835 of 1,055 people found the following review helpful
Great Trilogy.... Until the Last Hour or So,
This review is from: Mass Effect 3 (Video Game)
Be warned, this review contains some spoilers so read at your own risk. This is also a bit long winded; I apologize but, as a fan, I invested quite a bit of time in the series. Time for me to give back what they took from me.
My Real Rating: 4.5/5 until the last hour or so, at which it becomes 2/5
Game reviews can often be subjective so this review is coming from someone primarily with an RPG background who, in terms of game play, enjoyed the first game better than the second. The second wasn't terrible in terms of story but it was much less of an RPG and more of a shooter. The first thing I noticed about Mass Effect 3 is that BioWare gave us a game that gives us the best of both worlds and should be recognized for that. There are also some things here and there that I either loved or hated but these were not things that impacted the overall experience so I exclude them.
1. Some people complain about graphics but that isn't as much as an issue for me. I am a hard line gamer who still pulls out the classics from the 80s and 90s and can generally forgive not-as-good graphics for a good story or game that is simply fun to play. Mass Effect 3 is, for the most part, both. That being said, the graphics weren't terrible and I feel that this is really a non-issue.
2. The re-design of the Normandy is great! I love the lounge (reminds me of a line from Mass Effect 2 when Shepard told Jacob that the next Normandy gets a lounge). Nice touch.
3. The writing was generally good. There were some places where I felt it was lacking but I'm saving my anger to discuss the ending. Also, character development is good, especially across the three titles; this is insanely difficult to accomplish in a game trilogy so kudos for that. There were several points in the game where a scene elicited an emotional reaction from me. In the last hour, that emotion was sheer terror that all this character development had been for nothing (see below).
4. As I mentioned, many of the RPG elements that were taken out of the second title were brought back but vastly improved. One such feature was weapon modding. While it didn't bother me like it did some people, I must still admit that modding in the first game could become rather tedious, especially for someone who feels the need to collect everything (not a good idea in the first game).
In this game, for example, suppose you mod a series of weapons with, say, a Rifle Scope I. If you pick up or purchase a Rifle Scope II, all weapons with the earlier mod are automatically updated as well as your inventory.
From the start, you can choose to upgrade weapons you are using to better weapons right away. Moreover, weapons are no longer constrained to a particular class (i,e, infiltrator, soldier, vanguard, etc) so you can enter a combat situation with the weapons that are best suited to the task. There are some weight limits that you should observe when carrying weapons that depend on class, however.
Overall, the game play is fantastic.
5. Halleluiah, planet scanning is gone! It has returned in some form but one does not need to spend large chunks of time collecting resources to upgrade weapons and ship components. Planet scanning is mainly used to collect war assets in Reaper controlled territory but even this can still get a bit tedious at times.
6. I am not a huge fan of multiplayer games, cooperative or not, so I do not feel like I am in a position to adequately critique it.
Comments on the Story
The story was great. I was on the edge of my seat digging it, that is, until the last hour minutes or so when, in my view, the totality of the trilogy came crashing to the ground. There is a huge, heated debate about the ending of the game where both sides are calling names like rather ill-behaved children. I do not intend to call names here as games, like movies, are very subjective. However, I do have some thoughts about the ending and the story. If you don't share these thoughts, great. But don't be pompous, acting like your opinion is the only one out there. And, beware of spoilers.
//[Work Hard and Still Get the Shaft]//
The first thing that really annoyed me was that I played through every mission/side quest and got most (but admittedly not all) of the war assets from the various worlds using the planet scanner (this also got tedious at times but was nowhere as bad as the scanning in ME2). The way I understand the galactic readiness rating (GRT) is as follows: it is basically a multiplier that takes your raw military strength and is used to produce an effective military strength (EMS). If you spend more time in the multiplayer (which I did not) you can, in principle, spend less time on side quests and vice-versa. Good idea, I thought, as it gives players some leeway on how to proceed.
