The Biggest Thing Wrong With Mass Effect

Why Mass Effect’s biggest threat, the Reapers, are one of the series’ biggest flaws.

[GarrusVakarian]

EA

[3-4-5]

ME1 was a really good game. Parts of 2 were done well, but it was boring, and 3 was just_________.

[Roccetarius]

I thought removing mechanics, instead of improving them made ME2 worse. ME3 didn't make things better, by adding things like the simplistic fetch quests.

Not to mention that MP was forced to achieve the ''best'' outcome, because it was impossible to achieve otherwise.

Of the 3 games, i still consider the first game the best.

[Sideras]

That is a general thing that keeps happening all the time in games today. Instead of improving or fixing they strip away parts and polish what remains, this whole streamlining crap needs to stop.

[Blacklash93]

ME2 is my favorite as a standalone game, though it didn't do any favors for the overall trilogy.

But for the story arc of the trilogy, ME1 is definitely the best.

[Irishguy95]

ME1 was really good but had flaws

ME2 was better, however it removed things from ME1 instead of improving them.

ME3 was really good too, but again it removed even more things.

The reason I stuck with ME3 was because the combat was good and the story was good(up until the ending)

The most important thing foe ME2 was to only collect what minerals you needed, and to not go off specifically to get them, that made the game horribly boring. I even dropped the game until I went back and tried again, spacing out the minerals mining on planets which stopped it from being boring.

[DOMination-]

I pretty much agree with your points.

All three games were great. Wish they could have remade me1 with me3 combat mechanics though.

[Juste_Belmont]

I only played ME2, but my biggest issue was that it seemed like the focus was on the story over gameplay, and the story didn't seem to interesting in the first place. It reminded me of the old choose your own adventure novels I used to read as a kid. I enjoyed them, but I never took them seriously.

If BioWare hadn't focused so much on relationship factors, story factors, and the dialog wheel, maybe they could have made a fun open world game set in space. I tried ME because I like the concept of an open world space game, but the gameplay didn't appeal to me. If they focus on making it more fun in the next game, maybe I'll check it out, but I want more freedom, not the same corridor/cover shooter I played in ME2.

[aliengmr]

You pretty much missed the point. Its just not your cup of tea. Gameplay took a backseat to story, that's what BioWare is good at. If you didn't care for the story, well, too bad.

Also doesn't help that you only played ME2.

Not trying to be harsh, but you want to get rid of the only thing that was worth anything in the series.

[Juste_Belmont]

Fair point, I'm sure there were plenty of people who started from the beginning who enjoyed the story, but I just wanted to explore space. Maybe I'd feel different about it if I'd played ME1 first, but I guess it wasn't the game I was looking for.

I'm glad you enjoyed it though. Maybe we will both be able to enjoy the next game in the series.

[Lord_Sloth]

The only real issue I had was the choices not really meaning anything.

***SPOILERS FOR SERIES AHEAD***

ME1 has you choose between Alenko and Williams but I chose to protect the bomb to ensure it's destruction because honestly, she was a racist and he was an ass so I didn't care about either of them. The choice effects nothing story wise either, it just replaces 1 with the other beyond that and they do the same things for the remainder of the series.

ME2 has you choose to work with TIM or to disolve your partnership with him at the ending. This means nothing because no matter what you choose or do, you still turned on him anyway in 3 so again, this choice is an illusion.

ME3's endings don't change in option no matter what choices you've made. It's just a dialogue with a different color, not to mention 1 of your choices is to do what you just killed TIM for trying to do in the 1st place making his complete section as the villain incorrect.

The hardest choice I had to make was choosing between the Quarians and the Geth and it was a decision I made instantly because I liked Tali far more than Legion.

***END SPOILERS***

I liked the series, I really did but the choices were just kind of there and didn't really change anything in the grander scheme of things. Just changed who was saying the dialogue here and there.

In terms of Gameplay ME2 was my favorite, hands down. It wasn't full blown action shooter like 3 and it wasn't as clunky as 1.

[NarooN]

Agreed 100%. Not to mention how the devs hyped up so many events/characters who were given tons of spotlight and exposition, only to mysteriously either disappear or do nothing in ME3. The Rachni Queen, who was hyped to hell and back in ME1 and somewhat in ME2? Doesn't really make an appearance in 3 and is only barely mentioned as being a part of your war effort if you met the requirements. The Harbinger, who was all over ME2? Lol he barely even made a *cameo* in the third game, and that was at the end, where he didn't even do anything.

There were so many choices that were hyped up to make a huge difference where in the end, they were really insignificant. I had fun with the three games, but ME3 was a massive disappointment story-wise, especially with the endings.

And I just have to laugh at the people who tried to defend the "endings" of ME3. Because the devs blatantly lied in one interview months before the game launched, where they literally said they wouldn't do a cop-out and have some "generic A, B, or C ending that all players get" and that's EXACTLY what the end of ME3 was!

[MattS]

Truly horrible article.

The fact that the author doesn't seem to realise that the Reapers are the embodiment of one of the popular philosophical arguments at the moment for why humans haven't discovered other alien life (go do some reading around possible "answers" to the Fermi Paradox), invalidates the entire argument.

"Oh, but the Reapers are so BORING" - not if you understand the reason Bioware built them, kiddo.

This is what's wrong with games journalism. People throwing out opinion pieces without actually validating their opinion first.

