for me. Not to mention it's seems like "just another" one of Bioware's RPG titles. Sure, it is a great game, with a huge amount of things to do... but in light of other games out there: not GOTM material. Especially since the reviewer of Call Of Duty 4 literally writes, "There is really nothing bad I can say about this game."

Someone explain this to me?

Mediocre Effect

I am not blown away by Mass Effect.

I'm only a couple hours into it, and it feels to me exactly like Knights of the Old Republic. In fact, the stage I'm on, the Citadel, is pretty much an exact copy of the port you arrive art early on in KOTOR. I've spent over an hour running errands for people and walking into the occasional ambush and intimidating people for fun. Same ol, same ol.

Not to say it's not fun or intriguing. There is more dialogue in these Bioware games than in some novels. And it is all voiced, which is especially nice. But even though you have lots of choices to make, it still feels way too scripted.

And I especially do not like the fact that you have six characters that can eventually join your crew, but only two of them will actually be there at a time. A common annoyance in pretty much all RPGs. I want a large posse! What's the point of having these people if they're not there to back you up at all times? And it would be nice to at least have more of a variety of crewmates to choose from. The first time you pick your squad members, you will see the silhouettes of everyone you can eventually have... sorta ruins the surprise. I want to be able to recruit some drunk in the bar, or at least the table dancer he's with. (Where's that game? The recruit-anybody game where it's more about surrounding yourself with human shields and live-wire testers.)

I gave Bioshock a four-out-of-four star rating, even though I lamented on how it failed to progress the genre or do anything really new. It just did the same old stuff well. At this point in Mass Effect, I'm leaning towards a 3 star rating, because as good as the storytelling and the character detail is... there are many problem issues. Excruciatingly long elevator rides and long empty hallways... and still there are game freezes to load some areas. There are occasionally some annoying jitters and popups in the graphics. And the combat isn't very smooth (Speaking of which, my character is a military commander and a war hero who single-handedly held off an invading squadron... yet she only starts with one pistol stat point?).

Another weird point with the game: I received an Achievement for completing Eden Prime (first level) when I killed the final enemy on the stage... however, I had not found & deactivated one of the bombs, which was the actual objective, so twenty seconds later I failed the stage and had to do it over. I unfortunately did not receive a duplicate achievement.