Do we play videogames so we can live out our greatest fantasies in a secure virtual world achieving our every desire in an electronic , or so we can experience stories which surprise us, scare us, excite us, move us, and affect us in the same way other art forms do? If you're at all familiar with other articles I've written, you've heard this question before -- and you're likely sick and tired of hearing my views on it.
If that's the case, I apologize in advance for the following article.
After finishing Mass Effect, I have to say I enjoyed myself. Not necessarily because of the combat, graphics, or plot, but because of the characters. BioWare's latest offering includes some of the most well written personalities I've seen within the realm of videogaming: they fall into established archetypes, but many of the characters are still remarkably three-dimensional in their characterization.
One scene in particular stands out in my mind: Wrex, a krogan mercenary and ally to the protagonist, draws his gun on the player during an argument. After he does so, one of three things will happen, depending on what the player's actions. The outcomes themselves are pretty interesting, but even more interesting than the actual events are how they come about -- that is, the logic behind which player choice contributes to which outcome. Do you reward your player for caring about a character by letting him live, or do you take advantage of that empathy and kill the character just to elicit an emotional response?
I can't say anymore without getting into mild spoilers, so just hit the jump. We'll continue the discussion there.
Basically, the situation is as follows:
Wrex is a krogan, a race of warriors who were chemically sterilized after a particularly nasty war. He is one of the last of his kind. Upon visiting the planet Virmire, your team discovers that Saren (the bad guy) has found a cure for the krogan infertility genophage, and is using it to breed his own race of violent, loyal krogan with which he will take over the galaxy.
The player's initial reaction matches that of most of his or her comrades': the base has to be destroyed, or else Saren's krogen will take over the entire universe. Wrex's feelings, however, are not so cut and dry. He (rightfully) feels the cure could save his entire species, and, as such, is worth saving. After a very short discussion, Wrex drifts away from the team and spends some time on his own.
In order to progress to the next mission, the player must follow and speak to Wrex. No matter what you initially say to Wrex, he'll draw his gun on the player (understandably irritated that the player wants to destroy the only hope for his people), who will then draw his own in self-defense.
This is where it gets interesting.
My first time through the game, I saved Wrex's particular sidequest (namely, recovering his family's armor) for later, near the end of the game. The specific reasons for this escape me at the moment. Still, though, I really, really liked Wrex; I appreciated how he embodied the angry mercenary archetype, but also had an incredibly sad quality to him as the last of a dying species. When he pulled his gun on me, I was surprised, and taken aback.

At this point, the player has five conversation options. You can:
-Charm him
-Intimidate him
-Ask him to calm down and wait a second
-Tell him he's not making any sense
-Shoot him
The dialogue options change slightly depending on your stats and whether you've completed Wrex's sidequests, but more on that later.
As I don't want to hurt Wrex, I choose the charm option. I move the analog stick up, hit A, and -- crap. I hit the wrong dialogue choice. My fault, stupid mistake. Still, though, I end up asking him to calm down and wait a second; I didn't charm him, but I pretty much did the next best thing.
So, my character asks Wrex to calm the hell down. Wrex just gets angrier. His voice raises, he begins to threaten the player, and
BLAM.
Wrex falls to the ground, dead. His collapse reveals Ashley, her outstretched arm holding a smoking gun. Ashley and the player exchange some post-murder conversation, and the game continues...sans one krogan.
It's important to understand that when Wrex died, I actually shouted "NO!" Wrex was my single favorite character and, despite (or perhaps because of) his flaws, he meant a great deal to me. I'd wanted to talk my way out of the situation and Ashley, that huge bitch, had cold-bloodedly shot him in the back. Now, I've enjoyed many emotional moments in many games, but never before had I experienced a scene so shocking that I actually yelled out loud in shock and horror. That was the power of Wrex's murder.
But still, it only happened by accident; I felt compelled to load my last save and redo the conversation.
The second time around, I actually succeeded in choosing the charm option. Rather than raising his voice, Wrex paused for a moment, considered what I said, and peacefully put his gun away. The game continued. He was still alive. I was bored.
Essentially, Mass Effect determines Wrex's fate by one main factor -- how much you care about him. If you liked Wrex enough to charm him into complacency, he lives: if you don't really give a rat's ass about him and can't muster anything more than a halfhearted, Willy Wonka-esque "No, wait, stop," the game ganks him.
