Quantcast
Community Discussion: Blog by the Company | It Doesn't Have To End This Way: Why Mass Effect 2 Seems Poised to Disappoint MeDestructoid
LIGHTS:  ON | OFF
surf dtoid with arrow keys

HOT GAMES
REVIEWS VIDEOS COMMUNITY FORUM SHOP

pc PS4 PS3 NEXT XBOX XBOX 360 WII U 3DS PS vita ANDROID APPLE

REMOVE ALL ADS?
Guaranteed contest entry?
A new video show?
Something else?

Vote in our membership poll

click to hide banner header
About
My name is Sean Gorant. It'll be nice to meet you when we do. For now, let's take it slow, I don't want either of us to get overwhelmed.

A little introspection might reveal that I'm a tad too interested in video games. Film and music, too. I am attending a private art school for college, where I will hopefully move on into a career in advertising and graphic design. And you see, I like to hear myself go on about every little thing. I'm very picky. If you can put up with that every now and then, we might be able have a good conversation, the two of us. I have something to say on almost every subject. But I'm good humored, curious and more friendly than I give myself credit for.

It's been a pleasure.
Player Profile
Follow me:
the Company's sites
Badges
Following (2)  




[Spoilers: Mass Effect and information routinely divulged by Project Director Casey Hudon on Mass Effect 2's plot and final mission. Also, "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan."] + [FIRST BLOG is LONG BLOG]

Take a moment, dear reader, and think back to your favorite moments in gaming, whether it's a gripping tale coming to a close, a white-knuckle car chase that ended with narrowly avoiding capture, or just a brief moment when you found yourself completely immersed in the look and the feel of your virtual environment. Now, if you can, decide if any of those moments could be improved if they were experienced in another medium. Obviously, nine-times-out-of-ten, the moments you enjoyed in games are best left in games, because the designers mindfully crafted your entertainment with the unique strengths of the medium in mind. The stories told in games are absolutely sui generis. And you see, no one arguing that video games can tell a powerful story is doing so without, themselves, having witnessed something along those lines. While it may not have been the ideal experience, it gave them a passion for the potential of stories in games, inspiration for future possibilities. What they saw, and felt, was something like they had never experienced before.

And we all want to have that experience. We all hope for something new, something else we can point to when we declare that our medium of choice is doing something nothing else can.

But I am concerned. Because the trappings of this medium we love may be the doom of those things we hope to move forward. The release of Mass Effect 2 is almost upon us, and there is plenty of excitement in the air as there often is with big-budget sequels from established developers. Just from scanning the comments to any video or preview of the game, one finds people anxiously counting down the days and vigorously fist-pumping in the air while chanting "GOTY." But a few weeks ago, I heard something that shifted my perspective on the game-to-be. So now, before my thoughts fall completely on deaf ears post-launch, I want to show you what I fear may be another escalation of the ever-evolving battle between what a game should be and how a story is told. Things are getting cut-throat and people's feelings are bound to be hurt. But the real victim here is what gets blown away in the cross-fire; the innocent casualties of compromise.



Let me say upfront that I am eagerly anticipating the release of Mass Effect 2, and despite being in the fortunate position to receive the game for free, I have been very excited to pick up the sequel after a handful of enjoyable play-throughs of the first game, ready and keen to continue the story and evaluate the improvements to the gameplay (sort of like another game I'll be getting on the 26th, yeah?). And let's face it, unless there is a very reclusive and bizarre demographic of gamers that are completely uninterested in the story elements of Bioware games and doesn't tell anyone about it, the people counting the days until Mass Effect 2 is released are largely more excited for the story than anything else (not to say that the improved gunplay isn't quite rousing). We want to know what's going to happen to Shepard, the old crew, the new crew and the Reapers.

Bioware knows this and they've been stringing along those of us who are too excited to wait to play the game ourselves with new information, character profiles, extended trailers and lengthy interviews. But something fishy has been showing up in many of the interviews regarding the touted "suicide mission", a certain thread strung through these discussions that has me filled with a growing sense of unease. Specifically the following, documented by Destructoid's own Anthony Burch during a preview of the game:

"Depending on how well the player has equipped the Normandy, which NPCs the player has recruited and how loyal they are to him, the player may have to watch as some or all of Shepard's crew die… including Shepard himself. [Casey Hudson] promised that it'd be possible to get through the game without losing any of your squad-mates, but that it'd be very difficult to do so."