However, when I went into the final battle, I feel that the EMS rating was rather misleading. Mine was roughly at about 3200 or so with a default GRT of 50%. The green bar was completely filled. However, my ending sucked (I'll get to this in a minute). In fact, the first time I played through, I was so shocked that I re-loaded the Citadel mission to see if I missed something. Nope, as I feared.
Now, my initial reaction was knee-jerk. I was furious that EA/BioWare made a game where, as I perceived at the time, a decent ending could not be achieved without multiplayer. I have since then been corrected. A decent ending, where Shepard presumably lives (there is still some ambiguity here), can be achieved with an EMS of 4000 or better (at least, according to sites like IGN). However, my complaint is that the game misled me about this as my EMS bar was completely filled going into the last mission. Even if you can get the good ending without playing multiplayer, much of your readiness rating depends on previous choices from earlier titles. Also, admittedly, there is a box that told me that my chances against the Reapers was even but I didn't think much of it because in Mass Effect 2, they still called it a "suicide mission" even if you made all the necessary preparations.
I should note that the supposed "good" ending includes a very brief cut scene where Shepard is still alive but appears to be in bad shape; I don't have much of an incentive to work hard to get my EMS up for a 20 second cut scene that leaves some ambiguity about Shepard's ultimate fate.
I didn't feel that all of my decisions really mattered. My feeling is that your decisions mattered mainly insofar as a character might briefly appear in the game and promise to help you but you may not ever encounter that character again in the game and a positive number would be tallied, in your favor, to your military strength. So, basically, I feel like I made decisions not to see further development of a character who was willing to fight and, possibly die, along side me but rather, to see a sum magically increase by a few hundred points.
A good example is the Rachni Queen. She appears if you save her and you are again given an option to save or let her die as she has been taken over by Reaper tech. If you let her live, she appears in a list under the war assets and that is that.
The collector base, for example, does play a role in what choices you have in the ending but I didn't really feel like my decision to destroy it made much of an impact throughout the game. This was, at least I thought, a huge decision and all it does it determine which three crappy choices will cause you to "win" if you even "win" at all. That is, the crappy choices are permuted depending on your choice to destroy or not destroy the collector base.
You also see Major Kirrahe who promises to fight by your side no matter which way the political tide turns. What is frustrating is that I expected a full scale, epic battle where all sorts of people I have rallied were fighting by my side. Literally. I don't think that this was a wrong or misleading assumption. But this isn't what I got. Perhaps my expectations here were far too high.
I understand that making a game that is custom tailored to the player is a difficult, technical task but this is how they marketed the game. I remember feeling that my ME1 decisions, with the exception of Wrex, didn't really have an impact on ME2 except for a few casual encounters with Conrad or an Asari communicating on behalf of the Rachni Queen. I really felt like I would feel the heavy weight of my major decisions from ALL three titles. Instead, there were many times when it felt like "Oh yeah, I remember doing that." The only decisions that seemed to carry sufficient weight were ones that I made in this particular game.
//[Total Annihilation/Gooification of Humanity Isn't So Bad So Long As it is Justified by a Child]//
The ending didn't make much sense to me. In fact, I felt like more alcohol would assist me in understanding it. So, to save organics from the hands of super advanced synthetics or AIs we have to brutally destroy entire species with a race of ultra-sophisticated synthetic-organic hybrids? Okay, perhaps "destroy" is a bad word; more like, gooify you and collect you as a museum exhibit of what once was. So, instead of being destroyed in the usual "the machines have revolted" sense, we will be brutally harvested by super advanced machines. Yeah.... that is a great....uh.... solution? Chaos is not necessarily a bad thing; it is found in nature. This was hard to stomach.
In Mass Effect 2, we discovered that the collectors were really Protheans who were re-purposed and it was generally agreed by Shepard and crew that this was a fate far worse than extinction. Why the change of heart? Because the presumably non-caporial being on the Citadel took the form of a child instead of Harbinger, with his guttural, bad guy-ish sounding voice? This child basically told Shepard what Harbinger told Shepard on Virmire and at various spots in Mass Effect 2. Shepard certainly didn't buy what Harbinger told him in the previous games but now it is okay because a child says it?
