Ush's Videogames review thread!

Started by Bardock4223 pages

Originally posted by Peach
Baldur's Gate I played a bit of when I was younger but didn't care much for (I was pretty into Diablo at the time), wasn't big on NWN, and I never played Jade Empire because I didn't have a regular Xbox and have never been a PC gamer.

The fact of the matter is, Bioware will never be able to make a game that I really enjoy and think is great, because the core gameplay that they use for all of their games I do not like at all.

Hmm, that's fair then. I didn't mind DA, it was alright fun, but nothing amazing, I have yet to play Mass Effect, though it seems like I might enjoy it. I know you didn't care for KOTOR, but that game was a lot of fun for me at the time, I feel like they just remade that with elves in DA with no real improvements, which is a bit silly 6 years later.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Hmm, that's fair then. I didn't mind DA, it was alright fun, but nothing amazing, I have yet to play Mass Effect, though it seems like I might enjoy it. I know you didn't care for KOTOR, but that game was a lot of fun for me at the time, I feel like they just remade that with elves in DA with no real improvements, which is a bit silly 6 years later.

KOTOR I liked better when I was actually playing it, but it was one of those things that afterwards I was like "...well, that actually wasn't very good". Mass Effect just struck me as KOTOR in a futuristic setting without the Force. And with a botched FPS control scheme.

That, and fantasy > sci-fi, every time, for me. Hence, Dragon Age is the only thing that Bioware has made that I think is really any good. And it's still not a great game. I definitely don't buy into that "Bioware can do no wrong" mindset so many people seem to have - honestly, I don't think they've done anything really right yet.

Originally posted by Peach
KOTOR I liked better when I was actually playing it, but it was one of those things that afterwards I was like "...well, that actually wasn't very good". Mass Effect just struck me as KOTOR in a futuristic setting without the Force. And with a botched FPS control scheme.

That, and fantasy > sci-fi, every time, for me. Hence, Dragon Age is the only thing that Bioware has made that I think is really any good. And it's still not a great game. I definitely don't buy into that "Bioware can do no wrong" mindset so many people seem to have - honestly, I don't think they've done anything really right yet.

In RPGs I do agree, I prefer Fantasty, though in most other media I prefer Science Fiction.

Originally posted by Peach

That, and fantasy > sci-fi, every time, for me. Hence, Dragon Age is the only thing that Bioware has made that I think is really any good. And it's still not a great game. I definitely don't buy into that "Bioware can do no wrong" mindset so many people seem to have - honestly, I don't think they've done anything really right yet.

Obviously you are biased when it comes to Bioware but to say they haven't done anything really right is a bit unfair.

I don't like JRPG's but I can see why people like them and can tell if the game is quality or not. There's a difference between not liking something due to core differences (which is what you said) and thinking the game is not good.

Well, opinions don't have to be fair. And, see, that's the thing. I honestly do not see what people like in those games. They're incredibly generic (really, KOTOR is Mass Effect is Dragon Age, just in a different setting), with broken gameplay, and a completely arbitrary and broken attempt at a morality system. Dragon Age at least had something the others lacked, which was the "yay fantasy and magic" appeal, but it also added in a completely broken (and frankly insulting) romance subplot that boiled down to "I can be a horrible person but as long as I buy shiny things they'll sleep with me".

Also I thought the character interactions in ME were pretty damned clunky and not all that well done, but that's mostly because of how you'll be talking to someone, and then when you're done it's simply "I have to go now" or "Goodbye" and walking away. They couldn't even program in some sort of conversation ender that fit the tone of the conversation? A bit jarring and definitely makes it hard to get into that aspect. At least the voice acting was good, I'll give it that.

And really, if I don't like something, then to me it's not good.

Originally posted by Peach
"yay fantasy and magic" appeal, but it also added in a completely broken (and frankly insulting) romance subplot that boiled down to "I can be a horrible person but as long as I buy shiny things they'll sleep with me".

I agree.....that's way too realistic for a fantasy setting 😛

Originally posted by Peach
Well, opinions don't have to be fair. And, see, that's the thing. I honestly do not see what people like in those games. They're incredibly generic (really, KOTOR is Mass Effect is Dragon Age, just in a different setting), with broken gameplay, and a completely arbitrary and broken attempt at a morality system. Dragon Age at least had something the others lacked, which was the "yay fantasy and magic" appeal, but it also added in a completely broken (and frankly insulting) romance subplot that boiled down to "I can be a horrible person but as long as I buy shiny things they'll sleep with me".

Also I thought the character interactions in ME were pretty damned clunky and not all that well done, but that's mostly because of how you'll be talking to someone, and then when you're done it's simply "I have to go now" or "Goodbye" and walking away. They couldn't even program in some sort of conversation ender that fit the tone of the conversation? A bit jarring and definitely makes it hard to get into that aspect. At least the voice acting was good, I'll give it that.

And really, if I don't like something, then to me it's not good.

I would disagree with your points but that wasn't my point. I just think when somebody doesn't like a certain thing, it doesn't necessarily mean that it's of bad quality. I don't like many things but I can see why people do and I can see the quality of the person work.

Originally posted by Smasandian
I would disagree with your points but that wasn't my point. I just think when somebody doesn't like a certain thing, it doesn't necessarily mean that it's of bad quality. I don't like many things but I can see why people do and I can see the quality of the person work.

I agree with you to some degree, but in that case it would have to be quantifiable why you think something is of good quality, and even then some people may not agree with your categories, and they are not wrong

That is true.

MASS EFFECT 2 (PC Version)

Bioware scored big with Mass Effect, so the sequel was inevitable. In fact, they'd set out with that in mind in the first place, with the game all ready to import your choices in Mass Effect into the sequel and even the third in the series. I don't know if they decided from the start to make it a fixed trilogy, but that is how it is now settling.

Having spent a bunch of time in my first review talking about the RP background that Mass Effect entered into, this time I shall be looking at what you can do with a franchise once it has become established (looking back at some issues with Mass Effect that I didn't mention before), and also at this area of crossing over content between games. Still, let's get some basics done first.

With Sovereign defeated, Humanity has found its place on the Council due to its efforts led by Shephard. However, scepticism about the Reapers continues, with the general belief being that Sovereign was just some Geth super-weapon that Saren commanded. Worried that the Reaper fleet will get to galactic space eventually anyway, Shephard and his team are sent to look into other Geth incursions. However, his ship, the Normandy, your beloved hub from the first game, is rather unceremoniously trashed in the intro sequence when a mysteriously (and very ugly) ship attacks it. Much of the crew manages to evacuate, but Shephard is cut off from escape whilst rescuing the Seth Green voiced semi-crippled pilot, Joker, (an amusing highlight in both games). Caught in the destroyed ship, Shephard is presumed dead.

In fact, Shephard is recovered by the sinister pro-Human organisation Cerberus, who were the bad guys for a lot of side missions in the original, doing all sorts of hideous experiments that you could stop. Led by the awkwardly-named 'Illusive Man' (voiced with superb talent by Martin Sheen),. Cerberus believes in the threat of the Reapers where others are sceptical and blow a fortune on a project to re-build Shephard's shattered body, feeling humanity needs him as a symbol (this rebuilding gives a great excuse for you to tweak your character class and appearance if you ported your character over. It also virtually resets your level, with only a trivial bonus for porting over, but that was probably for the best, mechanically). Whilst not happy to be working with these shadowy types, Cerberus do a lot of favours for Shephard- building him a better version of the Normandy, finding Joker to fly it for him and providing recruitment files for him to rebuild a new elite team to replace the ones that have gone onto other things in the two years Shephard has been on the operating table. Cerberus wants Shephard to investigate the large-scale disappearance of human colonists; an issue being ignored by Council and Alliance alike. Those responsible turn out to be a highly advanced alien race known as The Collectors, which the Illusive Man suspects are doing proxy work for the Reapers- they also turn out to be the ones that destroyed the Normandy, as they are looking for Shephard (though quite why they didn't recover him when Cerberus did is not really explained; they'd trashed his ship and had all the chance they wanted). Eventually you are tasked with stopping the Collector incursion. They are indeed working for the Reapers (particularly one known as Harbinger) and are in fact the subjugated remains of the Prothean race whose legacy had made victory possible in the original. Shephard stops the incursion, destroys the Collectors (at possible great cost to his crew) and prevents the development of a new, human-based Reaper. Yet the invasion is still coming, setting the stage for part 3.

