Mass Effect Is Extreme

[Tale]

8/10, that's it, Bioware is doomed!

[Volourn]

L0L Doomed I say!

 

 

P.S. Theyw ere bought by EA! To some, it means they already are doomed! HA!

 

P.S.S. As a BIO fnaboy, I blame any ME weaknesses on MS the publisher and EA the new owner! It's NEVER the developer's fault! NEVER!!!

[Sand]

8 out of 10? That is a B grade. There is nothing wrong with a B.

[angshuman]

A lot of these reviews seem to be approaching Mass Effect's combat system from a shooter angle, despite reviewing the rest of the game as a typical Bioware RPG. The IGN reviewer makes a good number of informative comments, and then goes on to make the following stupid observation: "Once you've unlocked a good number of powers and know how to work within the system, you'll find the combat has its charms. It never approaches the fluidity of the top tier shooters, but it blows most of the RPG competition out of the water."

 

What the hell? Perhaps he meant to say that Bioware attempted to bridge the gap between the depth and control of a turn-based/real-time hybrid system and the pace and fluidity of a shooter, but ended up alienating both camps. That would have made sense. Review scores have never been meaningful, but I usually expect some worthwhile unbiased information from review texts without having to deduce the reviewer's biases and then reconstruct the entire review in my head. I guess it's possible though that Bioware specifically asked these review websites to review the combat as a shooter with the intention of capturing some of that market.

[mkreku]

OK, I am beginning to get a few doubts by now. I trust Eurogamer the most and when they say it's flawed, it usually is (ignoring the Bioshock/Halo3/Oblivion 10/10 grades..).

 

First of all, people are complaining about texture pop-in:

 

 

 

 

Second, the reviewer estimates it could be completed in around 10 hours?? Geez!

[Tale]

The good seems to outweigh the bad from what I'm seeing. I'm hearing only good things about the game proper (bar the AI's supposed stupidity at times). And the bad things seem to be related to technical issues (textures issues, load times).

Edited November 19, 2007 by Tale

[MLMarkland]

Haven't played it at all yet, but the texture popping is peculiar to the unreal engine (happens a lot in Gears of War, a little but not as frequently from what I can tell in Bioshock).

[angshuman]

First of all, people are complaining about texture pop-in:

 

Second, the reviewer estimates it could be completed in around 10 hours?? Geez!

I can live with a texture pop-in, if it predominantly occurs immediately after a new level loads. I can also live with a "could-be-completed" time of 10 hours. Hell, KotOR can be completed in 3 hours and BG2:SoA in 1, but most players take a lot more. Suicidal party members, though, is probably going to get annoying really fast, especially without the ability to control them properly. I'm not happy with the (seemingly) dumbed-down character customization either.

[Hell Kitty]

The texture pop-in happens frequently - when loading new areas, after fast travelling in Citadel, when switching armour in the inventory, when switching characters in the squad screen. I've seen it happy in other UE3 games, but probably not to this extent.

[Sand]

Since this is a console game there should be any major bugs in it. A buggy console game is just lame. PC it is understandable because all the various configurations the PC can come in, especially in the video and sound department. But on a console that just isn't the case. Bugs on a console is just shoddy programming and QA on the Devs part.

[Tale]

The texture pop-in happens frequently - when loading new areas, after fast travelling in Citadel, when switching armour in the inventory, when switching characters in the squad screen. I've seen it happy in other UE3 games, but probably not to this extent.

I have it rather frequently in Bioshock.

[Hurlshort]

Since this is a console game there should be any major bugs in it. A buggy console game is just lame. PC it is understandable because all the various configurations the PC can come in, especially in the video and sound department. But on a console that just isn't the case. Bugs on a console is just shoddy programming and QA on the Devs part.

 

Eh, I can see that back in the days when console games were fairly simplistic, but today console titles are extremely complex. There shouldn't be any game stopping bugs, but these bugs still leave the game very playable.

[SteveThaiBinh]

Matt Peckham doesn't like Mass Effect.

 

That alone is enough to make me want it.

[Hell Kitty]

Since this is a console game there should be any major bugs in it. A buggy console game is just lame. PC it is understandable because all the various configurations the PC can come in, especially in the video and sound department. But on a console that just isn't the case. Bugs on a console is just shoddy programming and QA on the Devs part.

 

Are you referring to texture pop-in? It's an annoyance, not a major bug.

 

I have it rather frequently in Bioshock.

