Have you played the first game? While it probably had some flaws that I'm too fanboyish to see (like overheating bug, inventory), it was a great game for me and one of my absolutely favourite of all time.
The reason why I and probably many others dislike the second game is that it ditched most of the RPG elements and customizations of the game and made it into a sci-fi shooter with some thrown in RPG elements in an attempt to satisfy everyone. However, it was so clear that they had gone from an RPG focus in the first game, to an action focus in the sequel. This upset (and rightfully so) many of the Mass Effect 1 fans who loved the game as a sci-fi RPG. When the sequel instead became a sci-fi shooter instead, the hate was bound to happen.
Slightly off-topic on the developer's POV for making games: + Show Spoiler +
I can of course understand the developers for wanting to broaden their market. All developers do this today. To do this they had to make the game more action focused, since there are a lot more shooter fans than there are role-playing fans. Developers are constantly striving to do blockbuster games.
The combat system was absolutely excellent in ME2, I can't take that away from the game. But with so few options to customize the characters when they level'd up, the retarded feature of scanning planets for resources for strange upgrades, instead of for example exploring, made one miss the old system.
In ME2 they also simplified a lot of stuff. For example, they implemented the heat clips instead of just having to wait for the weapon to cool down. They basically took away customization of weapon and armor and the inventory. I can agree that the inventory part of ME1 was a bit tedious at times since you got so many items that quickly filled your inventory and to have to go and sell them all the time.
The mini-games in ME2 are easy and boring. That being said, they were relatively easy in ME1 too but at least they could be somewhat challenging on the hardest level and there was an actual possibility to fail them, unlike in ME2 where you have to have some sort of brain disease to not beat them.
The biggest flaw of ME2 in contrast to ME1 is that while ME1 really felt like a big open universe, ME2 does not in any way. It doesn't feel big, you can't land on planets and explore them which was my favourite feature - to explore the planets for minerals, bad guys and lost artifacts was something that while being optional really created the feel of a massive universe - and the Mako car was ridiculously fun to ride!
That's the first time I've ever heard someone praising the Mako. You must have a serious case of nostalgia if you're praising the Mako.
For me gameplay is #1 because.. I play video games to play them, so obviously gameplay is a big part of that, making ME2>ME1 for me. I was disappointed with the story of ME2, but the gameplay made up for it.
My god the Mako was frustrating, I ragequit and didnt look back for quite some time due to that piece of shit. Getting angry just thinking about it.
The mako on uncharted planets was stupid, but it wasent really a terrible idea at all. It should just have stayed as a vehicle you used on missions and not for stupid planet exploration
The thing about the mako is that if you wanted to get the achievments or complete the secondary missions you had to cover a lot of ground with little to no clues about where those minerals/insignias/and others where located. That mixed up with the fact some planets where very hard to cover from point X to Y made the mako missions very boring after you had done it a few times...
I liked the idea of the mako explorer, pretty much like the "firewalker"? DLC on ME2 where you used the "Hammerhead", wich could hover so traveling over rocky grounds wasnt that big of an issue compared to the mako. But yeah.. it could get really frustrating and boring to explore an entire planet with the mako.
Got to admit i also got bored about the harvesting thing on ME2, but compared to the mako missions it was a walk in the park. If you could have used those minerals(wich i had in excess by the end of the game) for something else it would have been nice. I always seem to have too many minerals for researchs and not enough money to get them :S
I think it was due to how many times my fishies died... and i had to rebuy them :D
On February 20 2012 12:42 GGTeMpLaR wrote: ME1: A+ ME2: A-/B+ ME3: Looks like it will be a C+/C based off all I've seen but hopefully I am underestimating it.
I really don't understand how people can have this opinion. The only thing that got me through ME1 was the fact that I could play ME2 afterwards. I had to spend about 5 minutes in ME2 before I realized how much better than ME1 it was. ME1 is a mediocre shooter with mediocre RPG/squad elements, in a decently short game. ME2 is a great shooter with weak RPG/squad elements in a game where you actually feel like doing anything other than the main missions.
I don't disagree when people say ME2 was simplified, but seriously, there was no loss. The inventory system was definitely the worst part of ME1 since you just wanted to put on the best gear and everything else was junk, possibly switching weapon/armor enhancements for each fight (assuming you knew what you would be up against). The stats system was more or less the same, just forced to spend way more points, often with abilities you actively didn't care about.
Really, the opinion that ME1 is a better game than ME2 blows my mind.
The only thing ME2 had going for it over ME1 was the actual combat. In that sense, yes it was a better shooter, but it's RPG/squad/storyline/character/dialogue elements were not as good as the originals and I play these games for the story not for FPS combat. I would just go play an FPS if I just wanted good FPS combat.
On February 21 2012 00:51 HaXXspetten wrote: ...why did an ME3 thread turn into a ME1 vs ME2 debate? -.-
I was thinking the same :D
Yet on the topic i wonder.. wich sort of planet exploring will add ME3 to the series? IF any of course..