Now if you've read up to this point, I can safely assume you've already heard this piece of information spoken about a number of times. Maybe you thought it sounded off, like I did, or maybe you didn't. In either case, allow me explain to you why this and other statements made during the course of promoting Mass Effect 2 have got me dreading the conclusion to the game. (Despite what conclusions I draw from what the general public knows after this point, I don't know what will actually occur during the course of the game, so please don't assume I am certain or decided on anything at this point. This is purely speculation.)



I am absolutely love how video games allow us to interact with stories and characters in a way unlike any other medium. And when a story is built around the strengths and limitations of video games themselves, the result can be something very special. Though with the commercial success of blockbusting films, there is some incentive to capitalize on that energy and social fascination. With those efforts, it's not uncommon for obvious mistakes to be made when the goal for your game is "cinematic!" Likewise, focusing too hard on certain gaming trends can be equally damaging if you lose sight of how your design reflects on the gamer and the story they're experiencing. It's my suspicion that Mass Effect 2 may be guilty of a combination of these two. The result is a "suicide mission", but perhaps not the one Bioware thinks they crafted.

The idea for a suicide mission being the climactic end-game scenario for Mass Effect 2, a game marketed as the darker second part to the trilogy (because it's part two, motherfucker), is a very good one, indeed. Maybe not the most original, but from an angle of increasing the tension as we head towards our final mission and the culmination of the story thus far, it's not quite "edgy", but it certainly has an "edge" (in italics). It gives the player a sense of dread, while knowing that they have to face the the danger of very plausible death, and put the lives of their team (albeit new-blood and strangely antagonistic this time around (save for Tali)) in that same peril. I have no complaints about this idea, from a story perspective. Rather, it's the way that Bioware as decided to integrate this framework into both their marketing and the game design that has my eyebrow raised. So let's look at what that preview said again, this time zeroing in on the curious detail that keeps getting brought up in these interviews, "[Casey Hudson] promised that it'd be possible to get through the game without losing any of your squadmates…"

It's here that I'm sensing a little conflict here between gameplay and story. The big-brains over at Bioware have cooked up a suicide mission for their dramatic conclusion to Mass Effect 2, with the stipulation that you can survive "depending on how well the player has equipped the Normandy, which NPCs the player has recruited and how loyal they are to him". Now at first this seemed like a nice little reward to the player for utilizing all the resources and mechanics available to them, and I'm sure when this was decided on by the developers, they thought exactly that. They must have thought, "If the player really likes these characters, really digs our story and how they can build loyalty and strengthen every aspect of their team, why not make it worth their while and let them make it through the 'suicide mission' intact? Let the strong, dedicated team of soldiers go against impossible odds and conquer it through their bonds of friendship and superior fortitude! And give me a raise!"

Sounds brilliant, right? Too bad, though, that tension and dominating sense of actual danger has been completely deflated to a binary choice put into the hands of the player. Good bye, edge. Good bye, italics.



Now, I like giving the player choices, where and when appropriate, but I don't believe that what Bioware has done here is an example of the correct way to balance a narrative-driven experience and a player-driven one. Indulge me, dear reader, as I examine what mistakes were made, and how they could have been avoided.

Problem One: The "no-win scenario" is a very capable tool for creating a drama, don't fuss with it. If Bioware, and Casey Hudson in particular, is to be believed, then what could have been one of the more emotionally affecting moments in gaming history has been robbed of all traction and thrill. Let's take for example, if you will, the Kobayashi Maru test depicted in the movie "Star Trek II: Wrath of Khan", which sets up the audience for the final battle between the Enterprise and the Reliant where Spock dies as a result of his efforts to save the rest of the crew from certain death. Now just because of a strong use of foreboding by introducing a "no-win scenario" at the start of the film doesn't mean that the audience wanted Spock to die when the crew of the Enterprise was confronted with an actual one, or that they were even okay with it. Spock was a treasured character in the series and his death was a tragic conclusion to a riveting story. All of this considered, I doubt anyone asked to evaluate the plot of "The Wrath of Khan" would think that it could be improved by Spock surviving his last heroic act. And I believe this is a universal opinion among matured individuals. Whether or not we would, ourselves, choose to encounter a no-win scenario, I don't think you could find a reasonable person to suggest it makes for a less dramatic story.

The first Mass Effect tried a no-win scenario with the player when you were forced to decide between saving Ashley Williams or Kaiden Alenko (with mixed results). On the other hand, you were given another situation where you were confronted with an enraged squad-mate, Wrex, and if you didn't use your linguistic skill to resolve things with him, Ashely will shoot him before things get out of hand. Now, despite that the consequences of the latter situation are not revealed to you until the scene is over, players soon discovered the choice they had to make was essentially between "saving" Wrex, or letting Ashley gun him down. Without getting into the obvious imperfections of both scenarios, I believe that the scenario with Wrex is a significantly more flawed example of using the player to affect the outcome of the story.

Which brings me to my next point.

Problem Two: You're not taking anything from me when you take what I don't care about. Similar to the Wrex-decision from Mass Effect, the suicide mission in the sequel seems eager to affect you emotionally by putting your team at risk and placing you in the position to save them. Unfortunately, like in Mass Effect, a choice between letting a character I like live or die is no decision at all. If a player feels a connection with Wrex, they will want to talk him down and, essentially, save his life. But if they have no such connection with the character, they are less likely to put for the effort to save him, and he dies with no real consequence to the player. Now Mass Effect 2 looks to be making the same mistake, only on a larger scale.

The idea is that through completing the game's extraneous content (which I'm certain will at least be more interesting and better developed than the first game's side-missions) you can build bonds with all the major characters in the game, which is required to survive the final mission. In a simpler fashion, if you care about your team enough to create this fellowship, then you are rewarded with their survival. But if you aren't personally attached to them, they are likely to die. It's my opinion that this is being done with a backwards mentality to suit the gamer and with no regard for what could be a much more weighted conclusion in favor of pandering to the player.

But let's ask our man, Casey Hudson, for some good news. Maybe they'll off some characters we have no control over to introduce an element of mortality and actual risk to the player?
"Some of the characters, the potential love interests, some of the most popular characters, we needed to make sure that these characters could not be killed."
Oh. I guess we can't kill popular characters either.

The final insult though, comes wrapped as a gift to the player. But we know what it really is…

Problem Three: Playing the blame game. As I mentioned before, letting the player's proficiency at completing all the tasks within the game decide whether or not they come out in one piece by the time the credits roll is just dressing up a simple binary question. In this way, what appears to be Mass Effect 2's most interesting plot point becomes completely moot, and is really ages behind much more complicated examples of both narrative-driven and player-driven games. Even worse than the simplicity of the scenario being presented is the actual choice the player has laid out in front of them. It's at this point where Bioware comes off as either cowardly or stupid or both.

Yes, the much talked about "suicide mission" is actually not referring to the danger of the mission at hand, because we've already established if you run around collecting and training for long enough you can survive anything, but rather the idea that the developers are, instead, pointing a gun at your head and telling you to play the game one way or you will die. Now let me be perfectly clear on this, I'm not saying that the side-missions and extra content will be exhausting or simply not fun. What I'm saying is that it's likely that knowing what I know, I may end up playing Mass Effect 2 for longer than my enjoyment lasts to ensure that my team survives (I certainly didn't play 100% of the original Mass Effect). It just so happens I might see NOT scouring the galaxy for countless hours as a calculated decision to let my teammates (or Shepard) die, instead of just how I would normally play through the game. Not only am I suicidal for theoretically not wanting to play every last bit of Mass Effect 2, I am also murdering my crew!

I'm feeling depressed now, Casey Hudson, say something to cheer me up. This can't be how things will go down, can it?
"If you're doing all those things right, then everyone survives. And if you're doing them wrong, then everyone dies. And Commander Shepard dies, too."
Oh, bummer.



