Streamlining Mass Effect 3 won't ruin it

Default_picture
Monday, December 05, 2011
EDITOR'S NOTEfrom Layton Shumway

Danny argues that accessibility isn't always a bad thing, especially when developers learn from their mistakes. Will that happen with Mass Effect 3? Or will meddling with the formula hurt the experience?

It can’t be easy for developers to make sequels, especially for well-received franchises. We’ve all seen rants bashing companies for "dumbing down" features whenever a game’s sequel has a simpler interface or streamlined combat mechanics.

Mass Effect 3 has been the subject of such criticisms, partly due to recently leaked screenshots of an early build which showed different single-player game settings.

Mass Effect 3

Nothing pisses gamers off more than variety

The leaked screenshots indicate BioWare is -- or at least, at one point, was -- working on a mode where much of what defines Mass Effect is removed from the experience. It also enforced what EA said about making Mass Effect appeal to a “wider audience,” which is heresy to many gamers. 

I’ll admit that I initially jumped on the hate wagon that this image fueled. The screenshot, combined with the announcement of multiplayer and an explosion-packed trailer, made me feel that Mass Effect 3 was going to end up feeling too much like Gears of War.

But then I tried to replay the original Mass Effect. A few hours with the game’s clunky combat and inventory reminded me that Mass Effect 2 was a much better game to play. I’m sure some of ME2’s features were tweaked to appeal to a wider audience, but is that always a bad thing? 

 

Some gamers found fault with ME2’s streamlined features, like simpler leveling and exploration. They must have forgotten that much of the optional exploring in Mass Effect consisted of driving around deserted planets.

This is even less fun that it looks

This goes back to ME3’s different game modes. If some version of the original Mass Effect completely excluded the Mako Rover, I’d be all over it. Yeah, it would take away from the game...but only parts I didn’t like to play.

I’m going to spout some more blasphemy now: I auto-leveled my second time playing through Mass Effect 2. My characters weren’t built the way I would’ve liked them to be, but the game’s difficulty didn’t feel any different. It still felt like Mass Effect, and it still felt fun.

Believe it or not, some gamers aren’t huge on dialogue choices. A few friends of mine love Final Fantasy games, but they rarely read or listen to all of the dialogue. They just enjoy building characters and battling. Action mode sounds like it’d be right up their alley.    

Mass Effect 3 will probably be even more streamlined than its predecessor. If I spend less time navigating through unnecessary stats and menus and more time trying to save (or conquer) the galaxy, then that’s a good thing. Mass Effect was never a traditional RPG, so gamers shouldn’t expect sequels to abide by genre standards. 

It seems no franchise is hardcore enough for some. I’ve read comments from elitists with the audacity to say The Elder Scrolls 5: Skyrim is dumbed down or "console-ized." To be completely honest, I’m not surprised. I’ve read similar comments for just about every sequel released this year. 

In the eyes of elitists, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Crysis 2, Dragon Age 2, Portal 2, and even Dark Souls have been simplified for those who can’t handle the "hardcore."  It irritates me that so many gamers think this way. 

It’s true that developers add more roller-coaster set pieces and action-game tropes to make their titles appeal to a broader audience, but that doesn’t guarantee a bad sequel. Games like Mass Effect and Deus Ex blur the lines between genres and, in turn, contribute to the evolution of game design.

If you can’t accept that RPGs don’t always require players to number-crunch and grind their way to a good time, then you might as well abandon video games and go dig up your d20.

Hardcore

I personally don’t understand why someone would play Mass Effect 3 on Action Mode (if it even exists), but I don’t think its inclusion could ruin the game. If you're unfamiliar with the series and want to jump into ME3, I say go for it. Play on any game mode you like.

Ignore the raging purists. The rest of us just want to have fun.

 
Problem? Report this post
DANNY CONCEPCION'S SPONSOR
Comments (14)
Default_picture
December 05, 2011

Who cares about the combat gameplay?

Default_picture
December 05, 2011

You're right. Combat gameplay isn't what Mass Effect is about. My favorite part of the series is seeing how my decisions influence the story. But with ME1 I had to suffer through clunky gameplay in between those decision points.  If it weren't for the story I would have stopped playing.

Default_picture
December 05, 2011
I liked Mass Effect 1, but the empty terrain was really disappointing. I guess I'll have to try out Mass Effect 2 to get used to a more streamlined experience. I'm actually more interested in Mass Effect 3, to see how Bioware improves the gameplay.
Default_picture
December 05, 2011

Mass Effect 2 is already much, MUCH more playable than the original.  I don't see it changing too much for ME3.

Default_picture
December 06, 2011

It honestly took me THREE earnest attempts to get into Mass Effect 1 before I really "got it". The first time I tried I stopped after the first mission because the combat just didn't make sense to me. It was just... weird. It didn't really feel like a shooter but it also wasn't an RPG. The second time I reached the "town" part of the game where you have to talk to a bunch of people on the Citadel. But man the Citadel was boooring. I got lost and kept walking around the same empty corridors. It wasn't until I realized that this was basically an RPG and substituted the Science fiction for classic RPG tropes in my mind like: The soldier class is basically your tank character, biotics is your mage class, and the missions were dungeons. Then I "got it" and was able to play to the end. Bioware's trick almost kept me from enjoying this amazing series.

Default_picture
December 05, 2011

People need to stop looking at "Streamlined" as a dirty word. It's not.

