253 réponses à ce sujet

[KitsuneRommel]

KotOREffecT wrote...

^ I like the way you presented and broke down the aspects of both games VA_FyreHeart. And I completelty agree with you.

ME 1&2 FTW!

Lies! You can't be a fan of BOTH of them.

[Darth Drago]

Some minor spoilers… oh, and a long post warning.

ME1 had:

+A great story.
+Great characters, all of them. It would have been better to have more dialog with them but what they said worked good enough.
+A great group of villains. Saren, Sovereign, Benezia and the Geth. Every time you fought Geth or husks you were reminded about the main story.
+A large amount of side quests to keep you busy.
+An element of immersion that brings you into the sci-fi game world.
+Large main hub location with the Citadel giving you a scope of how big it is main quest worlds were also large.
+Main quest planets used the Mako effectively.
+Main quest is nonlinear in how you follow them.
+Random banter with companions in elevators and clickable ones in main quest locations.
+Life or death choices that resulted in a squad mate (or 2) getting killed.
-Certain spoken dialog is unnaturally loud.
-Security and hacking was inconstant through out the game in difficulty. An easy bypass could be as long as a hard one and vice versa.
-Mako controls are an issue especially with the turret and how moving it moves the Mako.
-Bad inventory items that you got to way to often with little actual improvement.
-Not all manufacturers made higher end weapons or armor, you typically ended up with only 1 or 2 usable suits of armor and one set of weapons. Geth Armory? Not all equipment available to the X-Box 360.
-A crappy economy where you get to much credits and have nothing to buy.
-Stores that didn’t update their inventory to your level or had multiple menus.
-Combat was iffy in certain areas. In the UNC mission locations it was mob mentality where most if not all the enemies would rush you even run by you equipped with sniper rifles. They also were always found in the same rooms. Main quest combat was a lot better.
-No variety in UNC mission buildings, interiors especially. You seen one you’ve seen them all basically.
-UNC planets were rather barren but understandably so with the Mako getting locked up in the Geth Dragon Teeth things. Having trees or other things would be insane to drive through.
-No cut scene showing the death of the companion who got left at the AA tower on Virmire.
-Cut scenes have your squad wearing default armor.


ME2 had:

+Decent graphics, an improvement over the first game for sure.
+Combat is better than ME1 but to much emphasis in the game is solely on that combat feature.
+Interrupt system is nice but needs fine tuning.
+A large group of squad mates with good recruitable/loyalty mission stories.
-Villains are not impressive at all. Collectors we don’t see often enough and Harbinger is nothing more than a headache in the making with his 3 or 4 lines he says over and over. The real threat in the game comes from the 3 mercenary groups that you fight in most of the quests.
-Lore for weapons and Geth are now messed up. Thermal clips? No one knows what a Geth looks like besides Quarians? They do go hand in hand.
-Game economy is crap. Now you cant even earn enough to buy the few things the shops do have.
-Biotic and Tech powers are messed up beyond belief. When was the last time you got hit with a Tech power that overheated your weapons or hit with a biotic attack like stasis?
-Leveling up your skills with the 1,2,3,4 point system. Having to spend multiple points in skills you don’t want to unlock the one you do is tacky at best.
-Squad mates are way to interchangeable. You have no real need of any of them for a special ability or skill.
-Not nearly enough side quests to warrant the idea of a open ended (sandbox I believe) game let alone to keep you interested in the main game.
-No random banter at all and you now have to hunt down a special location for each companion to hear what they have to say about that particular main world location.
-The story is gone. The entire game is nothing more than 13 short stories. One for each companion (Morinth has no story of her own at all) and a shorter one about the Collectors and Reaper threat. After you beat the game you are right back where ME1 ended.
-Dumbed down game mechanics. Showing you how to beat bosses, what crates can break, redundant pop-ups telling you something that’s already on the screen or trying to force you out of a mission area, airlock is never used, entering the ship means your leaving that location and so on.
-Most of the missions you do go on have only one outcome, to kill everything. The ones that don’t are way to short.
-Main world locations are to small/compact and everything is way to conveniently located within a very short walk from where you park the Normandy. Cameo appearances on Illium is insulting as how close they are to each other and again all in the same little location. The Citadel got butchered with the Presidium especially.
-The so called suicide mission is nothing close to that. With a high probability that everyone will live if you just do the quests your given, get the upgrades and choose the right people for the roles that are asked (not brain surgery people).
-Shepard is now a super soldier who can hack computers and bypass security without any training. I’m sure these skills are taught to every soldier huh?
-Renegade Shepard is more of a total ass bastard than a Dirty Harry persona.
-Your love interest Kaiden/Ashley and to a lesser extent Liara all but shrug you off and into the arms of someone new.
-Planet scanning. Need I say more?
-The entire game is very linear. Main Collector quests are forced on you.
-To many changes make this game feel like its not even a sequel. It doesn’t even feel like its made by the same company.