See, if you want to write a powerful story about heroes, villains and sacrifice, that's fine. But don't wimp-out and waste all that dramatic story-telling on making the player feel completely comfortable with how things turn out. If you want to give the player responsibility over the lives of others and have their decisions make a difference, that's fine too. But don't do that by making their choice between playing your way, or death.

Make the choices complex and sometimes impossible. Make me feel uncomfortable. Make me throw down the controller and stare, slack-jawed at the TV as it dawns on me what just happened. Force me to deal with the fact that I can't squeeze a flawless victory out of every situation.

Gaming has a great advantage in the realm of story-telling that it has not yet fully realized how to wield. The power is there to make the suffering and death of a hero so much more poignant than any film or book can. You might be forced to watch that hero die, or have sent them reluctantly or unknowingly to their fate. Even more so, you might have to be that hero, and there might not be any way around it. So don't cheapen what we have by reducing it to what's safe and easy. We're all used to "easy", show us something we've never seen before. I can't guarantee you'll get it right the first time, but I know that I'll remember a failed attempt at something great more than I will successful mediocrity.




(I would very much appreciate if you take into account that I have no way of being absolutely certain of anything that will happen in Mass Effect 2 at the time of writing this, as I have said multiple times, and as such the issues that I raise are not me trying to condemn the game before it even hits store shelves, but only the concerns I have at this point. Thank you.)

[Quote Sources:
Interview: Casey Hudson, project lead
Preview: Mass Effect 2
CES 10: Trilogy Story Interview]
Photo Photo Photo



Is this blog awesome? Vote it up!




Those who have come:



Did you know? You can now get daily or weekly email notifications when humans reply to your comments.

Legacy Comments (will be imported soon)


Interesting read, though you clearly hate BioWare in the most unbiased way ever. You are a troll, flamebaiter and everything you think is wrong.

...nah, I'm just messin' withya! Welcome to Destructoid!

Seriously interesting and well thought out read.

I've been following some of the pre-release stuff (In particular Giant Bomb and Kotaku's Podcasts with ME2/Bioware crew), and I don't get the sense that the choice will be so binary as Grind = Survival. If we can take BioWare's most recent work, Dragon Age, as an indicator of the studio's currnet approach to dark and difficult decisions, I imagine that there will be an element of polarization to the decisions and actions.

Considering at least one thing from Dragon Age, there was a party member that was (albeit in a mission based/undynamic manner) averse to any mission that did not seem to add to the final goal. In one instance in particular, if the player was not prepared with the proper pursuasion levels, the player could choose to rebel violently against the player. Its similar, I think, to Wrex, but at the same time, wholly avoidable. If he isn't a favorite character or present on that mission, the issue barely comes up.

So in effect, even if you have a valuable/respected/favorite party memeber, and even with a good level of trust, they may very well be inherently opposed to your current agenda. That gives me alot of hope for Mass Effect 2's execution of a similar idea. Maybe your star party member will become extremely irritated with your perfectionist grinding and decide to leave the party?

Separately, from the interviews I listened to, it seems like a combination of decisions can lead to death. And, if its anything like the no win situations in Dragon Age, a presented decision may be as such because of decisions you've made, like, 12 hard decisions ago! I personally get the sense (or have the naive hope?) that there won't be a clear and obvious path to survival. The decisions will have too much gravity to allow for a clear understanding of what variables will be in place. Not to say you won't be able to game it at all, but that the chance for narrative surprise will be palpable.

Lets see who's right next month! :D
I certainly hope I'm very much wrong about this, really. I just wanted to get some thoughts off my chest on the subject of could-have-been-great-endings while trying to be a little topical.

Bioware certainly has a good track record, and Dragon Age (while not my favorite game) set up a number of bars for them to reach and surpass from now on. But I suppose my concern comes from how they handled moral choices in Mass Effect (eg. too simple and transparent) and how the rest of the industry has been reacting to the moral choice fad with mostly less-than-inspired results (inFamous, Army of Two: the 40th day).

