First Impressions: Mass Effect 3: Galaxy At War

When BioWare announced there'd be a multiplayer mode for Mass Effect 3, that's really the point where I started assuming the worst. You know, because what place did multiplayer have in a story-centric RPG like this? (I haven't forgotten BioWare's old CRPGs, but this is a different situation.) What was the point, other than to appeal to the Gears of War/Battlefield 3 crowd? (Nothing against those games; I own and play both.)

(Parentheses.)

The really clever thing about the multiplayer, though, is that they didn't make it some separate entity where it's really just a battle royale for no reason. BioWare have gone through a lot of trouble to ensure that not only does Galaxy At War make sense within the context of the lore and the story, but it also ties back in with the singleplayer mode in a creative way. I'll go over that first before we dive into the actual game.

In Mass Effect 3, most of the game revolves around Shepard uniting the galactic races against the Reaper onslaught by way of the main campaign and the many sidequests that are woven in throughout. By doing this, you add "War Assets" to your overall "Effective Military Strength", the latter of which is represented by the big progress bar that you have access to in your war room on the Normandy. Collect more war assets and the EMS progress bar fills up more and more, and in order to get the "best" ending, that bar needs to be filled up all the way.

Now, you can max out your EMS exclusively through singleplayer if you wish, but it requires that you really go out of your way to grind out those sidequests and scanning quests for war assets. Let's say you're on your second playthrough, and you just really don't want to do all of that planet scanning again, but you still want to fill up your EMS bar all the way. Galaxy At War essentially provides an alternative for this. The more matches you win in multiplayer, the more your "Galactic Readiness" increases.

Your Galactic Readiness acts as a multiplier for your war assets, so you can pretty much look at it like this:

(War Assets) X (Galactic Readiness) = (Effective Military Strength)

Basically, you can play multiplayer in place of the many sidequests, if that is your preference. To that end, the singleplayer and multiplayer modes complement each other quite nicely, adding more depth and spontaneity to Shepard's overall goal. It's nice to know that you can take a break from the game... by playing another part of the game - and you'll be working toward the same goal in each. I'm hesitant to say more games should do this, but it definitely makes multiplayer modes look like less of a slight against the prime function of the product.

So! That's how Galaxy At War functions within the context of Shepard's quest. But how does it play?

Gameplay - "BioWare Loves Waves."

Galaxy At War is probably excessively complex for what it actually is. Basically, it's "Horde Mode" from Gears of War, and "Firefight Mode" from Halo. It's wave combat, with you and three other players going up against ten waves of increasingly stronger enemies, such as: Geth, Reapers, and Cerberus. Your task is to survive, and do as much damage to your foes as you possibly can.

Randomly divvied out through the waves are simple little missions that add to the challenge. Kill these targets or Activate these terminals or Upload the information... Actually, I think those are the only three.

The game itself is remarkably barebones. Beyond an adjustment of difficulty - Bronze, Silver, and Gold difficulties, that is - there's really not much here in the way of variety. Playing the game a handful of times will probably show you everything the game has to offer. And since it plays almost exactly like the base game, you won't be surprised by much.

But when I say the game is perhaps excessively complex, I'm referring to the customization options.

Customization - "Diversity in Combat."

The neat thing about the multiplayer mode is that it allows you to customize your own character - albeit in simplified ways, but it's still entertaining. All of the classes from the base game are available, and each class sports a group of three different characters for you to choose from. For instance, choosing the "Soldier" class will give you the option of being a Human Female, Human Male, or a Turian. For "Vanguard", a Drell, Asari, and a Human are available.

And so on.

Choosing one of these characters will allow you to give them a name, customize their color scheme, loadout weapons, and distribute points into the various trees as you level up. In essence, you can tailor your character to fit your play style. And let me tell you, it's pretty satisfying and exciting to charge into battle as a turian. If you've ever wanted to play a character of another race, this is pretty much your first opportunity to do so.

But even with customization options available to you, you're still going through all this trouble to level up your character, acquire weapons, skill points, color options, etc. to play a game that never really changes. It's only one game mode and six different levels, all of which you might have played before in the singleplayer story.

It's barebones, but that might have been intentional on account of...

