Remember when we got a bit uppity about the Mass Effect 3 ending. At the time, three British gamers challenged EA’s advertising campaign that put choice and impact at the forefront of the reasons to play Mass Effect 3. Today, the Advertising Standards Agency gave their verdict on the complaints: “not upheld.”
The ASA took the complaint to EA, who explained how the War Assets system worked. “They said almost every decision a player made in the game would impact the EMS score in some way, and they therefore considered that each decision would impact the player’s experience during the last hours of the game.”
The response from the ASA is simple: “we considered that the three choices at the end of the game were thematically quite different, and that the availability and effectiveness of those choices would be directly determined by a player’s EMS score, which was calculated with reference to previous performance in the game(s). We also acknowledged that there appeared to be a large number of minor variations in the end stages of ME3, and that those were directly impacted by choices made by players earlier in the game(s).”
No further action will be taken by the ASA.
The real question here, I think, is whether the ASA tried multiplayer, and whether any taxpayer funds were used to open randomised crates. And if so, are those weapons now owned by the state?