 

On PC? I was actually wondering if the pop-in was an issue due to the limitations of the 360, or if it occured on all systems. A couple of times when playing Rainbow Six Vegas, after a level load everything is white, with only the characters being textured, and it takes anywhere from 30 seconds to a couple minutes for the textures to load in. I never saw this when I played through on PC. This is the only game I've seen load with no textures, in everything else it's just low res.

 

MoH:A also suffers from it quite often, and I've seen it in Bioshock and GoW but it seemed less noticable in those games. All on 360.

Edited November 19, 2007 by Hell Kitty

[Tale]

Yep, on the PC.

[Volourn]

http://interviews.teamxbox.com/xbox/2101/M...n-Interview/p1/

[Pidesco]

Matt Peckham doesn't like Mass Effect.

 

That alone is enough to make me want it.

 

There was this bit in that review about the character and enemies' descriptions that was idiotic, but other than that, it seemed a reasoned and reasonable review. Is Matt Peckham generally an idiot or something?

[Sand]

Are you referring to texture pop-in? It's an annoyance, not a major bug.

 

Just console games and bugs in general. If the texture pop-in is the only bug in ME then all is good.

[mkreku]

Second, the reviewer estimates it could be completed in around 10 hours?? Geez!

I can also live with a "could-be-completed" time of 10 hours. Hell, KotOR can be completed in 3 hours and BG2:SoA in 1, but most players take a lot more.

Yes, I am aware of the weird sport that is speedruns. But this isn't what I am talking about here. More from the comments thread on Eurogamer:

 

Remember, it's a game you can complete in just over 10 hours first run - our man on the .de site took just 11 hours on his first run through, and I can quite believe it.

 

One reviewer clocked it under 17 hours on his first try. The German reviewer came in just under 11 hours ON HIS FIRST RUN! I am sure he didn't speedrun through it on his first attempt.

[Sand]

Well, I am not going to spend $50 to $60 on a CRPG that I can beat in 10 to 11 hours.

[Tel Aviv]

Ten hours including side questing? I refuse to believe you can complete the game, side quests and all, in ten hours.

[Sand]

Side quests are optional thingies. Normal I only really do side quests if it makes sense for my character to actually do them. I am playing in character after all. Just doing a side quest because its there but goes against how my character's personality and desires is silly. If time is portrayed to be of the essence I am not going to waste time do a bunch of side stuff just because. I take the most expediant route. One of the reasons why I finished BG2 fairly quickly. It was always hurry hurry hurry after Irenicus, so I hurried.

Edited November 20, 2007 by Sand

[Llyranor]

I'd rather spend my money on Crysis, thank you very much.

[angshuman]

Yes, I am aware of the weird sport that is speedruns. But this isn't what I am talking about here. More from the comments thread on Eurogamer:

 

One reviewer clocked it under 17 hours on his first try. The German reviewer came in just under 11 hours ON HIS FIRST RUN! I am sure he didn't speedrun through it on his first attempt.

Fair enough. There does seem to be a wide variation in observed times though. The Gamespot reviewer said to expect ~40 hours. I guess the main storyline is 10-15 hours and starting from there you can pad it with sidequests (and those dreadful-sounding mining missions). I hope the sidequests are good and do not feel completely disjointed from the plot.

[mkreku]

Hmm, the side-quests doesn't sound too promising:

 

If all the BioWare fans really want to convince themselves it's a proper RPG, that's fine. It has the levelling up system of an RPG, certainly, but what people have to accept is that the missions, both main story and sub quests, are 95% action, and play like any other action game, only not quite as well-realised.

 

There are small breaks between the shooting where you meet characters (who might offer you another small fetch quest for money) but once you're actually on a mission, it's a third person shooter, like it or not.

Then he goes on to slam it some more:

 

Important point to note pt 134: you can use the special abilities via RB if you think it makes it more of an RPG, but, try a little experiment and see if it makes any real difference to the outcome of a fight. It doesn't . You can get by without it every single time if you so choose, so if that doesn't highlight that it has been *designed* as an action game, I'm not sure what does.

 

If you can kill everything in plain sight in real time, without pausing the game, I don't see the need to utilise special skills just for the sake of it.

 

To clarify, I did use the special abilities quite a lot to begin with, then started experiementing not using them, and, to be honest, it seems to me that BioWare put them there to offer the illusion of RPG combat rather than making them integral to the outcome.

 

Far from having MAD SKILLZ , it's so easy to shoot your way through the game it's probably the main reason it didn't get a 9. The AI is, well, not brilliant, and at times, just non-existent. If you actually had to use some of the interesting RPG mechanics to get by, Mass Effect would be far more interesting than it ended up. Without the superb storyline, it would be more like a 7, I'm afraid.

I find the comments thread to be more informative than the actual review.