Mass Effect 3 Controversies
Focus on Learning provides a great Creative Writing course. We help you with forming stories, hitting beats, set ups and pay offs, and generally forming an engaging story. Mass Effect is a hugely successful franchise that let a lot of people down. See what you can learn from their failures.
This article contains SPOILERS. If you wish, you can skip them when you see the warnings.
Barely two weeks after the game’s release ‘Mass Effect 3’ had already caused three separate outrages among the gaming community. Good going?
Not to say that the game is bad. In fact, overall it's fantastic. We give it a four out of five. The main reason for the lower score being the controversies surrounding it (and a couple of other minor niggles).
Here's a look at what those three controversies are and how we feel about them...
Online Pass
This is something that is becoming increasingly common in gaming lately. Production companies, in order to secure themselves more revenue, are holding back sections of game for new buyers only.
In this case, the multiplayer part of the game is only accessible through the online store purchased using a code which comes in new copies of the game or for the lions share of £10.
I remember a time long ago, that when games were on shop shelves, they were a complete product. There were no post-release patches to fix bugs that were glossed over to meet a deadline. There were no missing sections intended to be brought out later on in special editions and most importantly, everyone who bought the game were entitled to the same product.
Many gamers enjoy buying games, finishing them and then selling them on or trading them in to help fund their next purchase. With these online passes that now becomes -not impossible, but a much less desirable thing to do. Essentially, a person who buys a new game from a retailer gets a complete package: the game and the online content included via code. The person that they sell it on to only gets the game.
This does not happen in any other type of media. If you buy a book and sell it on, you don't tear out a few chapters. If you buy a DVD and sell it, you don't delete the audio commentary. If you buy a house and sell it, you don't demolish the garden!
The decision by game producers to include online passes is simply destroying the second-hand market. This market exists because people may not be able to afford the £40 - £50 price-tag placed on brand new games or they may just be smart enough to save a few pennies and wait til they can get it cheaper.
We live in what is meant to be a free market. This means that we should be able to buy things for what we think they are worth. The companies ask £50 and we say 'no, we'd rather spend £20. We're on minimum wage and can't afford that insane price'.
The online pass tactic tends to force people who would otherwise be waiting a year or so before buying for £20 to pay an extra £10 to get the complete product. It's corporate greed and shows a lack of care for the customer.
The other side of the blade is that some gamers do not actually have their consoles linked to the internet. This may come as a shock in this age of technology, but it is true.
In these cases, they may well have bought a fresh new copy on the day of release but are not allowed access to certain features simply because their home set-up is not adequate.
Granted, in the case of Mass Effect 3, the missing component is the online multiplayer mode, so not having internet access will be a hindrance either way, but it is not always the way with all games. Remember Arkham City? Where the Catwoman sections were only available with an online pass? No internet connection is needed for a one player game!
These online passes only serve as a punishment to those who are unwilling to part with large amounts of money to play a game that may only last a week or so or otherwise those who simply can not use them for one reason or another.
The other headache caused by online passes are the inevitable batch of codes that are faulty. You may buy a new game and attempt to redeem the included code, only to be told that the code is invalid or has already been used. This then requires you to get online to try and find a contact email or phone number of the game company (harder than it sounds) and try to get your message through while countless others do the same.
If you do get your message through, you may be left waiting before you get a response, which in some cases is a 'no' or a request for more hassle on your part in having to take photos of your game, your receipts and your invalid code, uploading them and sending them on. At which point you will have to wait again for a response.
At this stage the lucky ones get a code and are able to begin playing the game they bought a few days back. The unlucky ones will either still be refused OR get another invalid code, meaning the cycle must start again.
In short... online passes need to be stopped. And stopped right now.
Day One DLC
I'm not talking about the patch that was released on Day One to fix some overseen bugs. Though that is a mild pain and yet another sign of the the producers rushing a game so it can meet a deadline, the main problem was something else.
A note on that. Gamers don't usually mind a release date being postponed a little if it means that the game they can buy will actually work!
Again, releasing an incomplete product means that those who have no internet access are stuck with a half finished game.
The controversy however is the 'From Ashes' DLC that came with the Collectors Edition of the game or is available in the online network stores.