Behind this seemingly simple design choice lies the complex, medium-defining question I posed before the jump: should games like Mass Effect work solely as wish fulfillment, or as dramatically potent (but not necessarily happy and enjoyable) stories?
Because while I was happy that Wrex was still alive after I charmed him, I didn't feel that happiness with anywhere near the degree to which I felt shocked, saddened, and betrayed by Ashley's decision to murder Wrex. On the one hand, I was kind of happy but bored by the ho-hum nature of Wrex's survival, while on the other I was shocked and emotionally moved, yet saddened, by his death.
Here, we have a paradox: if I hadn't cared about Wrex and had intentionally chosen the quasi-indifferent dialogue option, then his death would have meant absolutely nothing to me. If I did care about Wrex, and if I'd have successfully chosen the charm option the first time around, then I would have been robbed of that heart-wrenchingly sudden death scene and all the subsequent shock and horror which came with it. Through killing Wrex if the player doesn't care about him and letting him live if the player does, BioWare made absolutely sure that the player, no matter how he felt, would receive a uniformly positive-but-underwhelming consequence to his actions. In every aspect of the conversation, BioWare sought to make things easy for the player. The plot refuses to step on any toes; it seeks to act as nothing more than a vessel of wish fulfillment for the player.
In fact, the more you've shown the game how much you care about Wrex, the less likely he is to be killed. If you've proven your dedication to the character by completing his lost armor sidequest, then all but one of the dialogue options during the showdown will cause Wrex to peacefully lower his gun. Only by acting like an outright jerk to him -- threatening him, refusing to explain yourself -- will Wrex come to any harm. Of course, this makes little sense in and of itself: if you liked him enough to help him reclaim his family's battle armor, why would you bother treating him like a piece of crap afterward?
In a sense, I can understand this wish fulfillment attitude. To reverse the parameters for Wrex's fate, killing him if the player cared about him and vice versa, would be -- and there's no nice way to put this -- a dick move. It'd be emotionally satisfying and shocking and memorable, yes, but the player would no longer trust the storytellers: I can imagine players refusing to show affection toward any other characters from that point on, for fear that the all-powerful developer might kill their next favorite NPC. The gamer might even come to despise the storyteller, resenting every future plot development or story turn.
Of course, the player would only hate the storyteller if the player knows the game intentionally killed Wrex just 'cause the player cared about him. In other words, if the player's initial reaction to Wrex's death is powerful, but does not feel like a cheat, then the player would have no reason to reload an older save and experiment with other dialogue options (only then understanding the criteria for determining Wrex's fate). I'll stop myself before I go too far, as this gets into another area of discussion -- whether unlimited saves ruin plot development -- but suffice to say that so long as the player doesn't feel like the storytellers are acting like assholes just for the sake of acting like assholes, then Wrex's death could be permanent and meaningful without feeling like a cheat.
Personally, I'd prefer to see more NPC's the player cares about dying in games. Not because I'm a nihilistic killjoy, but because when character death is done well, it adds an infinitely greater weight and scope to the story. You're not just fighting to Save The Universe And Kill The Bad Guy, you're also avenging the death of someone you cared for (see: Serenity, Call of Duty 4). The story, like life, becomes unpredictable; the events become much heavier as the player worries whether he or the characters he cares about will make it out alive.
But then, that's the kind of gamer I am: I like my epic RPGs to tell me an interesting, unpredictable story of loss and triumph. Other gamers demand that RPGs should serve only to empower the player, allowing us to exert force and influence over a virtual world that we could only dream of in reality. These sorts of players probably love Mass Effect: every NPC death occurs as a result of player choice, and the developers make sure that the story, and the fates of the characters, are never quite out of the player's control. The whole story is catered so the player experiences only enjoyment, only satisfaction.
Having read all this, I propose the following question to you: would you rather play an unpredictable, dramatic, but potentially unsatisfying and depressing game where the player does not hold complete control over his surroundings? Or would you prefer a game like Mass Effect, where every consequence is more or less designed to satisfy the player, the plot and gameplay mechanics always serving as wish fulfillment?
You already know my answer -- what's yours?