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

I prefer ME 1 still due to it's slightly greater emphasis on roleplay and the much greater ability to customize your characters skillsets and equipment.



ME 2 felt dumbed down, though hid that with more exciting combat and a faster paced story.



I like them both but I have to give it to ME 1.

[MassEffect762]

Ryllen Laerth Kriel wrote...

I prefer ME 1 still due to it's slightly greater emphasis on roleplay and the much greater ability to customize your characters skillsets and equipment.

ME 2 felt dumbed down, though hid that with more exciting combat and a faster paced story.

I like them both but I have to give it to ME 1.

^
This. Also love VA_FyreHeart explanation on page 8.(with the exception of the overall tie, I disagree with that)


ME2>ME1? HA! Don't make me laugh.

Modifié par MassEffect762, 01 mai 2010 - 02:23 .

[uberdowzen]

FluxDeluxe wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

Hi and welcome to...

The Epic Mass Effect 2 vs Mass Effect 1 Debate

I've noticed that there are a lot of threads throughout the ME forums about whether the sequel or the original game is better and the one thing I've noticed about all of them is that eventually devolve into people throwing insults at one another. I'd like to address that.

My idea is to have a proper debate, not just open a thread and let everyone spout their ideas about what they thought was better. I don't want to get the argument going quite yet though (let's do this properly), I'd like some input on how this could be organised.

I was thinking that maybe each side could have a leader elected who anyone could PM their viewpoint to and then the leader could choose the best argument (or make up an amalgamation of the best). I think that this would avoid the problems all the other argument threads have where people with lots of different viewpoints just put their thoughts out there and it just becomes a confusing mess.

Any other ideas would be great (a slightly less convuluted way of holding the debate would be fantastic). It'd be cool (but unlikely) if we could get some of the Bioware guys involved too.

Also please take a look at this link:

http://www.wikihow.c...a-Good-Argument

Finally, it'd be awesome if someone arty made a banner for the first post of the thread and for signatures. Just sayin'...

Your probably bettor off starting a group if you want to moderate an argument of this kind.

Good Idea.

[uberdowzen]

Ok, so I'm going to give this another go, using a group. The current arguing here can carry on, but I'm probably going to start a new thread to give this another shot. This is how I think it might work right now:



On the new thread I'll hold auditions. People can state their case for why they should be allowed to be part of one of the arguing teams. I'll then start a poll with everyone who puts there name forward (please only put your name down if you actually think that you can argue your case well) for each side. The 3 highest for each side will then be made Group Officers who will be allowed to take place in the debate. When I have time I'll put up all the arguments on the main thread (we're they'll probably be another debate going on at the same time with the public). You'll also be able to follow the debate on the group. Any feedback? It'd be awesome if we could get someone from Bioware into one of the teams.

[SithLordExarKun]

tonnactus wrote...

Because all characters have a real connection with the main plot.Except Wrex maybee.What is the motivation of aliens to work for cerberus to rescue human colonies?!!??

Yes because garrus too has a real connection to the main plot, so does kaiden and ashley(seeing how insignificant their roles were).  Liara and Tali felt like the only ones that truly had a connection to the plot with one interpreting your visions and the other giving you significant evidence.

