I've just finished playing through Mass Effect 3, and I really enjoyed 90% of it. But like almost of the entire internet, the ending was just abysmal. Abysmal writing, abysmal plot, abysmal closure. The ending was such an epic disappointment, and like many others have mentioned, it's mostly counter to what the 2.9 games leading up to it were all about. I'll attempt to write this entry devoid of any big spoilers to the ME3 endings, but no promises if you are spoiler allergic!

I belatedly got into Mass Effect at the start of last year. At the time I was a little bored gaming-wise, and Mass Effect 2 was cleaning out all of the 'Game of the Year' awards for the previous year.

After playing through the first two games back-to-back, I was hooked. I wondered how I managed to not to play them earlier, as generally being a sci-fi geek it was right up my alley. I loved the universe, the plot, the characters, and also very importantly the choice. What the player chose had ramifications for all the plot and characters after it.

I unwillingly let Wrex get killed in the first game, and it's haunted me and my character for all the subsequent games, and also damaged my relationships with all the Krogan race since.

That's what ME3 was continuing so well up until the last 10 minutes, when it was all thrown out the window. If you want specifics on what was disappointing about the ending: this video sums it all up perfectly: 10 Reasons We Hate Mass Effect 3's Ending (spoilers). Almost all my issues with the ending(s) are there in that video.

The bewildering thing about Mass Effect 3 is that, minus a few cliche overtones and forced multiplayer gameplay for single-player reward, it was an absolutely fantastic experience leading up to the last ten minutes. In ten minutes at the end, it almost ruined 5 years, 3 games, and 100+ hours of gameplay.

There is hope though: the Bioware CEO has acknowledged the endings and all the negative reactions, and that they are "planning to directly address it". More info will apparently be available in April.

The cynic in me suspects that this was all part of an evil Bioware/EA plan to upset fans of the series, as a way to make us buy extra DLC following the game's release in order to get a satisfactory ending...

I've finally started to catch up on the gaming season releases, and the first that arrived in the mail: Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3. After being largely disappointed with Modern Warfare 2, I wasn't really expecting much at all from the latest in the series.

After playing through the game over the past week or so, I wasn't at all surprised that it didn't exceed those expectations.

The game isn't "bad" per se, but it isn't all that good either. It really is just more of the same continued on from MW2. The graphics are mostly identical (and imo seems to be a bit behind Battlefield now), the plot continues on from the nonsensical stuff MW2, and overall there was almost nothing to 'wow' me at all. The only stage that was somewhat memorable was a brief zero-g firefight in a nose-diving plane.

I'll mention a bit more about the plot. I thought the idea of Russia carrying out a full invasion of the US in MW2 was unbelievable, and the unbelievability continued in this game because immediately following invading the US, the Russians also somehow mustered enough resources and troops to do a full invasion of Europe too.

A lot of other things didn't make sense with the plot too, but I won't really go into those; if people actually think Russia invading the USA and Europe almost simultaneously isn't an absurd plot device, then the other terrible plot points won't bother them much.

All in all, i found the game to be rather boring. Probably borne out of the terrible plot over two games now, there wasn't really any excitement at all for me. It really is so disappointing considering how good the first game was.

Moving onto the next title, I've just started playing probably my, and probably most others, most anticipated recent release: Mass Effect 3.

As I've done with Windows 7 and Vista previously, I like to get my hands on the public betas or release candidates of upcoming Windows releases to have a bit of a play.

Right now I'm having a play of Windows 8, and to be frank I'm still trying to comprehend what's sitting in front of me. Some would say this beta is a revolution in Windows interface design, others would say it's a catastrophe. I'm more inclined to the latter. But before I get into it, here's the obligatory screenshots.



With Windows 8, Microsoft is attempting to develop an operating system that will work well on both touch-screen tablets as well as traditional computers. They're keen not to let the tablet market get away from them towards Apple's iPad iOS and Google's Android.

With this in mind they have made some pretty drastic changes. The most obvious and jarring change is the scrapping of the Start Menu, and replacing it with the Start Screen as part of what MS calls 'Metro UI'. Starting Windows 8 for the first time, you're presented with this new interface without so much as a tooltip or explanation as to how this 'Start Screen' works or how to navigate around it.

Even more baffling is the complete reliance both in 'Metro UI' as well as the traditional 'desktop interface' of hovering over unmarked corners of the screen to switch between the two interfaces, as well as just to do basic operations like searching, adjusting volume, or even shutting the computer down.

As opposed to regular buttons, I am a big opponent of 'hovering' options in user interfaces (especially with unmarked areas), and even more so for such critical uses as they've implemented them for in Windows 8. Added to that, it is insanely difficult to use these unmarked corner 'hover areas' in windowed environments like using a virtual machine (which I am using to try Win8 ) or remote desktop, as there is usually a seamless edge for the cursor to go in and out of the guest/client computer.