Similar to the online pass problems, this is an extra part of the game that is not included as standard and requires gamers to fork out more cash to get.
The rub is, the 'From Ashes' section was made alongside the main game (evidenced by being released at the same time!) and was quite probably originally intended to be a part of the main game.
The DLC includes two missions and a bonus Prothean squad mate. Normally I would say that mentioning the Prothean squad mate might be a spoiler, but since it is all over the advertising I'm fairly certain people are aware of it. Another nice move there, revealing a huge surprise that a member of an extinct race is still alive and willing to join you in the war against the Reapers! All they needed to say was you get a surprise bonus squad-mate. That would have been enough.
Besides this, the DLC is advertised as offering two missions. This is something of a cheat. It actually gives only you one mission that has a small sub-mission within it. The sub-mission involves simply looking at three computer terminals. Hardly worth the extra few pounds.
Open this spoiler section to see why I think 'From Ashes' was likely a part of the main game and not originally intended as DLC.
Spoiler =Mass Effect Spoilers Included!
Your new Prothean squad mate is named Javik. You find him on Eden Prime where he has been cryogenically frozen with the intent of waking up among a million of his kind to repopulate the galaxy. Unfortunately he is the sole survivor of his kind.
After your original mission on Eden Prime where you rescue him from Cerberus and thaw him out, he joins your squad.
From then he becomes much like any other member of your team. He takes a room aboard the Normandy and between missions Shepard can talk to him, learn more, and give the player extra cut-scenes and bonuses.
This is much unlike the DLC for Mass Effect 2. Both Kasumi and Zaeed did have their own mission, and they did take their own quarters on the Normandy, but neither of them would speak to you between missions apart from commenting on things in their rooms. Every other basic squad mate acted in a similar way that Javik does in Mass Effect 3, as well as the rest of your crew, with the extra included cut-scenes and so on.
Javiks behaviour in game may be enough of a hint to his originally intended involvement, but the bigger thing is the scope of his presence. He is a Prothean survivor of a previous Reaper invasion! It is a huge deal that he is involved, not a little bonus.
Zaeed was a bounty hunter, Kasumi an assassin. Sure they were cool, but they were clearly an extra boost to your already solid team. Not a legendary figure come back to life from an ancient past.
The idea that this character was left out to be included as a bonus is madness. His presence makes a massive difference to the mythology. He's not just an extra soldier, he's the equivalent of Robin Hood coming back to life today. Too big to ignore.
Leaving him out really does cut out a big part of the games experience. You can imagine Mass Effect 2 without hiring Zaeed or Kasumi. It wouldn't change a lot. But if you knew that there was a Prothean warrior alive who might have the vital knowledge to defeat the Reapers, then you would NEED him on your side.
Spoiler Ends
Regarding DLC and Online Passes, Nintendo agree. Top dogs at the company Reggie Fils-Aime and Satoru Iwata have both made comments on this type of thing:
"We’re unwilling to sell is a piece of game upfront and, if you will, force a consumer to buy more later. That’s what they don’t want to do, and I completely agree. I think the consumer wants to get, for their money, a complete experience, and then we have opportunities to provide more on top of that." Reggie
"In terms of that priority (DLC), we cannot, and should not, ask our consumers to embrace the situation where they are required to make excessive payments. Doing such things might be good for short-term profit, but it will not serve our mid-term and long-term business developments." Iwata
If the 'From Ashes' DLC wasn't enough, bonus DLC is available with the series action figures. With each figure bought you get some bonus gear for your multiplayer game.
The pattern was seen with the Guitar Hero franchise. Early days were great. Complete games with full track-lists were released. Later on however, the games required players buy more and more to get the full enjoyment. More instruments and more songs meant more money gone.
Eventually, this was it's downfall. People want their moneys worth, they do not want to keep paying out to get something that they paid for to begin with.
As far as DLC goes, especially with its price-tag, game companies are simply not giving enough any more.
Before the days of online network stores, games did have Expansion Packs. These were worthwhile. Usually they came out a year or so later than the original game and added a substantial amount to the gameplay, sometimes even doubling the size of the game.
Recent DLC packs that offer a half hour of extra play are just a rip off.
And costume packs? For money? Is that a joke? That's the sort of thing that should be unlocked by completing a challenging level!
So... let's see an end to overpriced DLC as well. Not least because of all the space on my crowded hard drive it takes up.
The Ending
The ending is probably the one that has bothered the most people. A large number of gamers have even started a petition to try and convince Bioware to create a new one!
In response, to be fair, Bioware intend to create more content which will hopefully address the issue of the ending.
The likelihood though is that they will ask gamers to pay more to get hold of it...
The basic gist of the problem is that the ending did not seem to deliver what Mass Effect fans had been waiting for. The series is renowned for rewarding or punishing choices made. The ending should have been the biggest payoff.
It simply wasn't.
It seemed no matter what you did throughout the three game series, everyone got the same finale... with minor differences.
The game was advertised with 16 possible endings. It really was closer to one ending, with 16 tiny tweaks.
For what I think about the ending have a look inside this spoiler section.
Mass Effect 3 Ending Spoilers Included!
The final mission is what you have built up towards in the whole game. Arguably this is what you have built up towards in the whole trilogy.
Since Shepard was first confronted with the Reapers, he has been fighting to get to the stage where he can defeat them once and for all.
Mass Effect 3 is all about uniting the galaxy to bring about the end of this terrible enemy.
So after helping the Turians, the Krogans, the Salarians, the Quarians, the Geth, the Asari, the Hanar, the Volus, the Batarians, the Elcor, and the criminal underworld, combining them into one huge fighting force and leading them to Earth for the final battle you land in London.
An epic battle begins, with Shepard and his squad sweating the entire way fighting hordes of powerful foes.
In the middle of the fight you are given a touching chance to speak to each surviving member of your squad from the past three games either in person or over holo-communication.
This serves as a nice goodbye for Shepard, who can not be sure who, if any, he will see again.
You fight on, and make the last push, trying to reach a teleportation beam to get you about the Crucible where you will hopefully be able to end the war once and for all.
You make the dash with Anderson, his squad and tanks, and your two chosen team mates.
At which point Harbinger attacks. Supposedly he kills everyone making the rush towards the beam.
Shepard of course picks himself up, beaten and bruised, and staggers the final few steps to the beam, believing himself the only one left alive.
In my case, I thought Anderson, Ashley, and Garrus had been killed.
Upon boarding the Crucible, you discover that Anderson had made it too, in just as bad shape as you.
There, the Illusive Man is waiting for you and tries to convince you one last time that controlling the Reapers is possible.
Your confrontation with him leaves you the only one left alive one way or another.
At which point your priority becomes the Reapers. Shepard tries to activate the device but is met by a ghostly image of the dead boy that had been haunting him. The boy represents a Reaper AI and explains the Reapers purpose.
Depending on how well you have played through the rest of the game, he may give you options on how to proceed. He may only give you one choice, he may give you three. It all depends on your Effective Military Strength.
I had a high EMS, so I was presented with the three choices.
First was to Destroy the Reapers as I originally intended. This however would also destroy all synthetic life, including the geth, EDI, and Shepard, who had cybernetic implants.
Second was to Control the Reapers. Apparently the Illusive Man had been right that it was possible, though he would never have been able to as he was already under Reaper control himself. Controlling the Reapers would mean that Shepard would have to make himself a part of them.
The Final option was to throw himself into the Crucible, where his image would be sent out to all creatures, synthetic and organic, and combining them into beings that are bits of both.
All three options involved Shepard’s death and the end of the Reapers in one way or another.
I chose the control option, because I didn't like the idea of sacrificing the geth and EDI. (I'd already destroyed the Quarian...)
Whatever you chose, once Shepard completed his part, a wave of power would spread from the Crucible and hit everything in the galaxy. Whatever the intended effect, the Mass Relays would be destroyed.
For some unknown reason, at this point Joker and the Normandy would be using one of them. I am clueless as to why they were leaving the battle-zone while Shepard was still there.
The destruction of the Mass Relays almost pulls apart the Normandy and forces it to crash land on an unknown planet. Joker emerges with two crew members.
