:format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/1947621/mass_effect_3.0.jpg)
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) in the United Kingdom rejected complaints that EA deceived Mass Effect 3 players by incorrectly advertising the extent to which players could shape the game's ending.
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) in the United Kingdom rejected complaints that EA deceived Mass Effect 3 players by incorrectly advertising the extent to which players could shape the game's ending.
EA had advertised that "the decisions you make completely shape your experience and outcome", although dissatisfied fans of the series felt that they had been deceived because their actions did not alter the game's ending to the extent to which they'd hoped.
The ASA received three official complaints claiming that EA "misleadingly exaggerated the variety of outcomes available in the game and the differences between the outcomes".
The ASA rejected these complaints on the grounds that most consumers would realize that there would be a finite number of choices available in the game.
"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 (Effective Military Strength) score, which was calculated with reference to previous performance in the game(s)," the ASA said in a statement.
"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).
"Whilst we acknowledged that the advertiser had placed particular emphasis on the role that player choices would play in determining the outcome of the game, we considered that most consumers would realize there would be a finite number of possible outcomes within the game and, because we considered that the advertiser had shown that players' previous choices and performance would impact on the ending of the game, we concluded that the ad was not misleading."