Seriously, I would rather fight a loosing battle against machines Terminator 2 style than have my friends and family turned into some goo where they loose all personality but their genetic structure is preserved. Because, you know, as I play, develop relationships, and think long term, my main concern should be.... preserving my bodily fluids? It almost has a Dr. Strangelove tone to it... I'm just imagining Shepard droning on about his precious bodily fluids.
Seriously, this sucked beyond measure. And by beyond measure, I mean it was serious, knee deep, disappointing, suckage. Dying at the hands of the collectors in ME2 was, in my opinion, a far more satisfying ending to the series. Fewer loose ends to tie up (which were not tied up in ME3).
//[But You Can Still "Stop" The Reapers]//
If, by stop, you mean one of three things: you control the reapers, which is very disappointing because it gives the Illusive Man credibility, you combine synthetics and organics which is equally disappointing and, frankly weird as hell, or, as some game sites misreport, you destroy all synthetics, including the Reapers (some game sites report that you just destroy the Reapers). And, unless you worked really hard, Admiral Anderson will die as will Shepard.
Then, in a sudden chance of pace, Joker apparently stops assisting the space attack to go and pick up Ashley, James, and Liara from the ground battle so that when they crash land on some Eden-like planet, there will be enough people to make babies (Note: some things may be different depending on who you saved in ME1, who your squadmates were for the last mission, etc but the idea is the same).
So let's recap: you either die or, if not, you take a breath of air badly wounded with absolutely no character resolution, you have absolutely no clue what happened to the other characters you have grown to love, and it is very likely that your spouse-to-be (or, at the least, I hoped) will have the task of making babies to repopulate humanity with little to no facial expression that seems to express the slightest bit of concern as to your fate.
I wanted to see total Reaper carnage (as opposed to total AI/synthetic carnage) and maybe a wedding or possibly a scene where you walk away with your friends in the sunset leaving behind a pile of dead reapers (yes, I know, I am a hopeless romantic). Instead, I got no character resolution and a random scene of Joker crashing on a planet that seemed to have little to do with anything.
Some people might contend I am making too much out of nothing. Possibly. But I wouldn't tolerate this kind of ending in a movie trilogy so why should I tolerate it in a game that is supposed to be story driven?
The suckage is complete and I'm not it sure can be undone. This alone does not make me want to go back and re-play the game. In fact, I would be content to stop playing before the battle of Earth and leave it be or die in ME2. I'm not even sure I can play the other titles knowing what ending lies ahead. The game and the trilogy was great but the ending completely ruined everything for me at this point.
Gameplay is good and refined. Ending sucks and ruins the trilogy. Even if the ending is bad (I would have preferred a bittersweet ending as mentioned earlier), character resolution is still a part of story telling!
Tracked by 11 customers
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 301-310 of 312 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Sep 4, 2012 2:02:31 PM PDT
Posted on Sep 14, 2012 11:32:04 PM PDT
Good review. The god child can go to hell.
Posted on Sep 15, 2012 10:09:11 PM PDT
I just finished playing the game and I couldn't believe what I'd witnessed at the end. It really is as bad, possibly worse, than what I've been hearing all of these months. Thankfully, I was able to wait and pick it up for only $20. Your review is spot on, and mirrors my own experiences with this series. The first game is my favorite, ME2, a slight disappointment, and this thing, despite so much greatness for most of it, feels like a huge middle finger to anyone who has fallen in love with the series. I'm stunned.
In reply to an earlier post on Sep 27, 2012 3:53:56 PM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on Oct 29, 2012 7:04:03 AM PDT]
In reply to an earlier post on Sep 30, 2012 1:19:06 PM PDT
Karl Grosvenor says:
Maybe you're the loser.
In reply to an earlier post on Oct 4, 2012 10:32:07 AM PDT
The stealth drive may make the Normandy hard to find but it's not invisible. Harbinger clearly looks at it and lets it leave.