Another thing is that Metro UI seems very bland and dull. What you see in my screenshots for the homescreen is the limit of personalisation at the moment. You can pick from a set list of colours and patterns, and that's it. No background images, or custom colours, nada. They don't even have any standard set of user account pictures (for previous Windows betas/RCs at least had a standard collection to choose from).

One thing about Windows 8 that I did love though: the new task manager. It really is an overdue overhaul, and the amount of information there for diagnostics and troubleshooting is fantastically good.

There is a lot more I can go through regarding the changes (especially in regards to the Metro UI), and without even going into those details and other major unintuitive intricacies, I really can't see how this is going to turn out well for Microsoft. As a tablet OS, the Metro UI seems pretty decent, but not fantastic. It's slick, simple and geared well to touch-based input. However as a PC OS with a keyboard and mouse, it's a nightmare to use and look at. From the 'desktop' mode to have to go constantly go back and forth to the Start Screen just to do basic functions like starting a program is a jarring, unpleasant, and unfriendly experience, and the whole Start Screen is mostly obtrusive and unfriendly with a keyboard and mouse.

For regular keyboard and mouse users, Metro UI just adds an unnecessary layer of complication and hassle without any benefit at all. What was wrong with the Windows 7 Start Menu, and conversely how is the Windows 8 Start Screen an improvement for keyboard and mouse users doing basic PC functions like internet browsing or word-processing work? (for some fun, google for videos of people putting their mostly computer-literate older parents in front of Windows 8 and seeing them struggle in how to use it)

In my opinion, for Microsoft to win in a Windows release they have to convince professionals that it's good to roll-out in an office or corporate environment, where most of Microsoft's money is made. That's what didn't happen for Vista and was a crucial part in why it failed. Conversely, that's what they got right for Windows 7. I can't imagine any situation administering a corporate network where I'd be rolling Windows 8 to end-users on regular PCs.

It really is so frustrating to see how Microsoft could get it almost so right with Windows 7, yet seemingly be heading towards screwing it so badly with Windows 8. Yes this is only a beta, but fundamental things like the interface should be pretty much final at this point. Short of Microsoft reinstating the Start Menu and implementing an option for 'PC or Tablet' use, even for my home use there's no way i'd be upgrading to this on a keyboard and mouse computer.

Microsoft is trying to simultaneously go after the PC and tablet market with Windows 8, but I fear that they will capture neither market with this OS which seems to be stuck in between serving both but not satisfying either.

But the biggest criminal change in Windows 8 I haven't even mentioned yet: in Windows 8 they have not included Minesweeper. Unforgivable.

We're still currently settling into the new house. Most things have found a place, but there's always those annoying items that you use, but not nearly often enough, that you can't throw away but have got to find a place for that is out of the way but still accessible for when you do on the odd occasion need it.

Anywho, one geeky thing that I have picked up recently is a new Logitech Harmony remote (I got the 650). Now that we have a AV receiver in addition to the TV, PS3, and WDTV, this remote is the best thing since unsliced remote controls.

One button-push 'Activity' actions turns on/off the relevant devices depending on what you want to do. If I am playing the PS3, pressing 'Watch TV' turns off the PS3 and the receiver and switches the TV's input back to DTV. Conversely, if I am watching TV, pressing the 'WDTV activity' turns on the receiver and selects the right input on that, turns on the WDTV, and switches the TV to the view the receiver's output.

Very neat and efficient If I do say so (although I did have to buy the Harmony PS3 adapter because the PS3 only receives Bluetooth and not IR commands).

Now that the house is almost finished I have really got to start catching up on a lot of gaming that I have mostly missed over the past 6 months. In the past couple of months I have only played a few hours worth of online BF3. So I have really got to properly get into that, and soon Mass Effect 3 will be arriving in the mail.

However the biggest thing that I will have to resist in terms of games, is the recent Star Wars MMORPG, The Old Republic (SWToR). I don't think I've mentioned this before, but I have a particular issue with games that require an ongoing subscription to play in addition to the game purchase price. Usually these types of games are MMORPGs (massively multiplayer online role-playing games).

It's been relatively easy to resist World of Warcraft and the other big ones, but SWToR is proving a little more difficult. The obvious reason why is that it's Star Wars (duh), but the other reason is that it's pretty darn good and seemingly everyone is playing it (even a friend of mine that does not have internet at his house!).

Even with all that (and jaw-droppingly awesome cinematics), I can't bring myself to pay $13-15/month just to play a game, and I really doubt whether my wife would stomach my removal from the normal happenings of the house and society that would consequently result if I were to get into it.