Monetization - "Why Play When You Can Pay?"

It's obvious that EA/BioWare are looking at their multiplayer mode with an Activision/Riot Games mindset. The levels that are offered at this point are pretty unremarkable and static. You can tell that there's going to be a map pack in the near future. A character pack, as well.

Additionally, most of the characters, customization options, weapons, and mods in the game have to be unlocked. You can do this by playing through different levels, acquiring credits, and spending them on veritable grab bags that might contain the upgrades or the characters you so desire. There are three different packs, with the cheapest one having the least chance of containing good items or characters.

But let's say you're tired of playing through the game and just want to unlock your turian soldier right now. Well, EA/BioWare have graciously allowed you the option of purchasing these item packs with Microsoft Points. So if you don't want to play the game to get that "Spectre Pack", you can just buy it with real money.

I'm not opposed to stuff like this in theory. I've played League of Legends, and I think charging people for cosmetic items is a pretty neat way to displace the fact that the game is free. The thing about BioWare's Galaxy At War is that it's not free; it's unlocked with the dreaded Online Pass, and you have a rotten goddamn chance of getting the characters and mods that you will definitely need if you want to play at the higher difficulties without being carried by the other players.

I'm almost at level 20 with my character, and I still haven't unlocked a single mod for my assault rifle. It's by the grace of the Goddess that the only character I've managed to unlock was the only one I wanted: the turian soldier. So, for now, I'm stuck at Bronze difficulty, hoping I'll unlock the mods I need to ascend to the... higher difficulty for the same levels.

Eh...

In Summation - "Buy You A Fight In Space."

In theory, Galaxy At War is a fantastic idea. And actually, in theory, it's pretty fun for a while! Being able to fight off the Geth or the Reapers or Cerberus with your friends, playing as your favorite race, is damned entertaining. It plays like Mass Effect 3, contains sufficient customization to add some much needed depth to it all, offers some good ol' co-op action and a distraction from the singleplayer campaign that'll actually end up benefiting Shepard's mission.

The multiplayer just doesn't seem to have the kind of staying power that I'm sure EA/BioWare were hoping for. There's no real reason to progress or get better or hit that upper tier other than the achievement, and the single "wave combat" mode gets old fairly quickly. There's also that prevalent feeling that eventually, with the right amount of cash in hand, you'll be able to buy the experience you're craving.

"Space Cash..."

It's all a bit uneven once the initial thrill wears off, but it's still multiplayer Mass Effect. Although, with Assassin's Creed now shipping with a lengthy campaign and a rich multiplayer mode that also ties back into its own story, you might wonder why EA/BioWare didn't push the envelope a bit further.

First Impressions: Dragon Age 2 Demo

Yeah, this is a week late. My Xbox Live Gold subscription expired a few weeks back, and I've had little reason to renew it. (Though I do miss Netflix and BC2. A lot.) But I digress...

EDIT: [Hello readers, this is Buch - the other writer here on the blog - hijacking so that I can offer a few comments. I'll be using this font, and square brackets. I should say that I actually downloaded the 'Dragon Age 2' demo on the day, and started so many blogs about it, but could never decide what I wanted to say.]

I wasn't quite sure if I wanted to download the demo for Dragon Age (Where's the colon and subtitle?) 2, since I'm not the biggest fan of spoilers, and BioWare loves to let a bunch fly just before a release. But I gave in. My curiosity has been building for over a year, and I just had to know: Just how bad did BioWare fuck up?

Sorry for cursing.

[Knightfall curses all the time.]

After playing it, I'm finding myself very, very, very, very torn. Visually, the game is a lot better. Gameplay-wise, it's also much better in some respects. But there are a few things that really made me say aloud, "Are you fraking serious?" I think Dragon Age (Why is there no colon?) 2 is going to do its share of pleasing, while bringing a bit of backlash upon itself at the same time. Of course, the game will probably sell very well, and get tons of acclaim thrown its way, so while I might go off on a rant here, I'm very certain none of it will be changed in time for DA3.