Mass Effect 2 goes for a darker tone. Not that the first was all happy-happy and nor is this game totally angst filled, but much of it is a dark reflection of the original. Instead of the Alliance, you are working for Cerberus, and whilst they make genuine effort to portray Cerberus personnel as not all being evil bastards (and writing off some of the unpleasantries in the first game to extremist factions of the group), everything is still just that little bit more harsh. Shephard is scarred and worn from his injuries (though this can be fixed). He is reporting to a much more dodgy man than the military command of before; each of your crew is one step down, morally, from the previous game (so, for example, the human marine in the first one was a loyal soldier; this one is one who has lost his faith in humanity. You had a Krogan companion in the original- violent and morally questionable; your Krogan this time is a bio-engineered weapon designed to want to kill and kill. You have a tortured psychic prodigy who has learned only to hate and destroy pretty much everything, and a scientist who was involved in the development of a bio-weapon against the Krogan that has rendered the race largely infertile and is all about ends justifying means. One DLC pack even has you pick up a virtually no ethics mercenary who wants your help in burning hos former partner to death. Charming! Even your old friends, when you occasionally bump into them, are often distant and unfriendly, especially due to your new superiors (and it is with great relief that said violent Krogan from the first game- of he survived it- is not only unchanged, but has prospered and is pleased to see you; one of the few nice things the game actually does for poor Shephard). Only one crew member from the original makes a return visit to your team this time- the bio-suited engineer Tali- and they don;t treat her too badly, I suppose (they only kill her father and make her question the entire current raison d'etre of her race and culture).

Now, I am not one who believes that dark themes automatically trump lighter ones. Indeed, that is a view that annoys me, especially with the popularity of angst-infested stories amongst certain sections of the younger marker. However, in this case the darker tone is a good mechanic to separate the game from the original a little; a fresh tone in a market where sequels are often so static. I approve. As is Bioware's style, they again go into great detail with all your companions, and you can talk over all of these moral grey areas they introduce. It's mostly cosmetic but it helps you experience the world, and you at least have the opportunity to help some of them at least be a little happier than when they met you.

Talking of separation from the first game... although you would be hard pressed to tell from, say, a screenshot, aspects of both the live playing segments of the game and the RP backbone are significantly different (only the social interactions and story choices are unchanged). Small changes to firefights make a big difference- a button is now used to activate cover, and using one power causes all of them to have to recharge, preventing you spamming each in turn and forcing you to choose which one you want to use. Fair enough- though a few times I died because what looked like could be cover turned out not to be, and sometimes its cover logic prevented me being able to fire at people some two feet away from me who were killing me. I'll forgive it that- just- because I think they improved the AI; I certainly had fewer issues with my team. Some changes take a while to get used to- the basic 'interact' command was changed from 'e' to the spacebar. 'e' becomes an order for one of your team to move to the area you are looking at, which you will do a heck of a lot for a while if you come from the first game (on the PC, in any case).

Two differences to the fighting dominate though- the regenerating health and the addition of ammo. The first game had a healing skill that affected your use of first aid to patch yourself up. Now, you automatically recover health if you spend enough time not being hit; no skill involved. This is part of a great exercise of stat stripping the game indulged in; more below. The ammo system is a big change- the first game had an overheat system; fire too much and your gun became unavailable. Now, you have ammo; fire too much and you cannot fire any more. They call them 'thermal clips' in a frankly hilarious attempt to maintain continuity with the previous overheat system; this attempt fails. They say they did it to give the tension of an ammo system. This also failed; the ammo system is a an illogical waste and a downgrade from the original- the max you can carry is absurdly small, especially for pistols, but enemies drop so much that it is all effectively irrelevant. Is the final effect better or worse than the original? Well, the power cooldown system is sensible, as is the way that special effects often now arc into place rather than just auto-zapping a foe, thus actually introducing a little player skill into the action game as you have to be just a little clever to get some of these effects to hit someone behind cover. All in all, though...I think they put in rather a lot of effort here to not much effect. I don't think they really improved the game. Still, all of this twins with this stripping issue...

I mentioned before how the inventory and armour/weapon system in the original was a pain (and I didn't even mention the even further detail involved in adding mods to your weapons and armour). Either this was a common complaint or there was a great philosophical shift in Bioware during development, because they certainly addressed that issue... by removing it. You have, literally, NO inventory in Mass Effect 2- they make a big thing of it, even at one point issuing a speech called 'Where has my inventory gone?” That's not all that went. No upgrades, no weapons, no armour (well... kinda; you can choose from a small pool of armour types for Shephard whilst on board ship), no social or non-combat skills (no charm, intimidate, medicine, hacking skills... all gone- your ability to Charm or Intimidate is now tied directly to your Paragon or Renegade score), no weapon skills (if you can use the weapon at all, you are as skilled with it as you can be), grenades have become skills rather than... grenades, and even all the funky special skills have been hugely curtailed.. There has been an almost ravenous stripping of the RP elements of the game. You now have fewer skills to use, and far fewer choices in how to set yourself up. You upgrade your weapons by researching and finding blueprints for better stuff around the game world; this gives you some trivial choices in what weapons to take for the team on the way out, but it is all barely worth it. Is this some glorious new streamlined future for RP games? Or is it dumbing down for the console crowd? Well, there was me complaining about the absurd complexity of the first game but... I didn't like this. They took something that was overburdened and replaced it with something that's just boring. There needs to be a better way, although there is something to be said with having fewer skills to worry about.

