Review: Mass Effect 2 (BioWare, 2010)

Platform: PC, X360, PS3

Mass Effect, the first game in BioWare's intergalactic saga, turned out to be one of the best RPG blenders of the past decade. Despite some flaws, it might even be one of the best in video game history. It is up there with System Shock and Deus Ex, becoming part of a trinity of very different games with very similar concerns, each of them a testimony of how far available technology could go to create believable environments, characters and plot, and how to take advantadge of constraints.

System Shock, Deus Ex and Mass Effect have something else in common: their sequels departed considerably from the original. In System Shock and Deus Ex it was, mostly, a matter of technology and standard shifts. System Shock was released when the FPS genre was still crystalizing and its, admittedly overcomplicated, control and inventory schemes failed to become the rule. Deus Ex 2, on the other hand, changed the reference platform from PC to the booming console market. In both cases, the result was a considerably simplified version of the first game. However, Looking Glass used the opportunity to create a completely new kind of game, while Deus Ex: Invisible War remained a dumbed down version of its predecessor.

System Shock 2 is nowadays a classic, while Invisible War is just not.

Between Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 no such technology or standard shift happened. All the modifications to the formula were the result of fans feedback, internal development and, I guess, some pressure from EA. And those changes left a mark even bigger and scarier than anything done in Deus Ex: Invisible War.

What happened?

Sequels of the world be aware of the tale of Mass Effect. Quite a start for a saga, raised from illusion, care and depth, by many loved, despite its flaws, into change it was compelled by EA's suits and internet boards.
Not too good a shooter nor much of an RPG, that was its cross, but the way of the bender was never meant to be easyly walked. Still it sold in the millions and, once DRM was gone, I bought it and rejoiced.

Things looked bright for BioWare and its new step-father, dollars in the pocket and still two sequels short, there was much to win, while little could be lost. Yet, greed took its toll, Mass Effect 2 was rushed to market, changed for the sake of change, dumbed down to please the masses of FPS, TPS players who about Mass Effect complained.

"The Mako is plainly a bore, with little to do in outer worlds, the arsenal too ample, the stats a ton, too much to watch and learn, overheating weapons are plain odd, and why is not Tali in my bed?"
"Just let us run and gun, the next gun better than the rest, picking weapons' not that great. I play to have some fun. Oh, and could you add some mini-games?"

Someone compiled all these requests, wrote them in a chart and forced them into the game. They might not fit well, or needed more thought to blend, but the release date must be met. "Just work less on the PC port. Like anyone will care."

And Mass Effect 2, my friends, is what we have left. By the way, this is the farthest I could take all this prosaic verse.

Port of Citadel...

Where to start? Let's take the platform out of the picture first. I played the PC version of the game, developed this time by BioWare, instead of Demiurge. It happens to be one of the worse ports I have ever stumbled upon. The engine runs smoothly, though it could be argued that textures are not that good, nor models so complex, but I've seen real nightmares in engine porting. Still, the list of problems with the PC version is preposterous.
Having put so much work into making sure the game ran properly on PCs, it is hard to understand why everything else is so ill thought. Using menus in Mass Effect 2 is slow and awkward, as two basic features such as double click and the mouse wheel are nowhere to be seen. To make things worse, Enter and Esc are seldom enabled in menus to speed up interactions.
There are also problems with remapping not working or only partially, which were not fixed until the second patch, more than a month after release. And on screen instructions are still unaware of remappings and only the default controls are shown. The game keeps prompting me to press Space, when the actual Use key is now G. I think I had never seen something like this since the beginning of the XXI century.

First Contact

The first thing most Mass Effect 2 players will do is importing one of their Mass Effect characters over. And, from the very start, problems start arising. Given how Mass Effect ended, it is quite possible that players finished the game at least twice in the same day, to check the outcome of the most important decission taken in the game. Some might have gone further and replay the game from certain mid-game points, were other relevant decissions were made.
These players will now have several profiles available of the same character, with similar levels and dates, most as old as one or two years.

The developers of the import system apparently gave no thought to this possibilities, as the players get no information whatsoever on the profiles they can choose from. Not even a date. I expected, at the very least, the game date, a photo, a list of the most relevant choices (Saved the Queen? The Council? The Krogan? Did Shepard propose a council representative?) and who was Shepard's love interest, if any. Shepard's stats sheet would have been welcome, too.
None of this was available until after the profile has been chosen and, strangely enough, there is no "Cancel" or "Back" button to be found at this moment. The only way to choose a different profile is quitting the game, via Task Manager (Alt+F4 does not work), which is far from ideal.

And, to make things even worse, the player was not allowed to check some other information about the profile until something like 20-30 minutes of introduction and tutorial gameplay, when Shepard is briefed in not very conclusive terms. If you had chosen the wrong profile, you were welcome to try again, but the introduction was unskippable, so you'd better choose the right one the second time around.

The failed import mechanism made for a frustrating experience from the onset, and an omen of things to come.

I must say, nonetheless, that the device used by the design team to reset Shepard's character is well thought and elegant. But they have the problem that they now should come up with a new way to perform the same trick in Mass Effect 3, without repeating themselves.
And, of course, Shepard's reconstruction does not explain why the recurring characters, Tali and Garrus, have forgotten everything they learnt on the first mission.