Have you ever actually spoken to the characters in ME2 to find out why  they wanted to follow you? They didn't "work" for cerberus, they worked for shepard  and when you actually talk to them(which is obvious you didn't), you would know the driving force behind their motivations.

I know why jack has such a ****y attitude, but it was never fully explained why liara is so obnoxious and pigheaded despite talking to her.
The majority of characters in ME1 felt like walking codex's and so utterly uninteresting with the exception of garrus and wrex.

How does the characters in ME2 "not being so connected" to the main plot make them lesser characters? Considering most of them(except jacob and grunt imo) were much better fleshed out and were better developed?

Don't even get me started on how ME1 forces you onto a romance path if you talk to your LI's.

And then lets start talking about the story. Sure, ME1 had great revelations but what "story" was being told during the majority of the game? The real "story" only kicked in after virmire and before that it was the cliche and boring "investigate planet X and Z and see what agent so and so is up to".

So let me ask you, does the "story" has to be so "Wow Baw baw baw omG jU h@xX0rz" or should the journey be made interesting? Games like
Knights of the old republic, 
Dragon Age (this especially),
Grand Theft Auto( all of them),
Fallout 3 (another game with a horrible story)

had very generic storylines yet were very well received by the majority. Was it just because of the story?(which many ME1 fanboys with flaming testosterone constantly argue) or was it the journey, the gameplay, the character development?


And then there's exploration and scale. Just what "exploration" is there in ME1? Other than driving around the same barren planet with a different texture, skybox and same identical generic base? At least in ME2 you had to fly to a star system and search for a place to land on(and each place having its unique look and feel) unlike the lazy copy and paste UNC planets in the first game.

Scale? What scale? The galaxy felt barren and almost lifeless in ME1 with the citadel being the most populated region avalible(and already so few people inside) and with noveria being populated with very little people. At least in the sequel you had more hub worlds filled with more people that actually made the place feel alive and not so lifeless.

tonnactus wrote...





Kaidan: His story about

the training on Jump Zero isnt worser then that of jack.

This
post is so stupid i don't even know where to start. All he did was
ramble
about some vyrnnus jackass and how he snapped his neck.

Right its SO much more interesting than jacks story(like how her past  actually
shaped her character with all the torture, experimentation and  complete
and utterly brutality inflicted on her.)

tonnactus
wrote...
Liara:
Growing up as a pureblood,dont follow her mothers
path.

Yes, liara complaining about her being a pureblood and not wanting
to be like her mother makes her incredibly interesting, all in  one
conversation by the way. I don't know how complaining about what race/ethnicity you are makes you more interesting than a lady whose father mercilessly manipulates and antagonizes for his own personal agenda.

tonnactus wrote...
Ashley:Problem that
her
grandfather was the only human ever surrender to an alien army.

Yes and this somehow makes her a better fleshed character than the entire ME2 cast, haven't you forgot that ME2 characters too had their own motivations and problems? Or did you not talk to any of them?

tonnactus

wrote...
Non of this background stories are worser then the ones in the
sequel.Especially that of the stereotypical former lonely rich girl story.

Actually, "worser" is an understatement, Much
much worse than the
sequel would be more appropriate. You just basically listed how
boring ME1 characters were. At least miranda had a driving force and
a distinctive personality unlike kaiden.

Modifié par SithLordExarKun, 02 mai 2010 - 12:29 .

[WaffleCrab]

in my honest opinion, me1 and me2 are equal, but the points they had different emphasis, ME1 had an immense and deep story and despite what people say, i loved the exploration aspect in ME1. and the weapon customization options. but i hated how much useless stuff you ended up with in me1 and it would take forever to get rid of them (stil remember when i got my first warning in the game my inventory was about to be filled, and spent then next 30 minutes off mission trying to figure out what to sell away). however ME2's combat system is better than the one in the original ME, also the skill evolving and the bonus skill feature give a nice tactical side to the game, I also like the fact you can choose which weapons to upgrade and how you do it, but it lacks versitility, another aspect i find in ME2 i loved more than in original ME1. the romance sub plots, more precisely, Tali. allways found her more interesting than liara or ashley on #1. Not to mention more usefull.

