66 réponses à ce sujet

[PiEman]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Depends on which story structure you prefer. ME1 was like one big movie. ME2 was episodic. I think ME1 had a stronger central plot, but ME2 was more emotionally engaging. I like both.

Also, brace for flamewar.

This, all of it.

Imagine a Sci-Fi series that was kicked off with a movie. That's what ME 1 and 2 feel like back to back, especially when you play the second one in more broken up portions than the first. 
Still wish the missions in the second were longer though, and more varied.

[lolwot]

Mass Effect, and it's better by a great deal. The bulk of Mass Effect 2 is comprised of missions that have no relation whatsoever to each other and the main conflict of the story. In Mass Effect, the mystery of the Protheans and Reapers gradually unraveled with each main story mission. I never had that feeling in Mass Effect 2. You essentially know exactly how the story will finish after one or two meetings with The Illusive Man. Then you go through 20 hours of filler, completing irrelevant tasks so that you can meet an arbitrary loyalty condition during the suicide mission. 

Modifié par lolwot, 16 février 2011 - 03:57 .

[Harmless Crunch]

Well I prefer ME1's style of story (Movie feel, big long epic adventure Etc) compared to ME2's episodic story but I seem to be in the minority and they both have advantages and disadvantages (ME1 has a much more memorable enemy but weaker character development compared to ME2 Etc) hopefully ME3 will bring the best of both games!

[Pwener2313]

BOTH

[Rogue Unit]

ME1's story was superior, IMO. Everything else (Sidequests, Characters, Weapons, DLC, Combat, etc.), goes to ME2

[samurai crusade]

Both. I enjoy the combat and characters of ME2. Enjoy the exploration and Sheps backstory in ME1.

That said... I'm more likely to pop in ME2 for future playthroughs than ME1.

[Dayshadow]

Lee The Krogan wrote...

Well which has the better story?

ME2's "main story" is simply a reason for the character stories, which together make the real main story.

They aren't the same thing so it's hard to compare the two side by side.  

[Vena_86]

I suppose everyone would agree that the main story line in ME1 is superior. Side missions and gameplay etc. don't really have anything to do with this particular aspect.

[Lumikki]

ME1 had better main story.

Side stories where better in ME2.

[Celtic Latino]

ME1 Story wise. It just feels so much more engaging. ME2 had a good plot but feels streamlined and condensed, but because it's a suicide mission and the middle of a trilogy it makes sense for it to be that way. ME2 does have better gameplay though.

[Whereto]

Besides all the plot holes etc mass effect 2 made me angry. Had the possibility to extend the story to greater lengths, yet it never really made it to thrilling in my books. It was far better in presentation but slightly under me1 for plot

[Nimrodell]

Been reading this type of topics for very long and one thing still bothers me - why do people compare stories from ME1 and ME2? From my point of view, there are not two stories, only one that is divided in three, let's say, books. ME1 was huge intro with many explanations about things that are on horizon, the second one is sort of character builder, sort of what's happening in that calm period before the storm and the third one will be about the storm itself. ME2 still kept its connection to the major storyline, plot, but there are sub-storylines, that are taking you a bit deeper to the more personal aspects of the main plotline. Just imagine playing War and Peace or Lord of the Rings instead of reading them... I guess then you would condemn Pierre Besukhov storyline or even better, you would condemn the entire Two Towers as worse then lets say Fellowship of the Ring or Return of the King as worse.

Mass Effect was designed as trilogy, meaning it has one huge story that is divided onto three parts. Tolkien had to divide his LotR cause in post war days no publisher would print it - lack of paper (as Tolkien himself stated in his Letters). And it was even published in the manner ME is nowadays. Because of that, people weren't able to see the whole story so they were actually judging it in pretty similar manner like we do here when it comes to ME1 and ME2 thus making huge mistake by comparing something that is not actually finished, not being able to see the purpose of some side storylines.

Let's say ME is like a novel that's being published in that manner. Before ME3 hits, it should be percieved as ME1 is huge earthquake, ME2 is calm before great tsunami hits, ME3 is great tsunami along with world afterwards. Simple as that. I don't know if Drew Karpyshyn had such story composition on his mind when it all started (but judging from his novels, it seems like that was his initial intention), but ME had that design from the very start meaning there was already larger story in story designer's head before ME1 hit the stores and that's the major difference between ME and other games (well, maybe Warcraft could be described like that, cause its creators already had bigger story on their minds before that mastodont started its 'real' life).

Bottomline is - I did enjoy and still enjoying both ME1 and ME2. I think they did marvelous job on both parts especially because they managed to stay consistant without having any retcons (Blizzard should learn from them in that aspect). I did get further answers on Reapers in ME2, better understanding on what they do, got better glimpse on Galaxy politcs and economy and even got better insight on different species as well on Cerberus. ME1 is more pew pew kind of thing, roller coaster for human kind as well for other species discovering what's behind their existence, ME2 is getting of that roller coaster to take a better look at that amusement park and people who are there with me and ofcourse getting chance to actually become familiar with em. If we're going to enter that House of Horrors together, I'm glad I got this 'pause' to know 'em better and to know how that amusement park actually works.

