Mass Effect: Forbes' Reports Are Weird and a Linkspam In Place of a Review
So, fair warning, this LJ may be a bit Mass Infected (GEDDIT?!) for a while. I'm sure I'll get over it. What this post really is the fact that now that I've written out my more meta thoughts on branching narratives and interactive storytelling and...stuff, I wanted to write an actual, detailed review of the game and its universe and characters. But honestly, with all the crazy controversy around it, I'm not sure where I'd start, and for now I'm happy to just link a bunch of random crap and talk about my reactions via that:
In the last two weeks - and further back than that, but I only actually checked the last two weeks, Forbes.com - yeah, that Forbes - has allowed its tech section contributors to post no less than twenty articles on Mass Effect 3, a few purely factual, but almost all negatively editorial or with heavy negative spin.
I have catalogued them all with appropriate links and brief descriptions of the articles on my tumblr, here. Yes, I have a tumblr. :/ I don't really ever post CONTENT content to it when it's not reflected here, though. Which is partly why I'm linking this. Oh, archiving. Anyways.
The point is, I'm basically fine with the fact that Forbes wants to align itself on a specific side of this issue. Really, editorials are an important part of a healthy press and there are even circumstances where noneditorial reporting can and should take a stance on an issue.
But TWENTY articles in FOURTEEN days? It really, really feels like the tech section in Forbes is run by a bunch of very bitter, very wounded fanboys. If it was a games-related site, I would totally understand. But...it's FORBES. And it's not even the gaming section of Forbes, it's the tech section.
Anyway, I'm not sure if I'm amused or concerned, but I'm certainly confused.
On a happier note, there are a few articles out there I find genuinely interesting, which I shall now link in lieu of giving my own opinion:
Why Mass Effect is the Most Important Science Fiction Universe of Our Generation - this is an article from a website that focuses on bioethical issues in popular culture. The wonderful nightxade linked me to it originally. It was written before the release of ME3, which is part of why I find it so interesting.
I don't agree with everything it says - most specifically I think the article's title is perhaps a little overblown, and while I like the points the author makes about the way humans are made to feel a minority species within the universe, I do think that the games also succumb a little to the "humans are special because they are plucky!" trope in some ways. I also think that while it's important to give BioWare credit for doing more for positive portrayals of other-than-straight-white-men in gaming, that bar is pretty low. So I agree that the diversity of race, gender and species in your companions and in Shepard's identity adds to the verisimilitude of the world and is something to note positively - I would probably just be adding caveats like, "all the women other than Shepard are pretty sexed up, though," or "You might feel awkward when you see what they do to Jacob in ME3, though," or, "I wonder why there was no dude-on-dude lovin' until ME3, when apparently girl-on-girl is just fine..." /cynicism.
But I think what this article absolutely and totally NAILS is the way it dissects the themes of cosmicism and humanism and how they interact, the way the author dissects the philosophy and underlying message of the universe, and how that perfectly, and I do mean perfectly, predicts the kind of ending ME3 got (to such controversy). Especially when so many of the arguments against the ending seem to believe these themes were not present prior to the end of the third game.
Ultimately, the article argues, "Mass Effect is the first blockbuster franchise in the postmodern era to directly confront a godless, meaningless universe indifferent to humanity. Amid the entertaining game play, the interspecies romance, and entertaining characters, cosmological questions about the value of existence influence every decision."
It's so...interesting to read an article that so delicately deconstructs this fictional world and so adeptly argues that it is about the question of finding meaning in our actions, knowing that on a cosmological scale our ability to affect our fate is miniscule, in the context of the ending's controversy. The article posits that the series asks, in the face of cataclysm that you cannot change, did your life matter? Did it matter that you loved, that you lost, that you died bravely, that you were kind? It's so interesting to read that against the backlashed backdrop of a fandom desperately, desperately wounded that, in the end, they felt they couldn't change enough.
It's...prescient. And a really good read.