[Terror_K]

SithLordExarKun wrote...

Just what "exploration" is there in ME1? Other than driving around the same barren planet with a different texture, skybox and same identical generic base? At least in ME2 you had to fly to a star system and search for a place to land on(and each place having its unique look and feel) unlike the lazy copy and paste UNC planets in the first game.

I'd rather have a barren, open world than only a whole bunch of tiny, linear corridors with no sense of real scale and no proper set-up or decent integration that feel like they were just slapped on without any finesse like a lazy DLC job... except they were in the vanilla game.

Scale? What scale? The galaxy felt barren and almost lifeless in ME1 with the citadel being the most populated region avalible(and already so few people inside) and with noveria being populated with very little people. At least in the sequel you had more hub worlds filled with more people that actually made the place feel alive and not so lifeless.

You clearly miss the point entirely. That's what space is like for the most part. It is mostly barren. It is mostly lifeless. Its filled with harsh, vast and barren planets with dust and rock as far as the eye can see. That lonely epic feeling of isolation and scale is completely lost in ME2. And when every planet it unique and special, none of them are.

These places are supposed to feel empty and barren and massive, and the hub worlds are better illustrated and give a better sense of contrast between civilised worlds and the void of unexplored and uncolonised space when compared to the barren worlds. It feels so false to have almost every single place a cramped colonised and/or tamed area with structures and boundaries.

Its the same concept as an empty room compared to one filled with junk: the former feels far larger and more vast, despite really being the same size. ME2 feels cramped and manufactured, and has lost that epic sense of scale and loneliness that stretches on forever that the UNC worlds gave us in ME1.

[SithLordExarKun]

Im just going to state my opinion in the following posts, not that i am trying to tell you that you're wrong.

Terror_K wrote...

I'd rather have a barren, open world than only a whole bunch of tiny, linear corridors with no sense of real scale and no proper set-up or decent integration that feel like they were just slapped on without any finesse like a lazy DLC job... except they were in the vanilla game.

Keyword : you.  Not me.  You may prefer vast barren open worlds that are completely lifeless with the same bland copy + paste bases but i clearly don't as i prefer the smaller but more populated and lively enviroment. 

You think that ME2's locations felt tiny and lacked proper interation, i don't. ME1's levels for the most part(in my personal opinion) were just as  linear but with more open space(the sky for the most part).

Terror_K wrote...
These places are supposed to feel empty and barren and massive, and the hub worlds are better illustrated and give a better sense of contrast between civilised worlds and the void of unexplored and uncolonised space when compared to the barren worlds. It feels so false to have almost every single place a cramped colonised and/or tamed area with structures and boundaries.

Its the same concept as an empty room compared to one filled with junk: the former feels far larger and more vast, despite really being the same size. ME2 feels cramped and manufactured, and has lost that epic sense of scale and loneliness that stretches on forever that the UNC worlds gave us in ME1.

Ok, so "scale" refers to the vast openness that is present in ME1?

What i meant with "scale" was more of the amount of life in the ME franchise. The universe is suppose to be teeming with life yet in ME1 there was far too much vast emptiness, it simply felt too lonely for a universe so big with life. That was the problem i had in ME1. ME2's "scale" was more of the fact that the areas(while smaller and more boxed) and hub worlds are much more populated and felt more alive.

It felt just as false to have the majority of worlds in ME1 so barren just as too many cramped colonised area in ME2 and i think we have agreed that there needs to be a balance for both in ME3.


EDIT: Just to substantiate a little further. When i look at a sci fi movie or game, i like to see populated worlds with different culture and not vast expanses of nothingness, this is one of the reasons why i didn't appreciate ME1's scale. If you ask me i think the star wars games and movies had the pefect balances between population and "vast empty scales".

Modifié par SithLordExarKun, 02 mai 2010 - 01:37 .

[bjdbwea]

Terror_K wrote...