I'm not sure what decides which crew-mates are with him, but in my case it was Ashley (my romance) and EDI.
Ashley, had no burn marks despite being shot by Harbinger like I had been.
So to sum up, every ending involves -
> Shepard’s death (unless you get the mini cut-scene where you see an armoured chest breathing. It's probably Shepard but it's non-committal)
> The removal of the Reaper threat
> The deaths of Anderson and the Illusive Man
> The crew of the Normandy (or some of them) being stranded on a mysterious planet
> The destruction of the Mass Relays
Minor differences experienced because of in game choices or performance seem to be limited to whether or not the Earth is completely destroyed or only left a ruined war-zone and whether you also wiped out the geth and EDI.
There are a number of problems with this ending. The main one being that I have not been rewarded as a player for what I have done in game.
In my case, I brought the full might of the galaxy together against the Reapers (minus the Quarians), and was a Paragon player and so should have had a brighter ending.
Apparently the best ending for a Paragon character is the choice to destroy the Reapers. i.e. choosing to sacrifice a race of people and one of your crew-mates along with yourself to do so.
I spent so long weighing up the options that I got a game over telling me the Crucible had been destroyed. I think I preferred that ending.
There's nothing wrong with the scenario Shepard was placed in, but it should have been an ending given to someone who had not done so well and achieved so much.
It's not even a huge problem that each choice meant that Shepard had to die.
But it is a problem that every choice destroyed the Mass Relays. I have the entire military strength of the galaxy orbiting Earth. They now have no way home.
I won't attempt to write a new ending myself, but it would be good if there was a way of choosing to defeat the Reapers without the Crucible. Or perhaps a way of getting another of your team on board to calibrate it to only target the Reapers (Garrus?).
A lot of gamers are beginning to believe that the Reaper AI was lying and that there could well have been an alternate option. The idea of destroying the Reapers by sacrificing himself and all synthetic life could have been some kind of bluff. The other options in game allowed the Reapers to keep on living, thereby satisfying their self preservation instinct.
Another major problem is the crew becoming stranded. The big question is, "Why were they leaving the battle?". It was in full swing right up to the point that Shepard sacrifices himself. A space battle and a ground battle both at the same time.
How did Joker get Ashley out of the war-zone? Where were they intending to go? Why do we only see what happens to two squad-mates?
I would have liked an epilogue showing where each of my team ended up. I still don't know if Garrus survived getting shot by Harbinger. Ashley got out without a scratch, but no hint of him. I assume he made it. He took a missile to the face in ME2, so I don't see why not, but there's no way of being sure.
Of course it would be nice if there was an ending where Shepard can keep his promises of having drinks with his crew after it was all over. (He did promise near enough everyone.)
It might even be fun to have an ending where the Reapers win!
That's the point. The game is meant to reward our journey over a trilogy of games! What happened to that? Why did we end up with three choices that give near enough identical outcomes?
I was saddened when Mordin, Tali, Zaeed, and Thane died over the course of ME3, but the stories were told well, and though it gave me a bad feeling, it wasn't a negative effect on my enjoyment of the game.
My other personal niggle with the ending is that it didn't match up to the fun of ME2s finale.
One of my favourite parts was choosing which squad-mate would be best suited to performing a certain task. I made life or death choices that affected the outcome of the mission that I had spent the entire game preparing for.
If I wasn't prepared properly, or I chose wrong, people would die and my chances of success grew slimmer.
In ME3, I was waiting for a final mission in which I would not only assign squad-mates tasks, but also guide fleets of warships and footsoldiers into position on the battlefield. My tactical choices could then help determine which way the battle went.
I play Mass Effect for my own personal story, where my choices have consequences. This ending did not deliver.
Spoiler ends
The game has been accused of suffering from poor writing because of this. I think this is unfair. The entirety of the rest of the game is fantastic. It keeps you playing to the end. The disappointing end.
But the rest of the ride is great. The entire rest of the game does what it is meant to do. It gives you options and lets the consequences play out.
It just seems so out of place that the big finale is nothing like the greatness of the series.
It is possible that the ending suffered again due to being rushed out for release. If that's the case, then again I say, I would rather wait for a complete product than get it before it's ready.
