124 réponses à ce sujet

[FlyinElk212]

I'll agree with you in that certain worlds definitely feel smaller. I'd love to see the Citadel return to its former glory, and maybe be able to explore all the ships of the Quarian fleet; you know, simply have bigger worlds in general.

But bigger worlds does not a replay value make. For me, I replay games for variability--the more possible outcomes there are to explore, the more inspired I am to go back and see what happens with the different choices. When it comes to that, Mass Effect 2 is AEONS more replayable than ME1.

I think the real thing that holds most people back from replaying 2 is the tedium of planet scanning.

Modifié par FlyinElk212, 31 mars 2010 - 03:55 .

[Ski Mask Wei]

ME2 is much more re-playable to me. The only real fault it has is not being to recruit every character as soon as possible thus leaving the feeling that you're getting some characters too late. This is really evident if you're crazy enough not to do the loyalty missions.

[OneDrunkMonk]

I find ME2 as equally repayable as ME1. Keep in mind ME1 and 2 are different stories along the same theme. The only way I could see improvement is to perhaps do something like Deus Ex or Heavy Rain where the story and situations you find yourself in change from decision to decision. More than one road to Rome and people will want to explore other routes.

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

I agree with the OP in most areas, minus the praise for ME2. Basically that yes, ME2s far less replay value is a problem, but its one that I think adds to the other reasons as to why I think its inferior to ME1. Not that "its okay for ME2 standing on its own".

They said it wasnt the case at the time, but I think it was clear way back with the marketing that everything took the backseat to the shooter aspect in ME2. Unless that changes with ME3, I cant imagine Ill bother with it. I dont have the endurance to bore myself "cover trawling" through ME2 once again, and I doubt Ill do it for ME3 if its going to follow the same path.

Modifié par Dinkamus_Littlelog, 31 mars 2010 - 04:02 .

[StowyMcStowstow]

I agree about how Linear it its. Although I have played through it four times already. I started a fifth, but due to the current DLC being... garbage, basically, I have no further interest in Mass Effect 2 until either some awesome DLC comes out or Mass Effect 3.

[Mikeuicus]

I don't think ME2 opens up until you start doing loyalty missions. Up until then there aren't very many distinct choices to make. After that is when I think the replayability kicks in.

[Kronner]

Yeah, replay value is basically zero. Not many important choices, most of the Paragon/Renegade ways lead to the same result. Lack of dialogues does not help either. ME1 was a lot better in this area.

[rumination888]

The gameplay is fun. I've probably spent over 150 hours in ME2 so far. Thats triple the amount of time I spent on ME1.

[KotOREffecT]

Laterali wrote...

I replayed a few times, but haven't touched it since. I have yet to download the firewalker pack because all I hear about is how lame it is. I agree that ME2 doesn't hold as much replay value for me as ME1 did.

Really? Because all I hear is how much of a blast it is to control the HH and how smooth it is, dispise the test beta like missions and the weak armor system and guns, most people agree the Hammerhead will be better upgraded with better sheilds and more guns in ME 3 than the Mako.

Laterali wrote...

Yes, the combat is much better, but to me, the immersion is worse. By that I mean that it seems like you are on your own completely. Very rarely do your squad members speak, and them speaking to each other is non existent.

Immersion is worse? Really? Infact because of the upgraded conversation system, the lighting, the fact that characters actual move now when talking, plus the whole updated cinematic feel to it, I find it much more immersing. Not to mention Paragon/Renegade interrupt FTW!

Laterali wrote...

And instead of Lance Henricksen, or a vid phone, we got facebook.... Seriously? Shepard doesn't need facebook, it's the ****ing future, people with future blouses and space furniture don't need facebook, they have holograms coming out of their eyeballs but they still need email?

You'd complain about anything wouldn't you? But then again thats usually what ME 2 haters do, complain about anything from that to the freakin sqaud hubs for crying out loud. To even the simple mission complete screens... I'm just saying, seems like you nit picked about this one, esp when in a replayability thread, whats a simple email system have to do with that?

Laterali wrote...