Posted on Dec 2, 2012 9:45:44 AM PST
Laird Schroeder says:
THIS IS AN ACCURATE REVIEW. Also, the only way Shepard can possibly "win" this game is to spend more money/time playing it online where Galactic Readiness scores may be increased. If the player wishes to do this, you should switch away from the keyboard/mouse towards a real game controller. The keyboard/mouse is way too klunky and slow.
Posted on Dec 30, 2012 9:22:31 PM PST
In reply to an earlier post on Dec 31, 2012 7:01:31 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 31, 2012 7:53:27 AM PST
@ AROB1970. We were expecting an ending which made sense. For you to say the ending was foreshadowed is accurate. Then why waste time building your resources? How could it possibly make sense that one person, just one human man's sacrifice could make any impact on the defeating the Reapers? The game fell short on so many level's... We get at least one (when Shepard destroys the Reaper ship on Rannoch) possibly more, examples of how to effectively destroy them. But when they arrive at earth, instead of observing the use of that Intel we see Shepard throwing "X-Wing" fighters at the Reaper fleet. I yelled at the screen at that point. Because what had been heading downhill from the start just went sideways.
The only two deaths which made any sense were Thane and Mordin. We knew Thane's days were numbered. He redeemed himself and made his peace. A lovely and appropriately sad scene. Moridin, by righting the wrong he began, died a hero's death. Again, an appropriately poignant scene. The player is sad, but satisfied. Miranda's death: Her death came off like a poorly written TV script. The cliched "kill her off" to get rid of her plot point. Because of that, it came off cheap and dissatisfying (yes, I know you could save her)
Anderson, our father figure of the game died not the hero's death he earned and deserved, but just a by product of a failing plot. Adding grief to grief does not make a plot stronger it dilutes the drama. Tali's death: Well, that's just a mistake of game play that you should not make. Legion's death: Another needless and non-heroic death. The writer's attempt at pseudo religion "do I have a soul" came off as cheap window dressing. So he must incorporate himself to successfully integrate. He was not a sentient being. His AI could and easily should have been accessible, in spite of him leaving his "body." Or he could have remained in his "body" and become the representation of the entire Geth... now that would have been an interesting journey through their attempt at the "do I have a soul" question.
Shepard's death: Again, just a human male dying to save the earth / galaxy? Why? When you think about it he didn't really sacrifice much of anything. He had respect, a career, a ship and valiant crew who provided him with support, encouragement and love at every dialogue opportunity. If he really thought he was heading to his death, then it strikes me that engaging in a full out romantic relationship with Kaidan, Tali, Liara or Ashley was very very selfish of him. Then he is denied a hero's death. In fact, the entire Hero's Journey story arch was broken by that point in the plot. To watch Shepard die needlessly, was nonsensical, thoughtless and heartbreaking.
Think of all the movies, plays and books you've seen in which you felt really satisfied. Maybe a little sad, but satisfied. When you feel that satisfaction it's the successful conclusion of the Hero's Journey. The hero doesn't have to die to achieve it either. Han Solo did it. Luke Skywalker made it. Jean Val Jean died a hero's death. Harry Potter completed his hero's journey without dying to achieve it. The Illusive Man and Voldemort, although traditional bad guys, actually completed their hero's journeys. So why was Shepard denied this and why were we denied the satisfaction of playing it through? Cheap, thoughtless and lazy storytelling.
Without giving away any spoilers, I offer the example of HALO 4's ending too. For those of you who played it through, given my examples, were you satisfied? I think the answer is probably yes. The fanfiction writers are hard at work on that storyline too ;-)
I'll give you another example of why your premise is faulty: BIOWARE actually... finally... responded and provided us with a patched up DLC to satisfy the fans. Also, within a week of of the release of ME3 the story volume (and I know this, because I wrote one too) on fanfiction.net went from 4000 to 6000 and now the story volume just slid over the top of 10,000 ME stories. A much beloved cast of characters will, in spite of BIOWARE's shoddy workmanship, remain alive and thriving through its fan base of artists and writers. Thank you for your attention.
Posted on Jan 17, 2013 9:40:11 PM PST
Noble Seven says:
Because of the terrible ending I will only play Mass Effect 1 and 2, I will never play Mass Effect 3.