[I agree that the character models and general graphics are strongly improved. But one of the things I noticed was a general poor quality in design. During the demo's few scant levels, the backgrounds look very dodgy to me. Just blank, dark, empty post-battle fields. I was reminded strongly of my first approach to Kvatch in 'Oblivion', and how much more affected I was back then. The backgrounds were dull, that one character has inappropriately brightly-coloured hair. The bad hair was one thing I was sure would be fixed in this game I'm not sure I'd say this game looks a lot better.]

The Pros:

-Combat: Ever since the game was announced, BioWare have been emphasizing that, this time around, you'll be able to "press a button and something will happen." Very vague to those of us who were already familiar with the concept of cause and effect. What they really meant is that, now, when you use one of your spells or talents, it connects. Your character won't start freaking out or slowly maneuver into position.

No, when you hit the backstab talent, Hawke immediately jumps behind the enemy and backstabs. There's no delay, there's no assuming the position (giggity). When all is said and done, it's really nice. Reminds me a lot of World of Warcraft.

[It's so good to see that the combat has not been dumbed-down - or at least, only to a very small extent. Personally, I preferred the old semi-turn-based method, but this works too. And it does feel great not to have three misses in every five attacks. There are a couple of other little touches about combat - archery is no longer underpowered, thank goodness. You can hit people with your staff or bow if they get too close, and there are cool little combat animations for everyone.
Bloody mages, however, are still bloody overpowered.]

-Character Design: I've interacted with a number of characters, and so far each of them have looked unique from each other. Not only that, but male and female body types have been refined, so that a woman with a full suit of armor doesn't look like a man, and a man with a full suit of armor doesn't look like the Incredible Hulk. Skin textures are better (a lot less shiny), and proportions are more realistic. Definitely an improvement in this regard.

There's also a lot of boob action going on. I feel that I should mention that.

-Goddamn Action: There have been a load of cutscenes, but characters seem much more animated. They interact with each other, gesture as they speak, and there's a lot more drama to it. So far, it's been refreshing. It was not uncommon in DA:O for a party of characters to just stand there, moving only their head and a single arm the entire time. And I haven't noticed any repetition in their movements, so that's something.

[The only thing that does bother me here is that the dialogue / cutscenes seem to be very, very similar to 'Mass Effect'. 'Mass Effect' of course has incredible cinematic, dramatic qualities, so it's no bad thing. But it does make Dragon Age 2 seem less unique, which I picked up on a lot and didn't like.]

-Talent/Skill Trees: I like that the trees have been cleaned up a little. There seem to be just as many as there were in DA:O, but it's loads easier to find what you are looking for. Plus, there's a greater variety, so it's likely you won't be putting all of your points into one single tree. I know, for the most part, that was the case for me.

Also, it seems like there are fewer sustained spells, which I like. Playing as a rogue, I just wanted more attacks, but I was constantly loaded down with buffs and things like songs. Save those for the mages.

[Well-said.
One gripe I have with the skill trees is that almost all of the skills I saw were very familiar. It's pretty much the exact same set of abilities as in the original game. This seems lazy.]

-Visuals: The first part of the demo takes you just outside of Lothering. Though, I didn't know that part of Ferelden was that barren, the place does look nice. There's more color, better shading, and the overall sense of ambiance is more pronounced than in DA:O, where there were times you could swear you were looking at a still image.

-Armor: One of my main gripes with DA:O was that no matter what piece of armor you found, epic or no, they all looked alike. In DA2 there seems to be a greater variety, which makes my heart smile.

-References: There were only a couple direct references to Dragon Age: Origins, but they really did get me excited. I really think this game is going to live or die for me based on how well it honors all that I managed to pull off in the first game. And seeing Flemeth again was awesome. She looks much more like a Witch of the Wilds now, and Kate Mulgrew really knocked it out of the park this time. She was amazing.

[Yes, but the very fact that Flemeth looked so different - at the same time as the original game was set - really annoyed me. Already we're retconning the original. This bodes ill. I know, I know she can shapeshift.]

The Cons:

-Hawke: Though I'm warming up to the concept, I still think a sequel to Dragon Age: Origins would have been so much better with a greater emphasis on character attachment. Hawke's backstory has already been written. He's human, he's got a voice that isn't yours, and he's already a Champion. I just feel like there's very little room for role-playing in that equation. I would have loved to be an elf again, or even a qunari! We could have spent the story living in the aftermath of your Warden's actions, but now we're completely circumventing it.