Someone stole my Role!

Now, for role elements: stats are reduced to six, plus one you can earn by importing a character. All weapons proficiencies are contained in one single stat, which also increases the effects of Paragon/Renegade. I am still trying to decide if there is a relationship I don't see, or if said stat is the "throw everything we could not fit in this stupid limit."
Improvement points are awarded onle after each mission ends, making progression laughable, and have varying costs of 1, 2, 3 and 4 points, which makes things even less natural. You are often forced to not improve Shepard for several missions, waiting until 4 points are available. In my Mass Effect review I explained my preference for more continuous systems, but BioWare decided that big, too noticeable increments would be better.

There are also no longer differences in weapon proficiency among classes. Every class can use any weapon with pretty much the same ability. Soldiers and other combat oriented classes have a couple of extra improvements, but that's about it.
The funniest thing is that soldiers and such have very few abilities per se, so they could have special ones which turn them into deadly users of specific weapons. Instead, most of their already limited stats are dedicated to elemental ammo. Because, believe it or not, only they can use special bullets, which take the form of sustained abilities. Other classes can only access those clips if the soldier masters the specific kind and learns the power of love, with which special ammo can be shared. Low level soldiers must be greedy, unlikable people, I guess. And then, all your party shares the exact same ammo. If you find yourself fighting groups of enemies with several kinds of protections, e.g. robots and humans, you can't have different party members use specially targeted ammo.
In Mass Effect I used ammo effects to create synergies, like poison + incendiary + shield piercer, which heavily damaged enemies. But in Mass Effect 2 strategy has become much more... non strategic.
This elemental ammo abilities, I must say, is the most ridiculous equipment system I've seen since Final Fantasy XII's licenses.

And the tale continues... not

The other selling point for RPGs is their story driven adventures. They usually tell grander tales due to their option to include levels of exposition any other genre would simply reject. And there is a lot of exposition in Mass Effect 2, be sure. The universe is detailed, with new species, ruffians and places to discover. But all that content leads to a depressingly underwhelming closure.
At the end of this part of the adventure so little has been achieved that it feels as filler. Don't misunderstand me: I find the information you gather interesting, but it remains just information. The Reapers are still as unstoppable as at the end of Mass Effect, the Citadel Council remains as stupid as ever and the Earth was screwed anyway. The universe is unchanged, the saga is no closer to an end and after finishing the game I felt I had spent 40 hours in something that would have been much better as a smaller part in something bigger.
It would have worked perfectly as a submission in a more complete game, or even as DLC (which I would have not played). But as a stand alone chapter in Shepard's life, it lacks the relevance to become a novel.

Development, development, development

And the third pillar in the realms of role playing games: character development. Not of the main character, usually, we have got used to that in videogames, but of companions and enemies. Shepard's only improvement over the story is that which the player wishes to instill in him or her, because otherwise little changes from Mass Effect 2's start to its ending.
For example, in my mind, Sharen Shepard, my blonde female soldier, started her journey in the original Normandy as a racist commander who mistrusted half of her partners, but is slowly getting used to them and even liking them. She will still keep her sentimental life tied to humans, but now befriends a couple of aliens. She is not completely bought into the Elusive Man's human supremacy ideas, and doubts she did the proper thing sacrificing the old Council.

Now, be honest: how many of you, players, give so much thought to your in game motivations? Before choosing an answer, do you stop to consider what would your Shepard do? Or do you just evaluate the rewards/penalties each option could lead to? Most people will not give a shit about stuff like background, and none of the Mass Effect games promote playing that way, to the extent that poor Sharen is being penalized for not having a black-or-white morality.  Her dialogue options are reduced and access to specific talents limited, because BioWare encourages players to always answer in paragon or renegade style, consistently, no matter the morale stand point.
Mass Effect 2 gives a little more freedom, having enough morale choices to fill one of the branches and a good deal of the other, but it still presses the player to take extreme positions.

The worst offender is the quick time morale events, which most often than not give a poor idea of what Shepard will do if the event is triggered. Not playing them gives the impression of failure, a sensation increased by the insitency with which they shine, so most players play along with their alingment of choice, even if they do not approve of Shepard's actions.
Another problem is that some timed events feel barely related to morale. If I have a sniper rifle, an enemy on sights and shoot, how can it be a renegade action, when I've killed thousands of enemies before without shaking a bit? I would have killed that robot 5 seconds later, anyway. And let me ask: a robot? Now killing robots is wrong, but not so shooting mercenaries, soldiers and cartel members?
Or maybe I'm wrong and the renegade action was shooting a rifle belonging to someone else. Could that be some weird Canadian social taboo I'm not aware of? As I said, there is little information about why a given action should grant paragon or renegade points.

So Shepard only develops as a character as much as you let your imagination go. What about the rest of the party? Well, yes, they do change throughout the story, as Shepard intimates with them. They way it works feels a little strange, though.
But that is another story and shall be told in a later post.

Next time, in GameNotGame

"Oh, father, where art thou?", "The more things change, the more they stay the same", "The life and opinions of Shepard, mineral scouting ship commander" and much more.