This has a bearing on the 'RP vs shooter game' argument. Technically speaking, all I said above about this being primarily an RP still holds true... just that now you can affect far fewer of the variables. You have far, far fewer choices about the weapon in your hand and NO choice at all about your skill with the weapon, so I guess the balance towards it being player skill in combat is very different. Yet I cannot call it a shooter. It's not MEANT to be that. It's still MEANT to be the RP, and all the mechanics behind it are meant to be that... I just suspect they didn't appreciate quite how much of that they crippled. A shame. This is all part of a wider question of just what people want from the pure gameplay of an RP game these days, and in many respects Mass Effect is the polar opposite of Dragon Age. Bioware have tired, and that;s fair, but I think they missed their target.

And it is not as if I have so much faith in Bioware as to not believe they could make such an error, as some of their other decisions are incomprehensibly bad. They scrapped vehicle sections after negative feedback from the first (replacing it with something they said was better in one of the DLC packs- they are incorrect about that...) and completely redid exploration. Now, you must physically drive your ship between planets in a system, and also between systems in a cluster of systems, burning up fuel on the way, on the top down map. In the original, you could just click on your target and be there; now you have to click and wait for your ship to fly there, burning fuel if between systems. You have to burn up probes now to scan planets, and use a kind of spectroscopic system to find either side missions or valuable material for researching there, instead of exploring the planets on the ground as before.

Again, fair play for trying something new. But where the action changes are questionable these are not, in that these changes are unquestionably shit. Burning up fuel and firing off probes has, literally, NO PURPOSE. You never actually have insufficient fuel to go somewhere and nor is running low on probes actually a fatal issue. So the only effect of this system at all is to force you to fly back to the central system to burn trivial cash on refuelling and reprobing. So not only is it now slow and tedious to fly anywhere, we have a completely pointless mechanic that adds no choices or drama or gameplay or... anything at all, that makes it even MORE tedious by forcing you to fly, slowly, back and forth to restock. Jesus. As for the spectroscopic planet searching- it's interesting the first time you do it. It's already boring the second. There are over a hundred worlds out there. You get the picture. Ok, it is somewhat less time consuming than the exploration grind of the original... but somehow they actually managed to make it all MORE boring. That's actually rather talented, in a horrible, horrible way.

Still, other parts improved. No more repeated maps- every area is unique. For those that like that sort of thing (more on that in my Dragon Age review), romance options are greatly expanded (and seeing as my love interest from the first had had a personality transplant, coupled with me not really having wanted her anyway, I gratefully took the chance to change lovers here). There is some genuine tension as just about any of your crew can die in the final mission (which is, apparently, why your love interests from the original cannot be team members- they want them all in ME3), though I am less happy about the effective time limited nature of the game, where if you do too many side-missions a bunch of your crew dies near the end. DLC content on the first game was effectively aborted; here it has been relatively frequent, both paid and free.

