The game of the year lists are out. The nominees have been argued, and the winners have been chosen. For most, this winner is Mass Effect 2. Sequel to the well-received Mass Effect back in (if you can believe it) 2007. Mass Effect carries a very specific attribute that we’ve never had before. It’s not a game, it’s a world.

When I say its a world, I mean BioWare handed us a universe expanding countless planets and solar systems containing various races and history on a plate and gave us the knife. They didn’t choose just anybody for us to play, but the most influential figure in the universe to date, Commander Shepard. The key thing to realize is that Shepard is only making history when you’re holding the controller. This introduces a very unique trait that is given to the player. Choice.

Choice can be argued to exist in all games, but in Mass Effect it allows the world to adapt to your decisions. As it turns out essentially killing off a entire warlike race through genocide can really piss them off. In Mass Effect you deal with this dilemma directly, and it affects your world. At the end of Mass Effect 2 you have to make some very important decisions ultimately deciding who lives and who doesn’t. I lost three loyal squad mates on the final mission. Not because I didn’t like them (although I could care less if Jack’s rotting corpse lays in that elevator), but because I made the wrong choices. Yes, you can go search for a gigantic flow chart emphasizing the choices I should have made but the real question is: Does it matter? 

This could easily go into politics and religion in a blink of an eye, but I’m going to keep it based solely on Mass Effect, if I can.

What makes these choices wrong?

It’s something I’ve been trying to come up with ever since 3…erm…2 of my most trusted comrades were lost in the midst of my suicide mission. For many, these wrong choices can be cured by playing through the game again and following a specific guideline to keep everyone alive. If you look at the achievements it even rewards it. This could also be just a way to have replay value in a game without multi player, but the point remains. Why should I have to conclude this chapter in the most perfect way? I mean, it was supposed to be tragic. The whole game built up to it. Everyone kept talking about giving their lives if they needed to, and we want to have the same ending as everyone else? Doesn’t that effectively take my 50+ hours of gameplay and throw it to the Vorcha… or dogs? I know it’s a lot of questions, but I honesty can’t answer them. I’m just baffled why people want to keep games non-linear when the same people will complain that straight lines are so 2000 and late (oh, yeah, I just referenced that).

So, if I could cause you to do anything, I want you to think about it. Why not, stick with your decisions and save humanity without those friends of yours?—If your Shepard died in the end, well, then that just sucks.

I think BioWare would like the experience to be your own, not the same as the next guy behind you in line at midnight come the third iteration. 

Games are telling stories, and as I’ve said before they contain one extremely unique ability: to let you make the actions. If a game is created to follow that simple purpose don’t ignore it, and complete your own story arch. I know I’m going to—I just hope saving Earth doesn’t require a singing, alien scientist. 

Note: Playing through it all again is a blast and I recommend it, but you should keep that as a separate storyline.