I'd rather have a barren, open world than only a whole bunch of tiny, linear corridors with no sense of real scale and no proper set-up or decent integration that feel like they were just slapped on without any finesse like a lazy DLC job... except they were in the vanilla game.

This. Of course it wasn't perfect in ME 1. But that's no reason to cut the feature out altogether, or replace it with some dumb mini "game" like planet scanning. It should've been improved upon.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 02 mai 2010 - 02:06 .

[Onyx Jaguar]

I am rolling over in my grave right now

[SithLordExarKun]

bjdbwea wrote...

This. Of course it wasn't perfect in ME 1. But that's no reason to cut the feature out altogether, or replace it with some dumb mini "game" like planet scanning. It should've been improved upon.

Yeah i would agree it should be improved upon.  A nice balance between UNC missions from ME1 and N7's from ME2 would be nice.

The problem for me was far too much barren landscapes with different skyboxes in ME1 for such a large universe.

I did like ME2's galaxy map where you flied around to different star systems and then discovered planets you could land on, for me this was more or less of a replacement in terms of "exploration".(ME1 was driving around).

Modifié par SithLordExarKun, 02 mai 2010 - 02:15 .

[bjdbwea]

SithLordExarKun wrote...

The problem for me was far too much barren landscapes with different skyboxes in ME1 for such a large universe.

That's just how the universe looks like. Every RPG needs some stuff to do beyond going from story mission to story mission. A shooter doesn't though, is what the developers probably thought, eh?

[SithLordExarKun]

bjdbwea wrote...

SithLordExarKun wrote...

The problem for me was far too much barren landscapes with different skyboxes in ME1 for such a large universe.

That's just how the universe looks like. Every RPG needs some stuff to do beyond going from story mission to story mission. A shooter doesn't though, is what the developers probably thought, eh?

Yes but it should be balanced and not too much on one side, both ME1 and ME2 are guilty of this.

[bjdbwea]

Seemed pretty balanced in ME 1 to me. In no way did you have to do the side missions on the "boring" planets. Only thing you lost were XP and money, and that didn't really matter. That's how it should work: Everyone who just wants to go from story mission to story mission, could pretty much do that. And everyone who wanted to explore, could do that too. Now in ME 2 there's no exploration for anyone, it forces one view on everyone.

[Terror_K]

Well, the fact is that there's always going to be more barren, lifeless worlds out there than ones brimming and teeming with life. That just makes scientific sense, and it would be farcical to have too many places seem alive and a whole bunch of class M planets everywhere. Also keep in mind in ME1 we were mostly in the traverse, which is highly uncolonised for the most part.

In either case, I see no reason why we can't have a mix of both in the third game: give us some UNC style barren worlds with missions on, but just make sure the bases or wherever we have to go to aren't always the same cut'n'paste selection of four places to shoot in (ME1 could have simply been a lot better in this regard if the key places on these worlds were just a little more varied). On top of that also give us some smaller more inhabited and structured areas as well. And in both cases integrate them better so they don't feel slapped on.

The N7 missions were more varied and interesting, generally with a great visual design, but they were set up weakly, had barely any dialogue (if any), real choices or interesting NPC's and overall lacked polish and proper integration into the narrative making them feel more like levels. ME1's UNC missions were far better set-up and integrated, had some dialogue and neat stories and characters attached to them and blended in well, but unfortunately were fairly samey in design and pretty much involved landing on a world and fighting through one of four base types until you reached your objective. What we need is the more varied style and originality of the N7 missions with the integration and polish of the UNC ones, with a little of both styles of world for variation.

Modifié par Terror_K, 02 mai 2010 - 02:35 .

[bjdbwea]

I agree, that's totally what should be done for ME 3. But I honestly expected exactly that would already be done in ME 2. But let's face it, the way it was done now saves a lot of development time and resources. That's the main reason, not the complaints on the forum.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 02 mai 2010 - 02:42 .

[SithLordExarKun]

Terror_K wrote...

Well, the fact is that there's always going to be more barren, lifeless worlds out there than ones brimming and teeming with life. That just makes scientific sense, and it would be farcical to have too many places seem alive and a whole bunch of class M planets everywhere. Also keep in mind in ME1 we were mostly in the traverse, which is highly uncolonised for the most part.