Next up:
Why Mass Effect 3's Ending Doesn't Need Changing - this is an article from Kotaku, and I have less to say about it because its thesis is simpler. It's a discussion on the emotional impact of Mass Effect as an epic, a comparison to the divergent experiences of players, that still revolve around a central series of unchangeable events, to the way myths and legends change as they are retold. It, too, raises questions such as the importance and meaning of life in a potentially nihilistic universe, as well as Shepard's status as a messianic figure.
The author, ultimately, may come down more alongside the limitations of Shepard's final choice as a reminder that this is, ultimately, a game with only coded choices available, whereas I embrace that limitation as an artistic decision - a use of the limitations of the medium to express the limitations of, well, reality. Sometimes, you make the best choice you can in difficult circumstances.
In my wild wanderings on the web, reading up on reaction to this, I heard an interesting comment. If you start ME3 without an imported character, you end up screwed. Most of the options you had in ME1 and ME2 default to the negative. I still feel this is a little harsh on new players, but I have a more interesting way to look at it too now - I heard someone comment that perhaps this was a way of saying, "making no choice is the same as making a bad choice." What's that saying? In any situation, the best thing we can do is the right thing. The worst thing we can do is nothing. The worst thing we can do is rage, impotently, at an ancient, alien machine in the hopes it will magically have a Come to Shepard moment, while your homeworld burns beneath you, when the weapon you have built to save it is ready and waiting to be fired. Even if it doesn't work exactly like you wanted it to.
Finally, and MOST briefly:
Reviewers' Talk: Mass Effect 3, the ending, the narrative, the controversy - an article from The Verge - excerpts from an hour-long podcast discussion with various Gaming Industry figures, none of whom I really know.
I genuinely enjoyed listening to it, partly due to the fact it was nice to find an actual, positive discussion of the subject, but also because of the way it so clearly illustrated the way that their various choices of ending were influenced by their individual experiences playing the game - for example, "Part of the reason I (chose unification) was I was still mourning the loss of Tali. I chose the Geth. There's that moment where she takes off her mask and falls off the cliff. When I got to the end, I almost felt like if I don't choose synthesis, then I've lost Tali for nothing."
So, okay.
There is my Linkspam of Mass Effect 3 instead of a review.
In the last two weeks - and further back than that, but I only actually checked the last two weeks, Forbes.com - yeah, that Forbes - has allowed its tech section contributors to post no less than twenty articles on Mass Effect 3, a few purely factual, but almost all negatively editorial or with heavy negative spin.
I have catalogued them all with appropriate links and brief descriptions of the articles on my tumblr, here. Yes, I have a tumblr. :/ I don't really ever post CONTENT content to it when it's not reflected here, though. Which is partly why I'm linking this. Oh, archiving. Anyways.
The point is, I'm basically fine with the fact that Forbes wants to align itself on a specific side of this issue. Really, editorials are an important part of a healthy press and there are even circumstances where noneditorial reporting can and should take a stance on an issue.
But TWENTY articles in FOURTEEN days? It really, really feels like the tech section in Forbes is run by a bunch of very bitter, very wounded fanboys. If it was a games-related site, I would totally understand. But...it's FORBES. And it's not even the gaming section of Forbes, it's the tech section.
Anyway, I'm not sure if I'm amused or concerned, but I'm certainly confused.
On a happier note, there are a few articles out there I find genuinely interesting, which I shall now link in lieu of giving my own opinion:
Why Mass Effect is the Most Important Science Fiction Universe of Our Generation - this is an article from a website that focuses on bioethical issues in popular culture. The wonderful nightxade linked me to it originally. It was written before the release of ME3, which is part of why I find it so interesting.