So, for me both parts have their goals accomplished and so far I had an awesome ride. ME is not game for players that want just 'pew pew' thing. It is not burdened with statistics, numbers, flashy gear (meaning nowadays WoW sickness), it has great story, enjoyable combat and the fact that player actually cares about his/hers decisions. Not much space for vanity boost which is fine by me.

[Harid]

ME2 didn't have a story. The Lair of the Shadow Broker DLC arguably pushed forward the lore more than the entire bloody game. ME1 wins by miles.

[Phaedon]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Depends on which story structure you prefer. ME1 was like one big movie. ME2 was episodic. I think ME1 had a stronger central plot, but ME2 was more emotionally engaging. I like both.

Also, brace for flamewar.

Yeah. 

Also, inb4 tro-

Created about 8 hours ago

Created about 6 hours ago

Created 21 minutes ago

[smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/pinched.png[/smilie]

I preferred ME1's story, but ME2's storytelling, but people like these make me want to facepalm. 
'Lolzomg me2 had no story u no tru storytelling u character-based noob'

Therefore, I'll defend ME2's story once more. Until people realize how vastly overrated ME1's story is. The beginning of the game was about collecting uninteresting characters, and then you have Virmire,Noveria and Feros. Noveria was interesting, providing a hint as to indoctrination, and Feros and Virmire were stupid until their end, which was admittedly very interesting. ME2, as the second act of the trilogy was about building a strong team for ME3. Did it do it well?


Hell yes.

And guess what. This has been brought up a thousaaaaaand times!

Will haters really change their opinion? No, they'll revert back to their regular state of denial by saying that 'Zomg, Mass Effect is not about the characters, it's about defeating the Reapers. What, the Reapers weren't introduced as a concept until almost the end of ME1, errrm *cough*' or 'Yeah, yeah, 'interesting' is subjective. Random marines are so more interesting than the guy who made the genophage'

Modifié par Phaedon, 16 février 2011 - 08:16 .

[Phaedon]

-double post-

Modifié par Phaedon, 16 février 2011 - 08:15 .

[CannotCompute]

Harmless Crunch wrote...

Well I prefer ME1's style of story (Movie feel, big long epic adventure Etc) compared to ME2's episodic story. They both have advantages and disadvantages (ME1 has a much more memorable enemy but weaker character development compared to ME2 Etc) hopefully ME3 will bring the best of both games!

Pretty much how I feel about it too.

Modifié par CannotCompute, 16 février 2011 - 08:17 .

[Fiery Phoenix]

ME1's main story/plot is light-years ahead of ME2's.

[CroGamer002]

ME1 main plot is way superior to ME2 but ME2 takes the cake with characters.

[Gatt9]

ME1 hands down.  ME2's story and sidequests were nonsensical,  dodgy,  and poorly written.

Some crewmembers from the Normandy were never found,  go find them!

Turns out that the highly trained people chosen to work on one of the fleet's flagships thought the best thing to do during a crisis was hide in a box.  Then the highly trained recovery crew,  looking at the wreckage of a key ship with no idea why it was shot down,  never thought to open said boxes in case they may have held clues to why the ship was attacked.  Nonsense.

Go around apartments in a quarantine district,  looting them.  Come upon a still occupied one,  direct the residents to safety,  then loot it,  in front of them,  without a word from them.  Two apartments later,  find some looters,  and choose the paragon option of lecturing them about looting...despite what I just did for the last 20 minutes.

There wasn't much attention paid to the writing in ME2.

[Lotion Soronarr]

ME1. It didn't have as many plot holes and idiot balls.



But ME2 has TIM. So it gets point for that.

[Chaos Gate]

The ME1 story by far.

I just don't consider the events in ME2 to even constitute a story, to be honest. In my opinion, it felt like a hodge-podge of meaningless sidequests all bundled together.

The loyalty missions should have been released as DLC, because they just didn't work as the game's main plot.

Modifié par Chaos Gate, 16 février 2011 - 10:31 .

[Da_Lion_Man]

I prefer ME1's story.

Though ME2 has the better characters IMO.

[abaris]

The story arc of ME1 is much better. But, as has been said, the overall integration of main story and side missions are better in ME2.



Side missions were a rather tedious experience in ME1 - at least in my opinion. The most tedious of all, the rogue VI on Luna.

[Khayness]

ME1.

ME2 should have had more Collector missions between recruiting. Assembling the squad to trigger the most awesome parts of the game feels tedious in replays.

Modifié par Khayness, 16 février 2011 - 10:59 .

[Lightbleeder]

ME1 had a much better story. ME2 had a fun story but it was very short. The main story of ME1 is vast, whereas the main story of ME2 if you cut it down consists of only a few missions. Side-quests and companion missions make up the bulk of ME2, whereas in ME1 they were more optional.