It isn't an issue of player choice vs game decided plot, because this one has both. Player choice decides if Wrex lives or dies, but player choice can not decide whether Ashley lives or dies, the game decides that that isn't an acceptable course of action, and leaves you standing over Wrex's corpse with no recourse at all; I found it the most unfulfilling moment in any RPG I've ever played.
Suit you up in the big daddy outfit, I was thinking in the back of my mind that it would make for an awesome ending if you killed Atlas, but then the pheromones that you used to smell like the Big Daddy began to take hold of your mind, converting you into Rapture's newest Big Daddy. Noone escapes Rapture.
END SPOILER
Finding this plot point out actually makes me want to play Mass Effect... I probably would've told him to calm down rather than charm him.
I chose Ashley over the soldier guy in the next battle scene, and I regretted it after it was over.
After playing the game, my thoughts are...
Had I know what a racist bitch Ashley turned out to be, I would've never chosen her. Not that I'm seeking a copacetic party at all times, but I felt disturbed to be hanging out with some bitch who's a closed minded intolerant bigot. It made some of the ephemeral conversations between her and Garrus on the constant elevator rides feel like they last a lot longer than they actually did.
Given that this actually adds some interesting character interactions, it wasn't a "bad" choice, but honestly, I might've preferred to see two other characters interact more than the racist and the cop.
If I could play through ME again, (I borrowed it) I'd definitely stay away from Ashley, and go with Wrex and probably Liara (and before that, the soldier guy, who's name I forget...)
And concerning Serenity, that moment was so jarring that I watched most of the rest of the movie in the hopes it would somehow be retconned. Perhaps it was a dream sequence or the whole thing was a hoax? That really got to me and I'd love to experience that in a game more often.
Oh, and Agro. I was with someone that cried when that happened.
You are totally correct in the Wrex situation.
Now, I personally didn't use Wrex, I like him as a character, but I'm playing a soldier so I don't really need the extra guns, but I saved him by essentially screaming sense into him about how it wasn't really a cure and that Saren was likely going to destroy the krogans once their usefulness was ended.
(and then I sent that Ashley bitch off to her doom..god I hated her)
That's what I'm liking most about mass effect, the characters are SO engaging and the dialog is so well written that I feel like I'm playing a person with a distinct personality and not a schitzo who flips violently between a saint and a psychopath because the story requires me to kill this dude or this dude has to live.
----
You know, like how in the beginning of God of War II, you’re humbled and you lose all your powers (and are killed by Zeus). I wanted them back, and I really wanted revenge in general after Zeus pulled that shit.
----
END SPOILER
Nice article as usual, Rev.
I give you two examples:
Bioshock, although very few choices in the game exist(story wise) towards then ending there is that shocking revelation as to your motives of doing everything that has been done. Deception and misinformation. Would I load back and see what happens? No, I'm not happy with what happened, I've been lied two, I have no choice, but I am content with continuing onward and getting revenge.
Chrono Cross(the first chrono game for the SNES, I don't remember the name) In it, in the first town you have the option to do a bunch of "deeds" which can go both ways. I forget exactly what they were, something like stealing food, or something. There were a bunch(I wasn't even aware that one was that bad, but it sort of butterfly effected). I was playing an RPG in an SNES and they still gave me the choice to be the good guy or the bad guy, and even wanting to be good I failed. Later, in a scene where the cops ring you up, and you say you're innocent(which you are, in this case) they bring back up the tales of your wrong doings throughout the town. I had no idea what I was doing, I had been genuinely mean to a bum though, and now I'm paying for it. I was sent to prison, I waited through a long, annoying(and adequately punishing) cutscene. And I continued through the game.
I believe if you combine these two concepts you get the true essence of choice, when wanting to understand the morality of a person. Now, it's fun to know everything you do has a consequence, but did you know helping that bum in the alley would later mean the henchmen and his small army would come after you? Or that the drifter saw you in another town, heard your quest and decided to help in the way of sabotaging the enemy somehow? The immediate reward is important, let's say the bothering grunt offered %10 of what he got off the drifter, and the drifter offered nothing but a thanks, or vice versa, you could the mercs, but they will end up betraying you. They won't come after you, since you won in a fair fight, though.