In most cases it refers to the removal of redundant gameplay. It tends to be viewed as making a game too easy, but I would argue that a lot of the time, difficulty remains unchanged, or was more harsh than fun to begin with (e.g. not being able to hit anything for the first few hours of Morrowind).

Skyrim's skill system allows you to shape your character as you're playing, rather than on a piece of paper/excel spreadsheet before you even begin. I'm thankful for this, as I remember Fallout 3 taking a long time to get into, simply because I obsessed over which stats to put points into during the introduction.

Another good example is Civilization. A lot of people complained about the streamlining of empire management in Civ V, but some of the insane micromanagement in previous Civ games was tedious, and I personally didn't miss it.

EDIT: And as for Mass Effect, it's true that a few gameplay elements were simplified in the sequel, but I never felt that it had strayed far from its RPG roots. If anything, it was such an improvement that it made going back to the first game a chore.

I'll be picking the most RPG-inclined mode in Mass Effect 3, but I've got nothing against anyone who wants to enjoy Mass Effect experience without having to deal with dialogue trees and ability menus. Some people don't have the patience for that sort of thing, which is fair enough.

Default_picture
December 05, 2011

I'm not really worried about streamlined gameplay with Mass Effect 3.  I'm worried about cut-and-paste locations (after the annoyance that was Dragon Age 2), the potentially bad story beats (I can only take what I've heard about the leaks with a grain of salt though), and the (I feel) tacked-on multiplayer mode.

Default_picture
December 05, 2011

Considering that Mass Effect 2 was already the iOS of RPG's, Mass Effect 3 may as well go all the way.

100media_imag0065
December 05, 2011

Streamlining core games meant for core audiences is like taking a casual game for casual audiences and making it 10 times as hard. Mass Effect is, in my opinion, the greatest game ever made. Mass Effect 2 is, in my opinion, the greatest letdown of my entire 23 year gaming career. What they did is take a franchise that was never, ever going to be played by a casual audience and streamline the selling points of the entire package.

Mass Effect 2's sales numbers did not go drastically up from Mass Effect 1's numbers, which should tell you that streamlining the game did not suddenly entice more players, it just made half of the games fans upset. And you thought they would have learned their lesson, but they did it again with Dragon Age 2. And now with Mass Effect 3 they are taking it about 5 steps further.

With Mass Effect 2, they took everything I enjoyed about the original and either took it out of the game completely or streamlined it so much that all of the depth was evaporated. Some don't like spending time in menus. If not, Mass Effect was never intended for you. Mass Effect was a great lite RPG. It was not Final Fantasy. It was already simple enough to understand. With Mass Effect 2 they took a great lite RPG and turned it into a 30 hour shooter...Why?

So people who were never going to play the game to begin with can continue to not play a streamlined sequel? This has nothing to do with being "Elitist". This has to do with the streamlining of a game that did not need it. Since when is anything considered "core" a threat to developers? Since when it a bit of complexity too much for the average gamer to understand? Have we all been suddenly hit on the head and can't understand menus? or RPG elements?

We have seen this happen time and time again and it just alienates half of the fans. Look what happened with Final Fantasy 13. You know it is bad when the damn developer goes on the record to apologize. Not every game has to cater to everyone. I don't expect Rovio to add a super hardcore option in Angry birds that gives me one bird to complete every level. Why? Because Angry Birds wasn't designed for me. So why should the games that are supposed to be made for me get watered down and diluted to cater to an audience that is too busy playing Just Dance 3?

This whole idea that every game should be catering to everyone is going to ruin this industry. You can not, ever, please everyone. Trying to make a game that pleases two completely different types of gamers will only end in upsetting one group. I am tired of sitting by and watching once great franchises take so many steps away from their roots in order to cater to gamers who, like I've said multiple times already, are NEVER going to buy these games to begin with. The sales numbers back me up.

Stop messing with our games is what I say. After being heartbroken by Mass Effect 2 I have no intention of playing the third. My job as a consumer is to vote with my wallet, and I vote for my games to avoid to casual hammer that seems to shatter everything it comes in contact with. Elitist? No. That is just a word the defensive use when they don't agree with my argument. The real words for me are "Hardcore Gamer", one who shouldn't have to share his core games with a demographic that Bioware is never, ever, ever going to capture in the first place.

Default_picture
December 06, 2011

I understand where you're coming from, but I don't see it ruining Mass Effect in particular.  

I just don't think the first Mass Effect was complex or deep to begin with.

Default_picture
December 06, 2011

I thought it was a classic Western RPG with Star Trek elements. It had plenty of great dialogue and motion-capture movement, but it also had the intense gameplay to back it up. Honestly, I liked it more for the fact that I could peek around corners and shoot. More importantly, I had to do this for almost the entire game. The only other game that gave me this much time shooting behind corners was Metal Gear Solid 3.

Oh, and Metal Gear Solid 2 had the same type of gameplay. But I could care less about Raiden.

( ̄◇ ̄;)

If anything, the action mode could probably play more like the Metal Gear Solid. Honestly, that's not too drastic a change for me.

Default_picture
December 06, 2011

Ed Grabowski, i agree with you 100%. Mass Effect 2 broke my heart...

Default_picture
December 06, 2011

I've been thinking for a while now that BioWare ought to do a remake of the original Mass Effect in the style of Mass Effect 2. I want to replay that game for the story, and to build up another Shepard to transfer over to the next one. But the combat and rover sequences are just so difficult to enjoy.

Default_picture
December 07, 2011

I've often thought the same.  Until then I'll never be able to import a save file where Wrex survives. :(

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.