And I much prefer the mako to planet scanning. I swear that mini game is going to give me a tumor it's so awful. So I refuse to do it anymore.

You'd be surprised how many people don't, which is shocking, I know. I'd def take the Mako or the HH over planet scanning as well, but when a bunch of people would take planet scanning over the Mako as seen in many topics and polls, then theres something up with the Mako. Plus we got the Hammerhead now, and it will be much better in the future long run.

Laterali wrote...

ME2 is the better game in the long run, but there's things that bug me enough that I don't feel like playing it anymore..

That's opinion, both games had things that were great and needed to be expanded on or fixed, both games are epic, and I'm sure when the best things out of both games get mixed into ME 3, that will be great!

Modifié par KotOREffecT, 31 mars 2010 - 06:08 .

[Sensei Wuzi]

well... I have currently played ME2 more than ME1. I played ME1 4 times and that was to get the achievements (Got all of them! DLC incl.) But it just felt like a chore... However I got all achievemnts in ME2 1st time round but I am replaying it out of love of the game, not achievements. Played 6 times now and still don't get bored.

[Lake88]

To be honest... I find myself rushing through ME1 at times just so I can import my various shepards over to ME2.

[TJSolo]

I am really trying to get my ME1 saves into ME2 playthroughs but like the OP the on rails feels isn't helping the replay factor for me.

[Darth Drago]

ME2 lacks a lot of replay value. Just a few examples…

-Dialog: It really doesn’t matter who you bring on a mission since for the most part everyone says the exact same lines. To make things worse in the loyalty missions the “third person out” doesn’t say anything unique to who you bring in most cases with few examples. No real random banter anymore now. You have to actively search for a little marker in each main world location for each companion to hear what they have to say.

-Missions: ME1 had a ton of side quests to do. In each star system there was a quest that you could do in it at some time (not including the collection ones here). Yet in ME2 we got more star systems to explore and yet lees side quests? I think the number is at 59 systems in ME2 and 38 in ME1. That’s not including the firewalker download which ads 5 more systems in ME2.

-Squad: In ME1 you needed to (or at least tried to) have a balanced squad of Soldier, Tech and Biotic and each of your squad mates were defined into one or more of those categories. You also needed a Tech in your group if you weren’t one to hack and bypass security. In ME2 there is no such thing. Shepard now is a master at security bypassing and a master hacker. All your squad mates don’t really have an individual feel to them seeing as it really doesn’t matter who you pick to have in your group. BioWare tried miserably to give each one a unique feel by giving them weapon upgrades or select powers but it just made them worse.

[TheDarkHuntress]

I agree with the OP.

I can't play it again for if I did I would have to create another Shepard and I don't want to do it. That's one reason I was hoping for an expansion pack. That would allow me to use the same character and play additional content.

But playing it again and doing the same thing over and over  just doesn't do it for me.

[Your Synthetic Superior]

Mikenator700 wrote...

I... actually agree with OP.
The only reason I replayed it was to get the Lvl 30 and combat achievements. I only liked playing soldier and found ME2 very linear, being forced to do certain missions at certain times.
I'll probably do a complete replay once all of the DLC's come out.

You could only do certain missions at certain times with ME1 as well (Helena Blake missions, renegade/paragon mission, post noveria/feros missions, etc.) For the most part the "open endedness" of ME1 was wasted by bad writting. Bad in the sense that by not doing things in particular order resulted in a subpar experience. Doing Feros after Noveria is just plain anticlimatic and Shiala tells you less about Saren then Benezia. It just feels all wrong. For me it's Therum/Feros, Virmire, Noveria, Illos in order for it to make sense. That's my opinion, which is not typically as I usually deal in FACTS, and I'm sure you have your opinion.

Can't please everyone

[GHOST OF FRUITY]

So far i've found ME2 to be as every bit replayable as ME1 was. However, I was still playing ME1 two years after it came out. Only time will tell if ME2 has that kind of longevity for me.