I think it's all about the deception of what your choice is affecting till the end(or very far away form the event) and the misinformation of a choice, or it's effects at all. It's when you don't know there will be consequence that your true colors come out. You will still have "complete" control, all the shame short term rewards that you get, the same exact game as Mass Effect, which does good with the emotional gauging(do you like this character? Okay, keep him, but choose between these two) but the other choices, the ones in morality are the real interesting ones, the ones that could come back later and bite you in the ass. That make you say, "Well, if I knew THAT would happen!..." but you didn't. That's why it's great and now you're living with it.
Really, however, with all the choices the developers give you, it all rests in their hands, in the choices they make for you(like shooting the racist bitch after she killed your friend while trying to reason with him. It would be great, but would also limit the already huge game).
The technology has to advance before we can get there correctly, but at the moment, balancing emotion with the lack of frustration would be too hard, so for now, I would prefer Mass Effect, even though I would like to feel for the game and the characters, it would be just to hard. Why am I playing this? To feel sad? So I prefer a game like Mass Effect just because I know the other game can't be done yet.
You went through with an option that many may have selected as an option for calming him down with the hopes that it would result in as such. But, even then, he got shot. Nothing says the player wanted him dead, otherwise they would have selected an option prone to enrage him and lead to violence. The story from that point on was not designed with you knowing that she would shoot him in the back.
What changed it for you was your want to go back and try another option that you felt would keep him alive. It wasn't the game that made that option, it only allows you to make such an option.
i understand what you're saying, but i prefer to be surprised and adjusting myself to new scenarios.
i did the same thing because the game had taught me to build the conversation forward by choosing neither charm or intimidate abilities (they usually end the conversation) and thats why it was so shocking.
i wasn't pleased with the outcome though. i choose intimidate (because i was a renegade motherfucker) and the conflict just ended, just like that. i was prepared to fight (verbally) here and for the scene to build up and build up, but no. they just cut it off and everything was fine.
also, i hate ashley. that bitch was annoying and i hated that the game threw her in every significant scene, even though i hadn't used her for a single mission in the entire game. i happily left that bitch to die on virmire.
214 comments on the mass effect review... is that some kind of a record?
this scene is perhaps the only one that delivered what the developers promised the game would be about. and i think i recall them saying that you're "profiles" would be transferred to the sequels. so, thats cool. if thats the case.
fuck i gotta go fire up mass effect again, this has got me excited again. i was pretty turned off when i finished it, never got the urge to replay it straight away.
I liked it, because the tone and music (and general style of the game) made it clear that if I screwed up, I could be killing my second favorite character (Garrus = 1st). So when I convinced him to put his gun down, I kind of had a sigh of relief.
It was equally "oh DAMN, this is heavy" when I had to choose between Ashley and Kaidan (although I didn't even know until after she said "We both know that isn't going to happen" that I couldn't get both), or your decision at the very end of the game regarding the council. The realist in me said "Take down Sovereign ASAP," but the non-racist in me knew the importance of galactic politics.
I'm a nerd.
You gotta understand that, in the game's timeframe, the human race had just joined up with the intergalactic community. All the different aliens and their little quirks would still seem new to some people, and the First Contact War probably didn't help matters. For humanity to just up and say, "Oh, well, we just met you guys but we're going to accept you without question, even though some of you tried to kill us," would be naive and stupid. The correct thing to do in this case is neither blind acceptance nor outright racism. Here, you should trust, but verify.
The way to get through well-meaning but mistaken folks like Ashley is to CONVINCE them to change their minds, not isolate them or bitchslap them for having an opinion you don't like. And that's what my character did.
Then I gave her 20.
(Oops. Spoilers?)
well, if you don't like ashley because you think she's a racist, you're a shitforbrains. the universe and the whole story arch that surrounds it is pretty impressive, which you just pointed out.
but i think most people here hate ashley because she's just so fucking annoying and irritating. i couldn't stand her because she was one of the characters that wasn't that well written or particularly interesting, her voice was squeeky and she laid on this macho attitude that just seemed out of place.
the fact that she can be considered a racist is the only plus in my book. now thats interesting.
It's best to have a mix of both because that's more like real life. In the real world, you can make decisions that will have a large impact on things one way or the other, but you are never fully in control and some decisions will have unintended consequences. That's the balance they need to strive for.
Back to Wrex, I thought that scene was great. I'm surprised about the outcome of the prolonging the conversation choice though. I wonder how much your rating on the paragon/renegade meters came into that.