A good example of where some of the clarity of what is right to do and what will result in the "Best Ending" will be properly and interestingly lost would be, like you said, if there was a lot of opposition in your team towards certain ideas, while another is avidly for it (Morigan in Dragon Age, yeah?). Best case scenario: I'd love it if as the game reaches its final moments before the 'suicide mission', some characters are so in conflict with each other that you can't placate them entirely, someone will leave if you side with another character (like you were saying yourself). Worst case: You can keep hitting the "Charming" dialogue option and all interpersonal conflict is resolved, forever.

Either way, I suspect things won't be as bad as I fear (knock-on-wood). I just needed a good excuse to put up a first-blog after all this time. Thanks for reading all of that, too.
Agreeable general concern, for sure! The contrast of moral choice in inFamous was painfully discreet (Even if effective in the short reaching, black and white paradigm they were going for).

Also, I really do hope "trust" in this game will go a bit deeper than "I bought you all these things: don't you love me?". If not, we honestly aren't getting much more relationship depth in ME2 than Harvest Moon (hot as that game is). Unforgivable things resulting in limiting total possible trust would be ideal, I reckon.

I'm hoping Dragon Age and Mass Effect 2 will urge a C-change in player decision options over the next few years, and hope neither of us is disappointed by Mass Effect 2. :)
Great read. I've been playing Mass Effect again in preparation for ME2. I powered through ME1 in like 3 days back in late '07, so I didn't remember a whole lot. Since I powered through it, I deleted my save file upon learning about ME2's character transfer feature, since I vowed I would have to replay to be ready for ME2.

This time, however, I am very carefully trying to "create" my character knowing that there's character transfer coming up for ME2. I will, at times, literally restart the game to chose a different option if I do not like what Shepard says after a selection. To me, this is sort of disturbing -- I am not really projecting myself into Shepard, but rather projecting the kind of person I think I want to go on this upcoming "suicide" mission.

So perhaps BioWare hasn't even just set up for disappointment with the JUST the new game. For people like me who feel almost obliged to have to play ME1 again due to lack of recollection of my first playthrough, have they essentially gone and lessened the experience of ME1 too? I've chosen a different origin for my new Shepard; I've decided not to hold any romantic relationships; I've settled for the Charm option far more than I did on my first run through. This time, I keep thinking that I want Shepard to be sort of like Optimus Prime, rather than going with how I would act in Shepard's shoes. I am dodging any accountability for what may happen during the upcoming suicide mission -- I'm making Shepard infallible compared to myself.
I agree with you.

I'm sure I'll eat the story up either way, but I agree with you. This has been my number one concern about the game since I first heard about the "suicide mission" aspect of it. Much as I love BioWare, they have always had an OCD/control-freak aspect to their games that doesn't sit well with me. The idea that every problem ever can be solved if you've taken the time to prepare for it, while an enjoyable power fantasy, is just not believable.

Unless you're Batman. Then it's awesome. Mmm, Batman...

*drools, stops after a moment, does a double-take*

Ahem.

Anyway, you can't make everyone happy, and everyone being happy is often antithetical to drama.

I can't deny that making everybody happy in a BioWare game satisfies me, but it satisfies me precisely because it's not something I can do in real life. It doesn't come from a place of emotional truth, it comes from an obsessive-compulsive need to make everything run the way I want it to. There is a lack of emotional truth within that model that prevents me from fully enjoying my hard-earned victory, and it is precisely because that victory wasn't really "hard-earned." "Hard-earned" means sacrifice, not "I worked on it for a really really long time, so can I just have victory naow plz!?" That is the emotional equivalent of empty calories. Sure, a Jolly Rancher tastes awesome, but it doesn't really satisfy you in the way a real apple does. I want games to burn my emotional calories, not keep me fat and naive.

If you are Batman, you are prepared for every eventuality. If you live in the real world, you just aren't. Sometimes there is nothing you can do.

...