[Sideras]

I agree, the reapers where one of the things that made me like the games. And they were perfectly fine until the ME3 ending ruined everything about them. Turning them from mysterious and intimidating to a fucking joke.
I will never understand how they managed to ruin that series for me.

[thelaughingwiseman]

Whatever happened with the Dark Matter backstory! It was really relevant with Tali's missions in Mass Effect 2 and been connected with the Geth!

[Xof]

The same thing that happened to ME3 in general.

Lead writer got canned; was replaced by hacks.

It could have been worse. EA could have hired Bob Orci.

[aliengmr]

Even with that theme, there still remains a problem; the three acts weren't written at the same time, but as each game was developed. Without a plan they ended up with an entirely contrived plot in ME3.

[DOMination-]

Somebody leaked it and they changed it.

[TroubleEntendre]

Truly horrible post.

The Reapers can't be the solution to the Fermi Paradox because the other space-faring species of the galaxy were all active during the 20th century, and had been for hundreds if not thousands of years. The vikings on Earth were still raiding European coasts during the Krogan Rebellion, for example. When Fermi proposed his paradox, the galactic community was thriving, and humans just didn't have the technology to detect that.

But even if that weren't true, and the Reapers were supposed to be the answer to the paradox, that still wouldn't explain their motives or make them less boring.

This is what's wrong with game forum commentators. People throwing out opinion pieces without actually validating their opinion first.

[Xof]

When Fermi proposed his paradox, the "world" was a very different place. He was a smart guy, but his "paradox" relied on too much on assumptions that have since proven false, so it's really not much of a paradox at all.

The biggest of which is the assumption that A.) any sufficiently advanced culture would produce powerful radio signals that they would broadcast into space over a long period of time, B.) that we would be able to receive and recognize those signals over such a vast distance.

The first point assumption is invalid because our only sample for analysis is Earth, and we only transmitted signals into space for a few decades; the second is false because signals degrade. We can only barely detect CMBR right now, for example, and that took--quite literally--all of the energy in the universe to produce. Possibly more.

If we COULD detect radio signals of alien civilizations, odds are we wouldn't be listening at the same time the broadcast signals pass through our solar system; and if we COULD listen at the same time there was something to hear, we wouldn't be able to detect it.

[MattS]

Holy lack of comprehension, Batman.

Bioware was taking one of the philosophical arguments made in response to the Ferni Paradox - of the idea that exploration of space (and contact with unknown worlds) is limited because a force actively prevents it, and materialised that philosophical argument as the idea of the Reapers.

If you can't understand the motives of the Reapers with that in mind, then you shouldn't be analysing games.

[Blacklash93]

The Reapers are not a 'fundamental' flaw in Mass Effect. There's plenty of cool things you can do with an antagonist like this, their anonymity and relentlessness.

Many successful Sci-Fi stories involve unempathetic enemies, and in those stories it's about what the enemy represents, philisophical intrigue of why they do what they do, and the theories and metaphors they can be attributed to. Of course the writer here is implying they could never be written to be empathic, which is simply not true.

But ME2 and ME3 failed to flesh out the Reapers in any meaningful way. ME2 and ME3 both just relied on an 11th hour plot twist to develop them, which isn't how it should be done. But this is not at the heart of the concept of them, but rather missed opportunities.

Really, people who berate this kind of antagonist in favor of empathetic villains are just asking for a new oversaturated cliche. I'm honestly getting tired of the "Shady and extreme but is coming from the right place." or "The ends justify the means." protagonists and I used to find them refreshing. The Illusive Man was a very predictable, almost formulaic character throughout ME2. The majority of conversations with him were essentially the same thing.

> Accuse Illisive Man of decieving you or mention him being too radical.
> "I'm practical, the plot didn't let me work better with you. You should be more grateful about what I'm trying to do blah results blah idealism blah."
> "Here's your next mission, go do your job."

Of course he turned into something worse than that in ME3, but he wasn't anything that compelling to begin with. It's either that, or that had a terrible childhood or have been sorely misguided by some greater evil. It's tripe and I'm starting to feel this way about most villains like him, especially in videogames.

There's games with antagonists that use both archetypes, and that's how it should be.

[WitWolfy]

*SPOILERS*

This Trilogy had such potential... Then idiots like Mac Walter and Casey Hudson screwed it all UP in just 10 minutes!!!!

*slow clap*

Idiots, nobody cares about ME anymore thanks to these twerps, whats the use the whole universe dies, or everybody became a half robot abomination.. The destroy option was just an illusion of fooling you into thinking you made the right choice; but we all know it was BW's way of saying "Ha lol made you look!!!"

Then to make it worse they give us an ending showing Sheppard exhaling for a brief second then *BOOM* credits!! WTF!?! Is he dead or alive, is he gonna be in ME 4 or not??

(I know BW has stated numerous times that ME 3 is the end of Shepard's story).'

THEN WHY FREAKING SHOW IT?!?!?

Oh and one more thing that bothered me ever since I finished ME 3.. In ME it has has stated numerous times that the Reapers cant be beaten conventionally... Oh really? *shoots switch*

HOW THE FUDGE did that shut down the REPEARS???

oh I know why "Space magic"

[Iltapalanyymi]

A I like the only person in the planet to like ALL ME games really much AND the ME3 ending?