There are far too many questions left open that need to be answered. Sure, I was disappointed that we never saw a Quarian’s face, but I realise that keeping a bit of mystery makes it more interesting. But this ending where nothing is explained, leaves too much to the imagination.
Bonus Controversy: Casey Hudson Quotes
Director and Executive Producer of Mass Effect 3 Casey Hudson has made some statements in response to the various controversies.
"I didn't want the game to be forgettable. Even right down to the sort of polarizing reaction that the ends have had with people - debating what the endings mean and what's going to happen next, and what situation are the characters left in."
We understand that you didn't want it to be forgettable. That's a good thing. But 'polarizing' means that some people love it, some people hate it. What we have here, is most people hating it and the rest grudgingly accepting that there isn't anything they can do about it.
"That to me is part of what's exciting about this story. There has always been a little bit of mystery there and a little bit of interpretation, and it's a story that people can talk about after the fact."
As I said earlier, a bit of mystery is good. The Quarian’s faces, the Illusive Man’s indoctrination and so on. But we want answers to questions like, 'What happened to our crew?', 'Is the galaxy safe now?' and 'Could someone give me a straight answer about why the Reapers were trying to wipe us out?'.
Spoiler "Supposedly why the Reapers were attacking"
Originally Planned Motivation
The Reapers' goal was to find a way to stop the spread of Dark Energy which would eventually consume everything.
There was so much foreshadowing about Dark Energy in ME2.
The Reapers as a whole were 'nations' of people who had fused together in the most horrific way possible to help find a way to stop the spread of the Dark Energy. The real reason for the Human Reaper was supposed to be the Reapers saving throw because they had run out of time. Humanity in Mass Effect is supposedly unique because of it's genetic diversity and represented the universe's best chance at stopping Dark Energy's spread.
The original final choice was to be
"Kill the Reapers and put your faith in the races of the galaxy in finding another way to stop the spread with what little time is left"
or
"Sacrifice humanity, allowing them to be horrifically processed in hopes that the end result will justify the means."
Motivation as Explained in ME3
The Reapers goal is that they are working to prevent a technological singularity. The quick definition of a "technological singularity" is basically a point when the machines of a civilization become more advanced than their creators and they are able to outdo their creators in pretty much every way imaginable.
Spoiler ends
Regarding 'From Ashes' DLC:
"I think a lot of the common sense is prevailing. Initially, it was spun in a direction that suggested that we had taken the lore out of Mass Effect 3 and were holding it inside the DLC only, which now the people who actually have played Mass Effect 3 and the DLC they know that that's not true. So that fear was set aside and, ultimately, I think people get it now."
I don't know where he gets this idea from. I completely agree that the 'lore' has been taken out and should have been included as standard.
"So where do we go from here? Throughout the next year, we will support Mass Effect 3 by working on new content. And we'll keep listening, because your insights and constructive feedback will help determine what that content should be."
Support Mass Effect 3? You made it in the first place. I just don't understand why in a series of games based on choices and consequences, that the ending would not follow suit.
"After much deliberation, the CAT mission (or rather, the Prothean mission) had to be removed from the set of tasks. The missions would later be completed as post-release content."
Oops. I didn't have to figure out that the Prothean mission was meant to be included to begin with. He's just gone admitted it.
"In truth, the final bits of dialogue were debated right up until the end of 2011. Martin Sheen's voice-over session for The Illusive Man, originally scheduled for August, was delayed until mid-November so the writers would have more time to finesse the ending.
And even in November, the gameplay team was still experimenting with an end-game sequence where players would suddenly lose control of Shepard's movement and fall under full Reaper control. (This sequence was dropped because the gameplay mechanic proved too troublesome to implement alongside dialogue choices)."
And there's my proof that the game was rushed to meet a release deadline...
Comprehension Questions
What are the three controversies listed?
Do you agree that these are problems for fans of the series?
Do you think these things are signs of corporate greed, or are they good for business?
Do you think downloadable patches for bugs in games are a good thing, or should developers take longer to test and polish their product before sales?
Do you think developers should consider the second-hand market?