I'm not so disappointed anymore, since the story is actually shaping up rather well, but I do feel an echo of what I was feeling as I played through Fable III: that this is a major missed opportunity to really capitalize on what made DA:O great and very replayable. Only time will tell (a week, to be precise) how I'll feel about DA2, but I think BioWare is getting too caught up in letting you play someone else's story instead of letting you feel like you're creating your own.

[This is my main worry as well. I really do fear that 'Dragon Age: Origins' will be the last new game I'll ever play with proper dialogue trees and a silent, personalised main character with a name and backstory I made up.

Of course, as I mentioned earlier, that's not to say that the cinematic 'Mass Effect' style isn't wonderful. I just wish Dragon Age would continue along as it began. Hopefully it will remain more of an RPG, and parts of the character and story, like the inventory and combat, will stay basically the same.]

-Hack and Slash: I groaned very loudly when I hit the A button to attack and Hawke slashed once, then stopped. Let me say this: stuff like this only works with a game like Fable, where the gameplay is so simple that you can easily get through the game without worrying about health or mana, etc. But when I have to worry about health, stamina, cooldowns, party members, and crowd control, I do not want to do all that whilst smashing the A button a billion times during a fight.

[And it gets bloody tiresome if your character, like my archer, is stood still at the back of the fight. Your thumb is going to get tired playing this.]

I've lost track of my health several times already, and actually died once. Died! In the demo! I think it'll get tiring after a while (I'm kind of tired of it already) and I think the whole thing could've been handled with a lot more zazz. I seem to remember there was mention of an auto attack option, ala WoW, DA:O, and every other f*%king cRPG in existence, and if so, I'll be okay. I don't know why they thought doing this by default for a 30+ hour game was a good thing, though.

-Hawke's Voice: I'm not a big fan of what I've heard so far. Male Hawke definitely sounds better than Fem Hawke, but I'd rank them both below Mark Meer at his ME1 worst. And I really don't get why they even give us the option to choose what Hawke says if s/he is just going to go off on his/her own tangent during some cutscenes, anyway. There were many instances where he would talk at random and say things that I would never say.

[I must leap to the game's defence here. I seem to be the only one who thinks so, but the male Hawke sounded pretty good to me! He's not the best actor Bioware ever hired, but I thought he was good enough. He is certainly more impressive than Mark Meer as Commander Shepard! The female actor wasn't terrible, either. Not as good as the bloke, for sure, but.]

-How you gonna act?!: Despite the fact that BioWare were very aware that fans were annoyed with how they could not predict how Shepard was really going to react when they picked a certain option on the dialog wheel, they've somehow managed to make it even worse here. There were many, many times when I'd pick an option that made no sense, and it alluded to something that also made no sense.

After this one character dies (kind of a spoiler) I chose an option that stated: "She won't be alone." Immediately, I was thinking, "Why won't she be alone? Like, spiritually or on the battlefield? Are we going to kill a bunch of darkspawn to keep her company up there?" But no; Hawke says, "At least she'll give father some company."

What?! That doesn't even make any sense! No one's spoken one word about Hawke's father since the demo began. How would I know that? Or that Hawke would say anything about his father? And so the divide between character and player knowledge widened, and I didn't like it.

[In an odd way, this is actually something I like about the dialogue in 'Dragon Age 2' and the Mass Effect series. It makes the player feel like he's in Hawke / Shepard's head, making snap decisions. I think the reason I like it so much is because it reminds me of 'Fahrenheit' AKA 'Indigo Prophecy', which gave you a few seconds to speak, and one or two-word clues.

It makes you feel as if you're really having that conversation. Just as in real life, there's no time to carefully plan out your words. You think of vaguely what you want to say, commit and see what comes out of your mouth. If Hawke / Shepard says something you didn't intend, you feel annoyed and try to backtrack, with limited success - just like in real life. Even though I would prefer DA2 to continue the style DA:O used, I really do like this feature.]

-A word in edgewise: Hawke's not given nearly as many opportunities to speak as the Warden did during DA:O. I kept waiting for my turn to speak, only to hear Hawke say something I didn't want him to. Again with the disconnect.