I would like to have a mix of the 3 already mentioned. The mako, hammerhead and planet harvesting. Just to mix it up and keep things interesting, having only 1 really makes the whole planet exploring thing boring after a while.
I liked Mako, couldn't figure out the issue people had with it. Although as someone that explored most of the planets in the game it did get boring and grindy.
Didn't like ME2 planet minigames.
Edit: I think I contradicted myself a little but w/e.
On February 21 2012 00:51 HaXXspetten wrote: ...why did an ME3 thread turn into a ME1 vs ME2 debate? -.-
People are preparing to complain about ME3. May as well start getting entrenched.
It seems pretty obvious to me that MAKO, planet scanning, and hacking, all got mind numbingly boring on subsequent play throughs, which is supposed to be one of the strengths of Mass Effect, and it is. But those features were not so much.
I'd much rather explore planets in the hammerhead instead of the Mako =). Mass Effect 1 had much more freedom than ME2. ME2 had the better combat, if it wasn't for the damn ammo clips. I personally value RPG elements that the first game had over the more stream-lined combat oriented style of ME2.
On my third playthrough I just looked at the Mass Effect wiki to do the stupid collection sidequests. Look up the planet, drive straight to them, rinse and repeat. Combat was much better in ME2, but I liked RPG elements of the original better. Really wish they could just take the more cumbersome elements of the ME RPG/item/inventory system and make it more streamlined. Seemed like the integrity of the item system in ME just wasn't there once you reached a certain point; turning a thousand random crappy items into omni-gel because you reached the money cap isn't much fun or very intuitive. But from the looks of things ME3 isn't doing that.
Oh well, I'll still love it because its BioWare and its Mass Effect. I love space RPGs, love the idea of space/planetary exploration, love the whole concept of space opera. My girlfriend pre-ordered CE ME3 for me for Valentines, can't wait to play it.
I think that while you could land on significantly more planets in ME1, there really wasn't that much to them other than minerals/insignias, and the occasional geth trap or thresher maw. I really didn't mind the ME2 mining all that much, as it basically expedited the process of finding minerals (which weren't really very important in the first game anyway). It'll be interesting to see how it's handled in ME3.
I did enjoy ME1 a lot, though it really took quite some time to get used to the combat system and inventory interface. The characters were at least somewhat interesting (with Wrex being by far the most entertaining). As for ME2, it's easily one of my favorite games. I felt like they took pretty much everything that was wrong with the first game and fixed it, as well as improved upon things that were already great. All of the characters were far more interesting to interact with, and combat became much more straightforward. But what I really loved about ME2 was that the entire game was built around the final mission. The vast majority of decisions you make can have even the slightest impact on how the final mission plays out, and the mission itself was just really fun to play through.
I recall bioware saying that there's over a thousand independent variables between the first two games that will have some impact, be it small or large, on the third game, and that ME3 can have really large differences in its endings. It seems like ME3 will even better than the first two and have so much extra re-playability. Likely going to have a marathon of playing through the first two games to get ready for the third.
I thought that the ME3 demo was pretty good, but I'll agree that I liked the 1st Mass Effect better than ME2.
If they could take away some of the customizations from ME1 (but still have more than ME2, for instance keeping stuff like the heatsinks and damage upgrades, but getting rid of less significant stuff like the scanners, etc.) but combine the combat from the second one, it'll be awesome.
The abilities in the second one also felt more refined and streamlined and I got more use out of them. I'll be honest though, it feels almost like the Soldier is overwhelmingly easier/better than the other classes when you play each mission side by side. I feel like some of the abilities are just...useless tbh. A lot of them are very "one time use" or situational. Idk, maybe that's just me though. Hopefully I can do some more testing of Me3.
On February 21 2012 02:50 azarat wrote: On my third playthrough I just looked at the Mass Effect wiki to do the stupid collection sidequests. Look up the planet, drive straight to them, rinse and repeat. Combat was much better in ME2, but I liked RPG elements of the original better. Really wish they could just take the more cumbersome elements of the ME RPG/item/inventory system and make it more streamlined. Seemed like the integrity of the item system in ME just wasn't there once you reached a certain point; turning a thousand random crappy items into omni-gel because you reached the money cap isn't much fun or very intuitive. But from the looks of things ME3 isn't doing that.
Oh well, I'll still love it because its BioWare and its Mass Effect. I love space RPGs, love the idea of space/planetary exploration, love the whole concept of space opera. My girlfriend pre-ordered CE ME3 for me for Valentines, can't wait to play it.
u sir have an awesome girlfriend, im so jealous my gf got me zelda for xmas, and ive played 15 mins of it ><
The multiplayer has me hooked.. once you have a few weapon choices, some levels in all the classes and are hitting the silver/gold difficulty.. it's extremely fun and not easy at all
Really interested to hear how many maps there will be.. how many enemy types and the like, with what i've played so far.. Bioware have nailed it.
EPT
