Search This Blog

Saturday, 20 December 2014

Reviews: The Mass Effect Trilogy

I recently finished playing through the Mass Effect trilogy straight after each other and thought I'd do a review on the series.  I will avoid spoilers though the games have been out for a long time, so I will talk about any game choices in general terms rather than specific plot points.



The player in Mass Effects controls Commander Shepard who is the main character in the story, you can customise the gender,appearance and class for the Commander when you start the game, with the choice of class having a significant influence on the game as each class has a different set of abilities.  There a six classes to chose from with each class having one set of powers or a mix of two: the soldier (combat), the engineer (tech), the adept (biotic), the vanguard (combat/biotic), the sentinel (tech/biotic) and the infiltrator (combat/tech),  Each of the power sets are different, with combat being the most straight forward as you rely mostly on weapons and buffing weapon damage, tech has a selection of powers that are strong against shields and armour as well as disrupting synthetic opponents while biotics have lots of crowd control and debuff abilities while relying mostly on powers for damage.  Your class selection depends on what play style you wish to use, and it is possible to change your class between each game even if you load the previous games save.





The story through the three games is amazing in my experience, it has lots of interesting well developed characters, interesting enemies, memorable locations and an epic story running through it that wouldn't be out of place in a movie or tv series.  There are points within the story where your actions have both an immediate effect as well as a knock-on effect in the later games.  I also had all of the expansion packs during the play through which add extra missions, this additional content add more direct links between the current game and the next, and in the third game one of the DLC mission arcs is a bit tongue-in-cheek and makes fun of the game itself in places in a good way, which is a very funny set of missions to play through filled with tropes and clichés and is bet done with as many crew-mates as possible.



The game play of the series is a fusion of role playing game and shooter elements with combat consisting of a mix of firing your guns and activating targeted abilities while the non-combat parts were often dialogue based, with a wheel giving different ways to advance the conversation, as well as interacting with objects such as hacking, collecting and examining.  The combat gets more streamlined and evolved through the series with a cover system appearing in Mass Effect 2 and at the same time the cool down for abilities changed from individual ones to a combined one.  Characters also have one or more guns to use in combat as well as powers from heavy pistol, sub-machine gun, shotgun,assault rifle and sniper rifle.  Each has strengths and weaknesses, the slower firing weapons do more damage per shot and are good against armour but require more aiming and are less effective vs shields whereas the faster firing weapons are easier to aim and good vs shields but do less damage per shot and less vs armour, which often means that you want one fast firing and one slow firing weapon to suit any situation.  The ammo system in one differs from two and three, in one weapons can firing a certain amount of shot before overheating and needing to cool whereas in two and three a more traditional ammo system is used where you collect thermal clips, which can be used in any weapon, that have a certain amount of shots before needing to reload the weapon.



Mass Effect 3 introduced an on-line multi-player that is linked to the single player campaign in which up to 4 players co-operate to survive waves of enemies while completing small objectives such as collection/drop off items, kill specific enemies, take and hold an area or escort a drone.  In each match your character earns experience and credits, with the experience levelling up the characters as in the single player and the credits are used to buy random "boosters" of equipment, new characters, bonus exp for certain characters, and one use items.  I found this addition to be a really nice one and allows for a quick game without cutting the story into too small chunks to do anything significant in.

Overall I really enjoyed the series and would definitely play again in the future if I were to have a gap in my hobby, so I'd give it a 5 out of 5 rating.  I hope this helps inform you on the series and I would definitely recommend playing it if you like strong story driven rpgs and haven't already.

Sunday, 14 December 2014

Game Design: Part 5; Shooting vs Melee

From my experience with gaming and from talking with other gamers, one of the hardest things to get right in a game is the balance between ranged and melee combat so this is going to be my thoughts on this crucial part of designing a game.  The problem in balancing them from my point of view is getting them both to have the right "feel" while keeping them at the same effectiveness on the battlefield.

When I say the right "feel", what I mean is that for shooting it should feel like you're troops are expending ammunition against the enemy while advancing/defending to both cause casualties and keep your opponent's heads down, while melee should feel fast, furious and frantic  with only one side emerging from the crush victorious while the opponent is wiped out or running for their live but from which neither side emerges unscathed.



This generally leads to shooting being a whittling down unless you bring heavy weapons to bear or focus fire where as melee is a bucket of dice affair where units can evaporate extremely quickly, which can lead to melee being judged as better than shooting.  I don't think this is the case as shooting is balanced to melee in a different was other than speed of destruction, when you shoot you have little to no risk of suffering harm in return whereas with melee combat there's always a high risk of being mauled in return or even being wiped out without causing damage if it goes wrong.



This for me allows for the balance between melee and shooting to be struck by limiting how quickly units can get into combat, how units react to taking casualties from shooting, how quickly units can get from combat to combat and how much damage can be done by a unit in one round of melee.  This balancing act can get skewed to give a preferential phase for example in a fantasy game the balance will be tipped towards melee while a sci-fi game will usually have a preference towards shooting.  The balance for a game like Warhammer 40k, which is a Science-Fantasy game, is the most likely to be equal with no preference as it fits the background well.



When writing game rules its important to work out how the balance of strength of ranged and melee combat is needed by the game to provide a "realistic" feeling to the game in relation to the background material and general type of setting of the game.

So these are my thoughts in balancing the strengths of the shooting and melee combat when designing a game.  If you've had thoughts on this I'd like to hear them or if you have topics that you'd like to hear about from me post them below.