121 réponses à ce sujet

[diaspora137]

The gameplay in ME2 appealed to me more than ME1. As for the storyline, I think ME1 was a little bit better.

[james1976]

didymos1120 wrote...

tonnactus wrote...
On freedoms progress,actually squadmates tell you to use overload on shields....
Or to use cover when the ymir comes.

Oh, for Christ's sake: it's called a "tutorial".  You know: for people new to the games, or who didn't do umpteen billion replays between the release of ME1 and ME2 and who might have needed a refresher?  That's also why you have to use an interrupt to progress the Veetor conversation, and are required to place Miranda and Jacob in two different locations in order to trigger the YMIR fight.  Notice how they stop telling you to do those actions once you're past that mission?

In ME1 you could turn the tutorial off!  I didn't see an option to turn those annoying "hints" off in ME2.  I don't need to be told repeatedly how to do something in the game.

[didymos1120]

tonnactus wrote...
Things like that also happen after the tutorial.

But NOT those specific things, do they?  Why? Because the game already covered them.  See how that works? 

[Evil Johnny 666]

ME1 by far. ME1 has everything better than ME2 except combat, at least the mechanics themselves.

ME1 has a much more involved, deep, interesting and mysterious story, it actually has a real one so to speak. You start the game, learning a few things and then investigating several places for more input, and everything unfolds gradually in a very satisfying manner. ME2 lacks all of this; everything is thrown on your face from the bat, you know who the bad guys are and know way too much about them and your ultimate goal from the get go. So rather than discover about the Collecters far, far longer into the game, rather than setting pieces by pieces gradually the story, the only thing we almost ever do is recruit squad mates and do loyalty quests, nothing which advances the story. Hell, the beginning itself is a complete mess filled with plot holes and makes no sense, only so newcomers don't feel like they missed something. The whole thing felt catering to newcomers rather than the numerous fans of the original. Where's the slightly hard sci-fi feel of the main story? Where's all the mystery and wonder? The Ascension book made the Collectors feel like a mysterious and dangerous force infinitely better than the actual game did. Plus, the whole game did nothing to advance the story (you are left at the very same place as in the ME1 ending) but to make you wonder how some things are not ridiculous.

The writing is poor too, Bioware used to be good writers, but they show too often bad writing in ME2. Jack is an incredibly stupid character, a very boring stereotype as Grunt is. Mordin was actually pretty cool, had a great backstory which added a lot to the universe, Garrus had a good character development too as Tali and all that happens with the Migrant Fleet. Then you also have Samara which is also a pretty dumb character with her stupid code. It's not clever, it's not specially interesting, it's just stupid. Jacob and Miranda are pretty standard too, Miranda being a bit more interesting, at least while being a bit cliché, it's a relatively good one. And then the humour... most of it is terrible really. Romance isn't very well implemented, not that it was particularly good in ME1 either, you barely speak with Miranda, sometime saying something nice, then that she's special, you care for her - while the only other thing you do is run her errands and do the psychologist - and then she automatically loves you and you end in bed. It's just terrible.

While planet exploration could be improve, it was a very nice feature. Some planets were I think very cool, some were too much alike and repetitive, but there were more than a couple which felt unique, which gave you a certain sense of wonder and great sci-fi feel. What was the point of removing the whole thing but to destroy and important part of the game?

Where are the quests? Where is the good level design? Most missions are designed the exact same way, you get through corridors, a slightly bigger open space (which isn't that open really) and then more corridors, a dialogue here, maybe one later, you kill someone and then it's finished. Guarrus' recruitment mission actually makes sense and is relatively well done, but - for a good reason - it's quite short. But gone is the big RPG thing of quests, no more finding a way to get a pass outside the Noveria port, repairing the Noveria station, doing some other quests there with a bit of shooting, no helping people on Feros or even good, coherent level design as with Virmire, it's all gone, you only get a couple of conversations through your very linear shooting mission. The only real RPG quests you have, is in hub worlds, and while they're very cool and most of those quests are fun, these hub worlds are small and quests limited.