In either case, I see no reason why we can't have a mix of both in the third game: give us some UNC style barren worlds with missions on, but just make sure the bases or wherever we have to go to aren't always the same cut'n'paste selection of four places to shoot in (ME1 could have simply been a lot better in this regard if the key places on these worlds were just a little more varied). On top of that also give us some smaller more inhabited and structured areas as well. And in both cases integrate them better so they don't feel slapped on.

The N7 missions were more varied and interesting, generally with a great visual design, but they were set up weakly, had barely any dialogue (if any), real choices or interesting NPC's and overall lacked polish and proper integration into the narrative making them feel more like levels. ME1's UNC missions were far better set-up and integrated, had some dialogue and neat stories and characters attached to them and blended in well, but unfortunately were fairly samey in design and pretty much involved landing on a world and fighting through one of four base types until you reached your objective. What we need is the more varied style and originality of the N7 missions with the integration and polish of the UNC ones, with a little of both styles of world for variation.

^ I agree here, a balance between ME1 and ME2's UNC/N7 mission as each game leaned too much on one side.

Though i just hope they keep the galaxy map from ME2 or even expand on it(would like a travel system like X3 terran conflict but that wont happen) as i did like discovering new solar systems to "scan and land".

[mosor]

I liked the gameplay and combat better in ME2. ME1 had more epic story though. ME was more about galactic events and happenings, while ME2 was more about the personal, individual level. It's just personal taste, but doing huge quests to solve issues of your squadmates doesn't have the same feel as saving Feros or shutting down experiments on Noveria or Vermire. The main part of the game felt like a soap opera rather than a space opera. I guess you have Horizon, the Heretic base and the collector ship/base here but you don't have much interaction on these missions with people. Just go in, kill everything and get out.

Modifié par mosor, 02 mai 2010 - 03:07 .

[GodWood]

I liked both but preffered ME2...

[VA_FyreHeart]

MassEffect762 wrote...
 Also love VA_FyreHeart explanation on page 8. (with the exception of the overall tie, I disagree with that)

IMHO whether you prefer ME1 or ME2 is really dependent on what type of game you prefer. If you're more an RPG fan, you're going to prefer ME1. If you're a shooter fan, you're going to prefer ME2.

I like both genres more or less equally (with the possible exception of JRPGs). I'm as likely to play Baldur's Gate as I am to play Halo. Hence: TIE!

[Tazzmission]

mass effect 1 has a way better threatning story but mass effect 2 has a better fluid gameplay and honestly better charachter backround storys compared to mass effect 1. i like mass effect 2 maybe just a sligh bit better than me1 because i love the clip system but mass effect 1 will always have the better threat and the better villain ( saren)

[tonnactus]

SithLordExarKun wrote...




Yes because garrus too has a real connection to the main plot,

Investigation against saren.

so does kaiden and ashley(seeing how insignificant their roles were).

The protean beacon has nothing to do with the plot,so ashleys guiding was irrelevant?

Have you ever actually spoken to the characters in ME2 to find out why  they wanted to follow you? They didn't "work" for cerberus, they worked for shepard 

True for Garrus and Tali.No one else.Subject zero just want the datafiles.She dont care for humanity.

Don't even get me started on how ME1 forces you onto a romance path if you talk to your LI's.

I was never forced into anything,so i dont know what you mean.

post is so stupid i don't even know where to start. All he did was
ramble
about some vyrnnus jackass and how he snapped his neck.

??
And you tell someone to speak with characters?
Vyrnus beat the crap out of the children if they didnt follow his orders,like he did with rana.
I better stop there and not wasting my time with you.
Go the doctoc and check if you have alzheimer or something similar.

Modifié par tonnactus, 03 mai 2010 - 07:31 .

[VA_FyreHeart]

tonnactus wrote...
Go the doctoc and check if you have alzheimer or something similar.

Oh, joy. Let the flame war begin. <_<

I'm out.