-Leveling: This might not amount to much after a while, but it quickly got annoying that I was leveling up once every four or five minutes. Which meant I had to pause the game, mess with my stats, mess with my skills and repeat for every other character that leveled along with me. I liked to put a lot of thought into where each of the points are going, so having to do it every few minutes made me grind my teeth a little.

Also, though I really like the layout of the skill/talent trees, they really don't give you many options at first. Though I had like six different trees and a ton of different options, only one or two were unlocked. So I didn't really get to see the "in-depth customization" side of it.

-Party Members: While I'm glad you can still mess with their stats, I'm not very happy that you won't be able to change their armor, especially since there seems to be a greater variety now. That's just the anti-RPG right there. I didn't like that they did that with ME2 and I still don't like it now. (Ten bucks says there will be plenty of alternate costume DLC though.)

[And you know I'll be buying every pauldron of it! Oh WHY must you be so tempting, DLC. I think the fact that I'm betraying myself and all players makes me want that alternate armour even more.]

So! That was my experience with the demo. Had to replay it (which I didn't want to do) because it glitched one of the quests, so now I'm well-versed in the opening moments of the game. Hate that. Despite my gripes, I'm still going to give Dragon Age: Two a fair shot. I still think this whole thing is a missed opportunity, but I know that it'll have a good story nonetheless. I just wish BioWare would stop playing it safe.

[I can't add anything to that - Anthony put it better than I could there. And yet here I am, taking the last word.

Dragon Age: Twenty Two and a Half will be set in Thedas (an in-joke for 'THE Dragon Age Setting'), and thus I will love it. The pirate girl looks rather silly and exploitative, but I'm already in love with the dwarf narrator. I have my doubts about the storyline and loyalty to the original game, but I do now know that there will be lots of cute little touches, good voice acting overall, and one completely new, and welcome, addition to the Dragon Age experience - cinematic storytelling.

When the seeker cried 'bullshit', immediately ending the prologue, shattering my understanding of the scene and very cleverly silencing all the questions I'd been preparing, I stopped criticising the demo for a moment and just enjoyed the scene. Our beloved 'Origins' never did anything like that (except maybe when Leliana started singing).

But that moment was comparable, and it happened in the first few minutes. If the full game keeps up that pace, we'll be laughing.]

First Impressions: Two Worlds 2

Let me talk a little about my experience with Two Worlds 2's troublesome prequel: There wasn't one.

During a sale that Gamestop had going on one week, I noticed several used copies of Two Worlds in one of the bins. I had just happened to have gone there that day in the hopes of scoring an RPG to throw myself into, and when I noticed the extremely low price tag (+ tax, it came out to around $3.75) I figured, "Why not?"

Took it up to the counter and asked the guys working there that day if they had ever given it a try. Both of them sorta bared their teeth, as if recalling some harsh memory, and then nodded their heads slowly. I really had not expected a Gamestop employee to tell me I was better off not buying a $4 game. But I brushed their warnings aside and bought the thing anyway. An hour later, I was back home with the game installed on my 360. I was ready to play.

I never could have known...

But that's implying a little too much; I couldn't even play the damn thing. After wading through several very confusing cutscenes, I'm eventually dropped somewhere to do something but I couldn't even do that thing on account of the terrible lag I was experiencing. Couldn't get out of that first chamber without my guy running like I was watching him through a zoetrope. Group that with the deplorable voice acting, the non-existent storyline, and the terrible UI...I returned the game the next day.

So, I didn't have a real experience with Two Worlds, but I think it's safe to say that if I had, it would have been a negative one. A terrible one, perhaps. But if I had such a bad time with that game, why did I pick up its sequel, the horribly-named Two Worlds 2? I didn't, I rented it. It was sitting in the Redbox one day, and I happened to check out the game rentals for the first time. Boredom also factored into it. And thus, I was back home with the game installed an hour later, as before. The difference being, I actually have something to write about this time - and it's actually not all that negative!

This is the part where I give a brief overview of the plot of the game to let you know what you're in for. To be perfectly honest, I still do not understand what's going on in this series. Something about how your sister has a demon in her that will bring about the end of the world if it ever gets released? And then a bunch of orcs break you out of prison, so that you can help them get your sister back? I think? Not really sure.