And speaking of shooting, while it is better than in ME1, most missions are boring as hell. Each encounter is extremely easy to guess and it always evolves the same way. Playing at Insanity, you ought to realize how everything is built the exact same way, all the time. With the bad level design... I'd rather have the clumsy gameplay of ME1, but with loads better level design and quests than have a relatively good (could be quite better) combat system but terrible level design.

The dialog system. Okay it was never particularly good, but in ME2 it just doesn't make any sense. While in ME1 I could role play a bit, choose a bit my lines (without really knowing what I was going to say in its entirety), in ME2 they're way too tied with a particular Shepard personality. You may not know while choosing your line, but you may be contradicting yourself because each line are designed accordingly a totally different character, so unless you want a split personallity disorder and contradict yourself, you don't really choose anything. It's almost entirely automated. And Shepard, more than ever, gotta be the most boring main character ever. I understand he's supposed to be "your Shepard", but how comes he's so defined, your choices are so limited and meaningless? How come he's such a boring stereotyped character no matter evil or good you are? He's so black and white, so much a redneck or a saint that it hurts.

Why are there so many meaningless features? Why do you even can choose your weapons since they're so limited and you always get better ones? Why do you have a research thingy when there's nothing to it other than choosing every one of them? It's a pure time sink, something you have to bother with every playthrough if you want a decent ending, nothing ever changes the gameplay either.

ME1 wasn't perfect at all, some features were quite bare bone too, but at least, they were there, at least, there was more to the whole game than ME2 could ever hope to achieve. And ME1 was also to me one of those "all the little things" cases that made it special; planet exploration, elevator rides and limited loading screens, good blend of RPG and shooter. While I know it wasn't meant as a sequel to the KOTOR games, I thought they had a lot of similarities and some things should have been more similar, somethings that wouldn't be out of place and would have greatly improved the game, like more dialog choices for example or more planets and quests, KOTOR felt deeper. But I still loved the game and thought that despite its problems, it was unique and great to play. I just feel so betrayed with ME2, I just feel that it's so sub par compared to the first, that it's loosing its essence a bit. Too much revolved over shooting rather than making sure the big universe they created was fun to explore and live in, rather than diminish every opportunity for you to feel this way, and it's a great shame. I loved Omega and Ilium, but I thought they were too limited, I thought that when bothering creating something like this, they should put more effort for making the thing more alive.

There's more to it as I may have forgotten a few things and haven't even attended some problems of ME2, but I just don't feel taking too much time writing this.

Modifié par Evil Johnny 666, 04 janvier 2011 - 11:26 .

[tonnactus]

james1976 wrote...
i

In ME1 you could turn the tutorial off! 

Yes,i wrote that already.It was ignored...

[Terror_K]

I prefer ME1 a great deal actually. ME2 just disappointed me in so many ways.

[tonnactus]

Sparda Stonerule wrote...

EDIT: You must be stretching things. Those VI monitor performance and dispense medi gel when the user isn't doing well, it also reduces cool down times by maximizing efficiency. Those somewhat common upgrades do not constitute a "this is how you install upgrade", "this is how you equip weapons", "this is what button you press to take cover". Besides that comment is designed specifically for armor upgrades. Not the armor itself. I fail to see your point.
Monitoring devices make tons of sense. Pop ups directing you do not.

A displayed map with plot points...
Where this should come from when not from a device in the armor.

[EuroShepard]

I remember first time beating mass effect 1 and I remembered I thought it was the game ever.I didn't have this feeling when playing mass effect 2(which is also an amazing game)

[porsche 911]

need help with bypass security, Horizon help iam stuck Pc version

[james1976]

tonnactus wrote...

james1976 wrote...
i

In ME1 you could turn the tutorial off! 

Yes,i wrote that already.It was ignored...

I noticed.  Which is why I stated it again.

[Whitestrake]

 I prefer the overall story in ME1.
But in ME2 the gameplay was better, & the side missions were better. I really loved the serial feel all the loyalty, & N7 missions had. 

Modifié par Renard the Bard, 04 janvier 2011 - 11:43 .

[fmsantos39]

MysticMage44 wrote...

