Although I have no interest whatsoever in downplaying the anniversary of the 236th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, I think it’s fair to assume that July 4, 2012, will go down in history for another reason altogether. That day last week is when scientists at the CERN research center in Geneva announced they’d observed a particle consistent with the Higgs boson. I’m not going to pretend to be any kind of an expert on that; you can read other ExtremeTech articles for a more thorough rundown than I could possibly give you. But I know enough that this is a major achievement for humankind. The significance of officially noting the particle we suspect gives mass to all the other particles, and where that information could take us, can’t be understated.
But the underlying theory at play here — that a single, minuscule component can be responsible for everything around us functioning as we expect it to — is hardly a new one. It has applications that extend beyond physics, such as to the realm of PC gaming. You only have to look at a couple of recent updates to some major titles to see that.
First consider the case of — pun not intended, honestly — Mass Effect 3. Although eagerly awaited prior to its release a few months ago, it was roundly critici ed by many longtime players of the series, who were unsatisfied by the various possible endings to the epic space saga. Quite a few of those who had invested years in the games didn’t love the confusing, cookie-cutter finales that asked at least as many questions as they answered, and made their displeasure known to developer BioWare. As a result, the company returned to the drawing board to see if they could recover some of their lost good will. Two weeks ago, BioWare released “Extended Cut” versions of the endings that gave gamers more of the closure they demanded. But after examining these endings for myself, I’m not sure they do more good than harm.
The “Higgs field” at play with Mass Effect 3 was never consumer expectations, but rather the creators’ vision of where the story should ultimately go. Players were always really just along for the ride, but BioWare’s greatest mistake was convincing them that they had (or even deserved) some concrete say in what the narrative’s natural endpoint should be. What BioWare provided the first time around was the gift of interpretation. By eschewing a clear-cut wrap-up, it let each and every Commander Shepard see the story through his or her uniquely constructed viewpoint. (I’m still partial to the “Indoctrination Theory myself.)
More is certainly explained in the new endings, but that’s not necessarily better. Just as before, they rely on lots of recycled animation, and use new, pseudo-profound voiceovers to articulate the meaning behind it all. A new “epilogue” suggests that victory against the Reapers did eventually come — but well after the action in which your particular character took part.
This is a different kind of disappointing. It’s all well and good if your actions still had impact, even if you don’t see it, but the prevailing sense of the player’s uselessness has been amplified rather than lessened. The original endings, which not only kept you guessing but rendered Shepard a legend that left you wondering how much you could trust anything you’d witnessed, suggested a deeper, more philosophical view of your behavior. Any victory Shepard may have effected seems smaller in the Extended Cuts, as though the impact of your choices — whether you destroy the Reapers, control them, fuse them with organic life, or refuse the false premise you’re presented (in a new fourth ending) — doesn’t extend beyond your own sphere of the universe. As I see it, that’s not a triumph of the players over BioWare. If anything, it reinforces how much artists should be trusted, even when (or perhaps especially when) you don’t agree with the decisions they’ve made.
The Higgs boson theory of PC gaming
0 comments:
Post a Comment