Christina Norman: A couple of major factors. First of all, we always had a vision for the game. The vision evolves, it never stays exactly the same but from the very start, there was the vision of the game. We knew at the point when Mass Effect 1 came out that there were certain aspects of the original vision of Mass Effect that we had not addressed. In addition, we looked at feedback from both reviewers and fans and we were lucky. If people had been all over of the map and everyone said something different then it wouldn’t have been useful.
There were a lot of themes that emerged that seemed really consistent and resulted in kind of like a critical, hardcore gamer feedback and there were also people who would just say things like, “I find this game confusing,” “I try to play it and my gun isn’t hitting anybody and I don’t know what’s going on,” and other sort of things. So there were certain aspects of the gameplay that were making the game inaccessable to players.
The way I like to put that is, Mass Effect has always looked like a shooter, but Mass Effect 1 didn’t really play like one. It could play like a shooter, if you were a smart gamer and you understood what we were doing and you did all the RPG stuff in just the right way, you could have a pretty good shooter experience.
We wanted to make sure every gamer who have already played a shooter could have a good experience in Mass Effect 2 and look at the RPG stuff as not being the barrier to entry, like you don’t get to play a shooter if you don’t do this RPG stuff and make it more like “You can play it like a shooter, but if you want to be really awesome, if you want to just destroy everything, you really have to engage that RPG stuff.” And that becomes sort of a competitive edge to a gamer when you engage those RPG mechanics.