Whatever. Game mechanics. You play (I assume) the same character from the first game, though you can customize him however you please. The character creation isn't very deep, and you can't create a female character. But once you get into the game, you'll notice that the writing and the voice acting have gotten much, much better. The graphics are something more in line with Oblivion this time, as well. The controls are easy to get the hang of, the UI is much more...it actually works, and the combat, while kinda clumsy, is sufficient.

Sounds like a recipe for a good RPG! And you'd be almost right.

Don't get me wrong, Two Worlds 2 is a massive improvement over its predecessor, but seeing how the first game was as down in the dumps as it could get, the improvements only bring it up to "acceptable" levels.

Once you're broken out of prison, the game starts coaxing you through the standard tutorial missions, where you'll learn all that the game has to offer. You might be groaning a few times, at the orcs that look like they've been ripped straight from WoW, at the poor character animations, and how your character sounds like Batman. I certainly did my fair share of groaning, but then I was actually quite excited by several of the features that were presented on Tutorial Island.

Light-footed rogues can approach enemies from behind for critical one-shot assassinations. Rangers can fire several arrows at once. Mages can craft and modify spells by using "magic cards" that can be found throughout the game. Fighting blade to blade, you can block, counterattack, and bust through defenses. In this sense, combat is more like Fable III than Oblivion, with more emphasis on magic and weapon customization.

On the flip side, combat only truly worked for me when I was fighting people much weaker than me. Strong opponents will block and dodge any move you can dish out. It got kind of annoying, watching a silly guard halfheartedly hop out of the way of my attacks, or continuously keep his shield up to block any sort of attack I made. And it's not that uncommon to just completely find yourself swinging at the air, since the targeting system is not as fine-tuned as it could've been. Combat wasn't a complete bust, in the same way combat in Oblivion and Fable III wasn't. Take that how you will.

But the crafting system actually works pretty well. Over the course of the game, you'll be picking up A LOT of loot, which excited me quite a bit at first; RPGs are starting to move away from their loot-whoring origins. Sad panda. After getting over-encumbered for the first time, it was a simple matter of breaking shitty weapons and armor down into their basic elements and subsequently upgrading the weapons and armor I was using with those elements. That was pretty neat, though you will constantly find yourself overwhelmed with a ton of useless loot. Again, take that how you will.

Now, the world itself. I compared it to Oblivion because I think it really deserves it. Sunlight filters through tree leaves, beaches and forests look absolutely gorgeous, there are no loading screens on the mainland, and the world goes on for a very respectable distance. Cities are filled with people, some of them standing around merchant stands, inspecting the vendor's products in their hands. There are town criers, varied (though, often repeated) conversations, guards roaming around. Compared to Oblivion itself, the world actually feels very alive. Whoever designed this world clearly put a lot of hard work into it.

On the flip side (again), everything kinda has that rough-around-the-edges feel to it. Not quite sure how to explain it. Though the game is certainly beautiful, you can definitely see the seams that hold it together...I'll leave it at that.

I compare it to Oblivion, but you'll know you're not playing Oblivion. Though, with the outstanding soundtrack this game has (it really is wonderful), you can be forgiven for forgetting.

When it gets right down to it, "rough around the edges" is really how I would describe this game in the end. It's beautiful, but not seamless. The writing is good, but not great. The voice acting is competent, but not spectacular. The combat is acceptable, but not very refined. Everything about this game screams "It's just okay." Much like Alpha Protocol, you can tell it's trying for greatness, but just doesn't have the tools to get there.

Despite all of that, I played it for a good long time. As another reviewer pointed out, this game's got heart, and I agree. I think it's commendable that this little German game developer took their rather substantial licks from the fallout of Two Worlds, and bounced back to deliver a better product.

I'm gonna go ahead and recommend this game to forgiving RPG lovers, and to the unforgiving provided they can find it at a good price. Two Worlds 2 is a good game, and probably one of the better fantasy RPGs to be released this side of BioWare/Bethesda/Obsidian, but I'm not quite sure it's $60 good.

Almost was for me, though. Count me in for Two Worlds 3.

3 1/2 out of 5