Mass Effect | Superior Realities

If you’re a longtime reader of this blog, you’ll recall that I bought the original Mass Effect many moons ago but was unable to play due to compatibility issues with Windows 7. This enraged me and nearly soured me on Bioware’s games permanently, but I did finally get around to playing the later games in the series.

That left me wondering what the original was like, so when I got my new computer, I decided to see if I could get it working. And to my surprise, I was able to.

I’m not sure why I wasn’t able to on the old computer. The fix I used was a little convoluted to execute, but it was not hard to find, and I can’t believe I wouldn’t have found it before. Maybe the fix to get it working on Windows 7 hadn’t been released yet when I looked the first time?

Anyway, the point is I was able to play through the original Mass Effect without issues.

I’m not quite sure how to rate this game. If I had to describe it in a word, it would be, “wonky.” Not bad, per se. Just wonky.

Firstly, the game reeks of “console port” in the worst way possible. It’s blatantly obvious the control scheme was not originally designed with the PC in mind, so it’s sloppy and awkward at the best of times.

There are also a lot of weird mechanics that just… don’t feel right. For instance, the overheat mechanic just feels weird in comparison to a more traditional reload option. And why the bloody hell does Shepard move so slowly?

The pacing is all over the map, too. Much of the character development and optional content is front-loaded onto the first half of the game. As a result, the early parts of the game feel too slow, and the last half feels too rushed.

Mass Effect does feel a bit more like a game, and not a “choose your adventure” novel, than the later installments, but not necessarily in a good way. The gameplay of later ME titles may be shallow and minimalistic, but at least it’s functional. Aside from the issues I’ve already mentioned, the original is bogged down by a lot of what I like to call “RPG BS.”

For instance, this time around, I rolled a class primarily based on fighting with a sniper rifle. But it took me until at least halfway through the game to train up my sniper rifle skill to the point where it was actually useful for anything.

I can’t believe idiotic mechanics like this ever existed in the first place, let alone that they didn’t die the death they so richly deserve back in the ’90s.

I do try to make allowances for the game’s age, but even so, there’s a lot about Mass Effect that just feels awkward and… indefinably wrong somehow.

It was disappointingly short, too. At least the later games were pretty meaty in the content they offered. I blew through this one in just a few days.

But don’t let all those complaints give you the impression I didn’t like the game. It still had a lot going for it. The story, while occasionally inconsistent, is pretty good, and it has all the great character development I’ve come to expect from the Mass Effect series.

I found it interesting to see how the characters had changed and evolved since the beginning. I’m inclined to say that Tali and Wrex changed the most as time went on, while Garrus changed the least. Shoot ’em all and let the spirits sort ’em out, eh, Garrus?

Liara actually displayed some personality this time around, even if it was just that of the blushing damsel in distress waiting to be swept off her feet by Shepard. She’s still easily the least interesting squad member, in my view.

Some missions suffered from pacing issues, but a few were very fun. The Virmire mission is definitely going down as one of the better moments from the entire trilogy.

This game feels a bit more organic than the later installments, too. The maps are a bit bigger and less linear, and I much prefer the elevator rides to endless load screens.

I’m going to do a full play-through of all three games in order, making all different choices this time around. I’ve only played one class and made mostly the same choices so far, so I’m going to try to be as different as possible this time. For instance, I’ve only ever played the later games with Ashley, so this time I chose to save Kaidan. Turns out he’s a pretty cool guy, but I still think I might like Ashley slightly better.

I feel like I should go full renegade this time since I only ever play paragon, but I just never enjoy being the bad guy. I also considered being a male Shepard this time around, but I still really dislike that guy’s voice acting. And it doesn’t really make much of a difference anyway. Male Shepard gets better romance options, but it’s not worth putting up with his monotone for three games.

I’ll probably do another post on my thoughts on the series as a whole once I complete the play through.

New article:

My latest article at ADANAI is Gamer Demographics Dispel Stereotypes.

Yes, girls do, in fact, play video games. In large numbers.

This isn’t necessarily an earth-shattering revelation, but I had a bit of a realization when it comes to writing recently.

For most of my writing career, I’ve thought of the terms “likable character” and “sympathetic character” interchangeably. Both just terms for a character you like and can empathize with — most well-written protagonists, in other words.

But recently, it occurred to me that the two concepts are not identical. You probably won’t like a character if they’re not sympathetic, but you can sympathize with a character even if you don’t like them.

Basically, I’d say all likable characters are sympathetic, but not all sympathetic characters are likable.

Although it is by no means the only example I can draw — or even the best example — what got me thinking about this was playing Mass Effect 3. I was reflecting on how interesting I find Miranda Lawson’s character to be — once you get past the shameless eye candy — and I wondered why she fascinates me.

I don’t like Miranda. Nobody likes Miranda. Miranda doesn’t like Miranda. She’s a cold-hearted, arrogant bitch.

But yet, despite myself, I feel some sympathy for her. She doesn’t have a very happy life. Nobody likes her because she’s a cold-hearted, arrogant bitch. She doesn’t have any family aside from her psychotic control freak of a father and the sister she never gets to see.

Seems like the only thing that ever gave her any purpose in life was Cerberus, and we all know how that worked out. She doesn’t take any pleasure in her achievements because she views them all as the product of her genetic enhancements rather than any real talent or work on her part.

It’s a pretty sad, lonely existence she has.

So I feel bad for her, even though I dislike her personally, and that dichotomy fascinates me.

I think this is one of the most difficult tightropes to walk as a writer, and it’s impressive any time someone call pull it off.

It occurs to me that my own writing is heavily lacking in characters that are unlikable but still sympathetic. I should probably experiment with it in the future. I guess I just get too caught up in trying to make my heroes as over the top awesome, and my villains as over the top vile, as possible.

Speaking of which, I realize there is one very prominent example of unlikable yet sympathetic characters.

Sympathetic villains:

It’s relatively common to see villains that still have some sympathetic qualities. Maybe they’re stealing and murdering to get money to help an ill loved one. Maybe something truly terrible was done to them, and now they seek vengeance indiscriminately.

The latter is something I’ve dabbled in a bit with my writing. A key villain for one of my main universes became a bloodthirsty killer after his entire family was massacred. Doesn’t exactly excuse the whole “I’m gonna commit mass genocide and conquer the world” thing, but you can kind of see where he’s coming from.

On the whole, though, I don’t find sympathetic villains as interesting as characters who are protagonists — or at least neutral — that manage to be both unlikable and sympathetic.

It’s not that it’s any less impressive of an accomplishment, necessarily, but it’s too simple a swerve. Making a villain sympathetic is a very obvious way to reverse a reader/viewer/player’s expectations. It’s effective, but it’s not a wild stroke of originality — at least not anymore.

Perhaps it’s just my personal experience, but I find the unlikable but sympathetic characters who are not overtly villainous to be far less common, so they’re more of a novelty.

Plus, with a protagonist or “good guy,” there are more reversals of expectation. You expect a protagonist to be likable, so it’s a reversal when they’re not, and then you expect an unlikable character to not be sympathetic, so it’s a reversal when they are.

Don’t really have any point to make here. Just something interesting I was pondering.

* * *

Also, totally random, but while working on this post, I did a Google image search for “sympathetic character” and the first results I recognized were Dexter Morgan, Cameron from the Sarah Connor Chronicles, Willy Wonka (Johnny Depp version), Harry Potter, and Sheldon Cooper.

Not sure what meaning can be drawn from this, if any.

Superior Realities

Tag Archives: Mass Effect

Mass Effect: Better Late Than Never + New Article

Likable Characters Versus Sympathetic Characters

Share this:

Share this: