Where BioWare goes wrong

I loved both “Mass Effect” games and “Knights of the Old Republic.” BioWare has always been high on my list of favorite developers. However, after playing through “Dragon Age: Origins” and “Dragon Age II” during the last month and reflecting on their previous gaming experiences, I have come to a realization that I have denied for a long time. BioWare is pretty average to poor in the gameplay and game design departments.

I know, it hurts for me to put it on paper, to commit it to an archive where it will become forever linked to me, but it’s true. During its most recent games, these issues have become even more evident. Compared to BioWare’s top-notch writing, their design is inexcusable.

Look at the original “Mass Effect” and its side quests. There were four dungeons in the original “Mass Effect”: spaceship, mine, science facility and warehouse. Each time the layout was the same and the location of encounters was the same. “Dragon Age II” has larger dungeons and sections off the dungeon so the layout feels different, but looking at the mini-map shows the same layout for every cave or city underground in the game. “Dragon Age II” at least tries to justify the monotony by having the game take place during 10 years in the same city and outlying region, but it all just screams lazy level design.

Beyond level design, the gameplay suffers as well. The vehicle sections in the original “Mass Effect” controlled terribly. Even after learning the controls, it was still difficult to drive. Of course, “Mass Effect 2” decided to remove the vehicle sections completely, which seems like a good idea until you tried the replacement. The planet scanning in the second game was tedious at best and rage-inducing at worst. I didn’t buy the game to become a galactic surveyor. “Dragon Age: Origins” had terrible combat. The MMO style combat made a simple battle in “World of WarCraft” seem exciting. Eventually I had to turn the combat difficulty down to the easiest setting, not because the game was too hard but because I wanted combat to end as quickly as possible.

The most annoying aspect of BioWare’s games is the menu system and inventory management. In “Mass Effect,” the inventory system was unwieldy due to both the accumulation of useless equipment and the poor comparison system. In “Origins,” the inventory was cluttered. Items were not grouped together by type or equipment slot, but instead were all crammed under headings such as armor or usable items rather than utilizing subheads such as potions or helmets. Rather than fix these issues in the sequels, BioWare simplified the games under the guise of “streamlining” them. In “Mass Effect 2,” it completely eliminated the inventory management system, and in “Dragon Age II,” it made armor only able to be equipped on the player character.

That is what ultimately bothers me about BioWare games when looking at their sequels. Instead of fixing issues, BioWare removes them. The idea of exploring uncharted worlds in “Mass Effect” was a good one, just poorly executed. Instead of improving it in the sequel, they removed it and replaced it with the even worse planning scanning. In “Dragon Age II,” rather than modify the menu system and allow you to equip your party, it removed armor for party members. 

“Mass Effect 2” is still my game of the year for 2010, and I still anxiously await “Mass Effect 3.” “Dragon Age II” was a pretty good game, and I am excited to see what comes next for the franchise.

But if BioWare continues on its current trend, I may be disappointed with some of the decisions it makes in the name of “streamlining the experience.”