I was just wondering if anyone actually liked the original Mass Effect better than Mass Effect 2 overall. Obviously once we break down the games some things are better in ME1 and some things are better in ME2.  But I was wondering if anyone actually liked the overall experience better in ME1.

ME2 for the gameplay and fun and ME1 for the playthrough

[Chaos Gate]

I thought Mass Effect 2 was an incredibly poor and paltry effort from BioWare. I couldn't believe how shallow the experience was, and how watered down the game had become. I was tremendously disappointed.



The orginal game is lightyears better in almost all respects.

[Avilia]

For me:

ME1 - story depth, characters and immersion
ME2 - general gameplay and combat

Modifié par Avilia, 05 janvier 2011 - 12:21 .

[Lumikki]

I liked both equal much.

ME1 had better story and little better roleplaying impression. How ever, ME2 had better gameplay, mostly the weapon combat side. Let say like this, that ME2 annoyed less, while ME1 feeled more loved. It's like when developers made ME1 they still did it little old RPG ways and in ME2 they just tryed to smooth the gameplay alot, but left players less choises and customation. How ever in the end both are excelent games in they own ways.

Modifié par Lumikki, 05 janvier 2011 - 06:50 .

[88mphSlayer]

i like 'em both, both have their ups and downs



i will say tho that ME1 has such a better ending, it's really satisfying when a game's ending surprises you the way ME1 did

[Lord Phoebus]

I'll give ME2 about a 7/10, ME1 a 5/10.

[sinosleep]

Damn Lord Phoebus, tell em how you really feel.

Modifié par sinosleep, 05 janvier 2011 - 07:26 .

[Lord Phoebus]

sinosleep wrote...

Damn Lord Phoebus, tell em how you really feel.

I'm a bit of a tough grader, and someone reading the grades would probably think I don't like the games as much as I do.  

For writing I give them both about a 7/10, a 10/10 would be Planescape:Torment, and after playing the Witcher, Mask of the Betrayer, and seeing the writing in the completed 2/3 of KotOR2, I really couldn't give it more than a 7.  I think ME1s writting is a bit better, but the structure of the plot is derivative of their early games, so I have to take back some marks there.  For the record most games would get a C or a D grade from me.

For gameplay, I gave ME2 a 7/10 and ME1 a 3/10.  There are somethings that could be polished in ME2, gameplay didn't quite feel deadly enough, a 180 degree turn key would have nice (particularly in CQC) and I still don't care for the mini-games.  For  ME1, barrier and immunity trivialized a lot of the combat, and the unlimited ammo meant that the higher difficulties became chipping away at the enemy; the Mako killed the rest of the score.

For graphics again they're both about a 7/10.  The graphics are good, but nothing I'm going to go wow about and stop and stare.  Again, judging them against the best of the best of PC graphics (since that's what I'm playing on), it really isn't in the same league as something like Crysis.

I don't care about sound so that really doesn't affect my score which is based mostly on gameplay and writing.  To sum it up: I enjoyed 2 and tolerated 1, but was interested enough in the story to play the sequel when I could get it cheap.

Modifié par Lord Phoebus, 05 janvier 2011 - 08:37 .

[DarthCaine]

Mass Effect 1 vs Mass Effect 2
http://social.biowar...596/polls/1670/
Mass Effect 1 - 37%, Mass Effect 2 - 63%

http://social.biowar...596/polls/4081/

GameSpot User Scores:
ME1: 9.1 360, 8.9 PC
ME2: 9.4 360, 9.3 PC

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I would have to say without a doubt that ME2 is pretty much superior in nearly every possible way.



The combat of course is far superior but even the characters and situations and environments Shepard finds himself in are far more interesting to me, ME2 is lightyears ahead of ME1.

[Rapamaha]

they are so diffrent from eachother that its really hard for me to compare, I like RPG's but I like Shooters also (specially 3rd person shooters wich seem to be more rare these days) but I think I liked ME2 maybe just abit more, it felt longer, it didnt have any framerate problems like the ME1 has on xbox and im allways a sucker for these "dark & eery" games/movies/tv-series