Well that's the game- up and downs. I'll discuss two areas of broader significance to go out on though. First, there's this matter of importing progress- not a new idea; RP games have been doing that for as long as I have been alive, and the Wizardry series used to import your plot choices. Still, they are trying to do it here on a greater scale- so great, in fact, that some small bugs crept in, and one particular import thinks you did it the Renegade way regardless. It;s a massive undertaking to get all of this right, I suppose. But the fact is... it is ultimately unambitious and trivial. The effect it has on the game is very small. Some of the major ones work of course- like your choice of who had to die in one of the original missions- but they've had to avoid nearly all of the major consequences. 75% of the imports just result in an email message during the game saying “Hey, thanks for what you did...” Some 15% more give minor dialogue or event changes that have zero ultimate impact. In fact, most of the choices in both games are rather illusory. At the end of the first game, you could choose to save the Council and get humanity appointed onto it, or let the Council die and then either have a human-led or even entirely human council. Now, in the Dragon Age review I'll carry on my discussion from earlier about moral choices in games, but to summarise- the whole point of this decision is whether you do the unselfish thing- save the Council that has been a ***** to you all game on moral grounds- or the very practical thing- elevate humanity's power directly. Now, aside from the morality involved, surely the big point of doing the latter is to remove the Council as an obstacle to you;' that is why you would do it. It is therefore astonishing, then, that one of the trivial but actually tangible changes in the sequel is that if you let the Council live, they'll restore your Spectre status in ME2. If you killed them, the new human-dominated Council won;t even speak to you. So... you actually make it WORSE by going down that path. This isn't about realism or just deserts or the like; it is 100% about the whole point of making that original choice to you as a player. If you cannot gain from the selfish action, what the hell is the point? It's this kind of lazy arbitrariness in the effects of choices that annoys me about systems like this, so between triviality and utterly unclear results, I think this whole area does not work. Only ONE thing actually carries through ok, and that is who lives and dies... and that's nowhere near what the system is hyped up as. Apparently ME3 will bear in mind over a thousand variables from both games, but I worry again that the final results will be disappointing. Now, to be fair, I doubt it is really practical to bring the sweeping changes to the games that the choices suggest- you'd virtually have to make at least two different games, plotwise. But... they are the ones that hyped this up. They need to find a better way to follow through. I think that true and tangible continuity between games like this eludes the current generation.

My final comment is on presentation. Mass Effect 2 is slightly, though reasonably, improved on the original, graphics wise (and the sound and voice acting are all still good). But actually... the original Mass Effect was very limited in the way it presented things. I didn't mention it at the time as during gameplay I was forgiving much as they were trying to establish the franchise. But once established, a sequel is where you should have the chance to open out this sort of thing., and this blatantly did not happen. To explain- all environments in ME and ME2 are still using the basic template from Neverwinter Nights and KOTOR- squares of limited area, with heavy loading transitions between them. They are claustrophobic, limiting and lifeless (and the surface areas in the original were very dull, though at least they actually existed). Whilst nothing is quite as bad as the horrific attempt at Nar Shadda in KOTOR 2, it's all just so damn sterile. Occasionally you see quite scenic vistas of futuristic cities out the windows, and you are desperate to be able to go out and explore- but no. There are some little touches; the Citadel in the first has its own visual style (which you promptly see much less of in ME2), and the bombardment of PA speaker systems, often in alien dialects, in some of the populated areas of the second game are effective. But I think it is time for RP games to be better than this. As an example, Assassin's Creed actually makes an effort for a city to FEEL like a city- wide areas (all loaded at once), good use of the z-axis, good art design and the right feel of PEOPLE. It can be done, and even if they don;t go quite that far in RP games, they have to break out of this lifeless mould we seem stuck with. Open up the damn world! We need to experience more than just the departures lounge on a planet, feeling that all relevant people and services are within 100 metres of where you got off your ship. THIS is the kind of broad change that would truly revolutionise the scope of RP games. I hear them saying they didn't do Earth in either game as they wanted to do it right- a fair view. I also understand it might be in ME3. I am very much willing to bet it is too soon- it still won't be right. Ah well.

CARDINAL SINS: Unskippable cutscenes! As above

Empty gameplay- even WORSE than before, with their hopeless fuel, probes and minerals system

SCORE: 8/10

COMMENT: A darker extension of the original, with many attempts at tweaks with varying degrees of success. Just about fun enough still for me not to dock it a mark, but the third game will lose out if it stays like this

Next time- Dragon Age, morality systems, grimdark obsession and the continuing evil of LEVEL SCALING...

Don't forget, Garrus also returns from the original game!

Oh bother, so he does. And even MORE miserable, inevitably, despite the amount I tried to set him on the right path in the original.

He seems to only respond to negative reinforcement.

Like a fist!

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Like a fist!
or a gun 😛

Originally posted by BackFire
He seems to only respond to negative reinforcement.

Odd, he seemed to respond most positively to my FemSheps 'enforcement.'

Same opinions, for the most part, on ME2. Though one moment of brilliance, I thought, was the result of Legion's loyalty mission. Maybe that's simply because the result isn't visible yet.

ME2 struck me, foremost, as setting up the factions and might of the two sides for ME3.

What's coming after Dragon Age? I'm looking forward to your thoughts on Assassin's Creed II. Though I've heard some of your complaints about forcing yourself to play the first...

Yes, I want to hear what you thought of AC2 as well (you know, the one that's vastly superior to the first 😛). Especially if you like how they made the cities feel real in the first one. Because, like everything else, that's even better in the second 😄

(seriously, compare an in-game map from AC2 to a real-life map of the same city. They match.)