OH MY GOD BIOWARE SHOULD DO A BATMAN RPG YOU GUYS
Also: you are the second Dtoider I have ever liked enough to put on my friend list. Feel special. :P
This was a great read! I swear I'm some kind of Bioware fanboy, so I automatically love all their games and the stories in them. But you did bring to my attention a genuine concern. Let's hope the choices are more like what Tubatic mentioned.
thats interesting, but would you really enjoy putting so many hours ina an rpg, where you dont have control of whats going to happen in the end?
maybe, maybe not, but you might aswell just og watch a movie.

buts lets see how it plays out. im like 18 hours in atm, amazing so far.
@Tubatic: For sure. Bioware has an impressive opportunity to make a pretty big shift in the player-driven sphere of gaming. If they do pull it off, I can imagine we'll see the ripple effects for years to come (maybe more than just Alpha Protocol). If they don't hit it out of the park though, well... there's always part three?

@Roek: That's an interesting result to their decision to promote this 'suicide mission' so heavily. I didn't initially think of it that way, myself. My Shepard was mostly "Paragon" and very reserved to begin with, though in some ways, I can see how preparing for part two has made me consider my actions (in my play-throughs this December) differently.

@Ffordesoon: I'm surprised to find that unlike in Metroid-vania games or collecta-thons, I am never more OCD about my games than I am with RPGs. There's also something about those moments in RPGs that stand as a "point of no return" that really bring out the freak in me. So naturally when games like these make looking under every rock so important to the game (but not to you personally), I get a little turned off of the experience. Maybe it's another example of player/character separation.
ALSO: Batman RPG -- why hasn't that been done?

@blackdeath1347: Right on. I should also mention there's no way I won't enjoy this game (I loved Mass Effect despite all it's flaws, too). I just have such high hopes for this one, ya know?

@eduh: I like to think as long as I can have as much control over my situation as reason dictates, then it doesn't matter if I don't get a happy ending every time. Keep things grounded in the reality of the universe you've crafted, and I won't complain no matter the situation. I like to feel like I've made a difference, but it doesn't mean I always have to get my way. You see what I mean?
I believe this adds a layer of realism to the game: Anyone and everyone can die if you screw things up in the game.

My Xbox 360 is broken, and I won't get a new one. After reading this blog post, I might get Mass Effect 2 on the PC.
Interesting idea which I would be very very surprised to see become reality: what if all this preparation saves the team, but ends up being the very instrument of Shepard's demise? You know, a Renegade saves himself, a Paragon takes one for the team, that sort of thing?

I think BioWare would make a lot of people very angry if they did that, so I don't expect to see it in there, but I still think it'd be a very ballsy choice for the ending.
Love it. Very good read indeed sir!

Though I haven't seen any preview stuff such as interviews and dev dairies, I have heard about the whole "suicide mission" though I haven't heard that even then, you'll still be able to survive, which, makes me kind of feel they're contradicting the claim that it is a suicide mission and that it's... I don't know, an easy way out? Not sure if that applies here, but what I mean is like a safety net, an alternate ending where everything is still okay and "perfect" to the player which is what we've come to expect from a lot of stories. This also applies to a lot of decisions I've seen in games with this type of branching dialog: there is always that one dialog option that saves them. Of course, it could be in there as a way to take back what the player said, but even then the character the player is talking to will just seem to forget the whole thing. Maybe i'm going to off topic there? Oh well, forget what I just said.

I think the main point i'm trying to get across is that consequence doesn't seem to be... reinforced in games enough. I often hear this claim of "Your actions will affect space and time indefinitely!" when, to me, I have yet to feel the actions and decisions I have made have truly impacted the game universe.

Anywho, that's just my thoughts on this.
Hmm well after reading this my only concern with what I am sure will transpire in my playthrough is that ME3 will make no sense in the trilogy for my part. If Sheperd can survive then certainly that will be the Canon ending. Seeing as I get the most enjoyment out of an RPG playing by the seat of my pants and living with decisions made I imagine there is a very likely chance my Sheperd will not be surving to part 3.

Back to Top
DLC   |   BEST Games of 2012   |   Best PC Games   |   Best PS3 Games   |   Best Xbox 360 Games   |   Best Wii U Games   |   Best 3DS Games




All content is yours to recycle through our Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing requiring attribution. Our communities are obsessed with videoGames, movies, anime, and toys.

Living the dream since March 16, 2006

Advertising on destructoid is available: Please contact them to learn more