I don't agree with everything it says - most specifically I think the article's title is perhaps a little overblown, and while I like the points the author makes about the way humans are made to feel a minority species within the universe, I do think that the games also succumb a little to the "humans are special because they are plucky!" trope in some ways. I also think that while it's important to give BioWare credit for doing more for positive portrayals of other-than-straight-white-men in gaming, that bar is pretty low. So I agree that the diversity of race, gender and species in your companions and in Shepard's identity adds to the verisimilitude of the world and is something to note positively - I would probably just be adding caveats like, "all the women other than Shepard are pretty sexed up, though," or "You might feel awkward when you see what they do to Jacob in ME3, though," or, "I wonder why there was no dude-on-dude lovin' until ME3, when apparently girl-on-girl is just fine..." /cynicism.
But I think what this article absolutely and totally NAILS is the way it dissects the themes of cosmicism and humanism and how they interact, the way the author dissects the philosophy and underlying message of the universe, and how that perfectly, and I do mean perfectly, predicts the kind of ending ME3 got (to such controversy). Especially when so many of the arguments against the ending seem to believe these themes were not present prior to the end of the third game.
Ultimately, the article argues, "Mass Effect is the first blockbuster franchise in the postmodern era to directly confront a godless, meaningless universe indifferent to humanity. Amid the entertaining game play, the interspecies romance, and entertaining characters, cosmological questions about the value of existence influence every decision."
It's so...interesting to read an article that so delicately deconstructs this fictional world and so adeptly argues that it is about the question of finding meaning in our actions, knowing that on a cosmological scale our ability to affect our fate is miniscule, in the context of the ending's controversy. The article posits that the series asks, in the face of cataclysm that you cannot change, did your life matter? Did it matter that you loved, that you lost, that you died bravely, that you were kind? It's so interesting to read that against the backlashed backdrop of a fandom desperately, desperately wounded that, in the end, they felt they couldn't change enough.
It's...prescient. And a really good read.
Next up:
Why Mass Effect 3's Ending Doesn't Need Changing - this is an article from Kotaku, and I have less to say about it because its thesis is simpler. It's a discussion on the emotional impact of Mass Effect as an epic, a comparison to the divergent experiences of players, that still revolve around a central series of unchangeable events, to the way myths and legends change as they are retold. It, too, raises questions such as the importance and meaning of life in a potentially nihilistic universe, as well as Shepard's status as a messianic figure.
The author, ultimately, may come down more alongside the limitations of Shepard's final choice as a reminder that this is, ultimately, a game with only coded choices available, whereas I embrace that limitation as an artistic decision - a use of the limitations of the medium to express the limitations of, well, reality. Sometimes, you make the best choice you can in difficult circumstances.
In my wild wanderings on the web, reading up on reaction to this, I heard an interesting comment. If you start ME3 without an imported character, you end up screwed. Most of the options you had in ME1 and ME2 default to the negative. I still feel this is a little harsh on new players, but I have a more interesting way to look at it too now - I heard someone comment that perhaps this was a way of saying, "making no choice is the same as making a bad choice." What's that saying? In any situation, the best thing we can do is the right thing. The worst thing we can do is nothing. The worst thing we can do is rage, impotently, at an ancient, alien machine in the hopes it will magically have a Come to Shepard moment, while your homeworld burns beneath you, when the weapon you have built to save it is ready and waiting to be fired. Even if it doesn't work exactly like you wanted it to.
Finally, and MOST briefly:
Reviewers' Talk: Mass Effect 3, the ending, the narrative, the controversy - an article from The Verge - excerpts from an hour-long podcast discussion with various Gaming Industry figures, none of whom I really know.
I genuinely enjoyed listening to it, partly due to the fact it was nice to find an actual, positive discussion of the subject, but also because of the way it so clearly illustrated the way that their various choices of ending were influenced by their individual experiences playing the game - for example, "Part of the reason I (chose unification) was I was still mourning the loss of Tali. I chose the Geth. There's that moment where she takes off her mask and falls off the cliff. When I got to the end, I almost felt like if I don't choose synthesis, then I've lost Tali for nothing."
So, okay.
There is my Linkspam of Mass Effect 3 instead of a review.