[jlb524]

I agree with the OP as well. ME2 doesn't seem a replayable as ME1. The ME2 missions by themselves are fun and none of them are tedious. Compare this to ME1 which had, IMO, some boring/tedious levels *coughs* Noveria *coughs*



However, taken as a whole game, I find running through ME2 again quite tedious and there's not much motivation for me to continue with it (I've started a few ME2 games trying out different characters/classes but I've just lost interest in completing them after recruiting a few people). I've played the hell out of ME1 and completed it 16 different times in a year. I'm currently replaying ME1 and am finding no trouble motivating myself to play it and complete missions (even Noveria, ugh). Unfortunately, when I import this character into ME2 they'll probably sit there for awhile until I can muster up the desire to play it again.

[KotOREffecT]

Both games have the same great replayability, dispite both games having different things that make them great. If  I made 6 characters in ME 1, best believe eventually they will have all went through the dramatic events of ME 2 ready to finish this epic story off in ME 3!

Modifié par KotOREffecT, 31 mars 2010 - 06:25 .

[HexHammer]

If ME2 just hadn't this scanning feature, it would be more replayable for me.

[GHOST OF FRUITY]

jlb524 wrote...

I agree with the OP as well. ME2 doesn't seem a replayable as ME1. The ME2 missions by themselves are fun and none of them are tedious. Compare this to ME1 which had, IMO, some boring/tedious levels *coughs* Noveria *coughs*

However, taken as a whole game, I find running through ME2 again quite tedious and there's not much motivation for me to continue with it (I've started a few ME2 games trying out different characters/classes but I've just lost interest in completing them after recruiting a few people). I've played the hell out of ME1 and completed it 16 different times in a year. I'm currently replaying ME1 and am finding no trouble motivating myself to play it and complete missions (even Noveria, ugh). Unfortunately, when I import this character into ME2 they'll probably sit there for awhile until I can muster up the desire to play it again.

I found Noveria really dull too - It was the only part of ME1 that I didn't really enjoy for some reason.  It always felt like a chore.

[hwman]

My biggest reason why I agree with OP is that driving around on random planets for minerals on ME1 was boring but didn't have much use. Scanning planets in ME2 is way more boring but needed for upgrades.



I still think whoever came up with the holding buttons down while the planet rotates for endless hours idea should be fired. Worst part of the game, by far.

[Lake88]

I really don't see how any recent bioware game is less linear than the other....



Both ME1 & 2 require you to pass through compulsory plot checkpoints. Like the beginning/end, or Ilos, Collector ship missions. Between them are 'free-time' where you can do the main missions in any order you like + the side quests. While ME1 only had 4 plot missions during the 'free-time', ME2 had much more main missions(recruitment+loyalty). But both are still linear.



If anything, Dragon Age is the one that's non-linear as it had several completely different starting scenarios.



I think the biggest reason people would find ME1 more replayable than ME2 is that ME2 doesn't have as many big decisions as ME1. Most of which involve letting people live or die. Those 'kill you'/'save you' decisions that even appear in side quests.



The only similar decision in ME2 occurs towards the ending moments of the game where you can choose to leave no one behind or kill off your entire crew(because you need the time to scan for minerals!), let 10 of your squadmates die and sell off the last remaining potential robot buddy for research.



For me, I prefer to replay ME2 because of the combat. There are so many different ways to setup your character and squad for the missions in the game.

[Maria Caliban]

Wholetyouinhere wrote...

ME2 is on rails. Again, not necessarily a bad thing. The game is more focused and, arguably, intense. Plus the shooting is much improved. But replayability? Drastically reduced or even nonexistent, IMO.

The thing is that it's the combat that made ME 2 repayable for me.

'Exploration' in ME means finding new stuff the first time. The second time, I've seen it all already. Being able to do Planet A then Planet B the first game and switching from Planet B to Planet A the second game doesn’t increase replayability for me.

[Pocketgb]

I did a lot of playthroughs of ME1, but largely due to having a very, very limited selection of games at the time. I think I'm on my fifth or sixth playthrough of ME2 even though I have a much broader library.



In ME1 I just wanted to get the combat dealt and done with. In ME2 it's something I actually want to experience. The role-playing aspect and dialog situations are just as fun in both for me.