171 réponses à ce sujet

[Ozzyfan223]

I can see maybe the story being a bit lesser in the sequal, but that should be expected in a 2nd entry of a trilogy. And the lack of armor and weapons. Everything else, graphics, characters, acting, gameplay, settings, missions, etc. is improved in ME2.

opinions are individual, sure. But the biggest gripe I see with people who distaste ME2 is the lack of armor and weapon choices. How can that be enough to hinder the experience that much? Playing through ME1, looking back, was a bit of a chore. I'm getting sick and tired of people on this forum saying ME2 is the beginning of Bioware's downfall, when in fact, both from a personal stand point and critical stand point, it is their best game.

Also, in terms of story, I haven't had a game build up a final mission so much and have it be much more satisfying than anticipated.

edit: yes, opinions will differ, but dismissing ME2 is stupid.

Modifié par Ozzyfan223, 11 mars 2011 - 03:03 .

[Fiery Phoenix]

ME1 was the better experience; ME2 was the better video game.

[AdmiralCheez]

Personal taste. I hate sweet potatoes, but the rest of my family loves 'em.

And Fiery, I disagree with you--ME2 was a better game and experience for me.  But like I said, sweet potatoes.

Modifié par AdmiralCheez, 10 mars 2011 - 09:54 .

[Funkcase]

Because they have a different opinion to you? You ain't right, but you ain't wrong. Everyone like's different things.

I like ME1 more as I enjoyed the story, music and characters much more, and I felt like the galaxy was huge while playing ME1, it felt so small in ME2 and I enjoyed the side quests more (not including dlc, and loyalty missions) as there was much more choices to be made, and I could solve problems without using a gun all the time. Thats just my opinion though.

Modifié par Funkcase, 10 mars 2011 - 09:57 .

[Fiery Phoenix]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Personal taste. I hate sweet potatoes, but the rest of my family loves 'em.

And Fiery, I disagree with you--ME2 was a better game and experience for me.  But like I said, sweet potatoes.

Yup, sweet potatoes. All night long.

[SNascimento]

People can like more whatever they want. But I also think saying ME1 is better than ME2 nonsense.

[Durontan]

I loved them both deeply. Think I agree with Fiery, but wouldn't dare to say which is better. Both are just bloody awesome. And both have Urdnot Wrex in them (if you kept him alive in ME1 that is, and only an idiot lets such an awesome character to die).

[N7Infernox]

There's a lot of very conservative rpg players here, and they prefer something a little closer to the old formula than ME2. I'd being call it narrow-sighted but hey....sweet potatoes.

[Mynoot]

ME1 had better character depth, especially for the protagonist, and fewer logic failings.

In short, the story was better and more seemless.

[SlurpinTaxt]

Imo

The graphics are the same in both games.
The characters were deeper in the first game.
The voice acting and dialogue were superb in the first game. The writing budget was essentially nixed in the second game.
Gameplay, i could use abilities with separate cooldown times in the first game, in the second, they all share a cooldown timer. Slows down the action. In the second game, there is the inexplicable addition of ammo, causing you to have to reload every few seconds. Slows down the pacing even more. Settings, the citadel for example is stripped of most of its complexity, there is almost no exploration involved, making it seem inconsequential and cheap. Same goes for the rest of the settings in ME2.

In ME1 you could physically land on a planet in an actual vehicle, and discover ancient alien ruins, adding to the depth and the feeling of immersion and substance of the game.
In ME2, commander shepherd is reduced to scanning a planet by hand, searching for minerals. They really dont have an autoscanner 200 years from now?

Many of the renegade and paragon actions are silly.

Loyalty of your team is based on whether or not you do them a favor. These missions feel tacked on but they amount to what is essentially the core of the game. I could go on and on.

I go to the gun store but they dont sell guns. What?
In fact all of the vendors just seem to have random **** to sell, it feels arbitrary, and again, tacked on.

As a Bioware game, as a mass effect game, ME2 is a pile.
As a stand alone game, it is a mediocre third person shooter

[Sailears]

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

ME1 was the better experience; ME2 was the better video game.

Yes, I agree.

But it all comes down to personal preference anyway.

[spacehamsterZH]

So, anyone wanna take bets how long it's going to take for this thread to go horribly wrong?

As long as it hasn't, speaking as someone who likes both games equally for different reasons, let me address a few things here:

>graphics

If we're talking purely from a technical standpoint, sure. The difference in art direction is a matter of personal taste. I like the environments in ME2, but there's certainly a noticeable difference, and I can see how some people would find that jarring.

> characters

Personal preference. Wrex is one of my favorite characters in the ME games, and he's barely in the second one.

> acting

I don't see how the voice acting in ME2 is significantly better. If anything, Jennifer Hale did a noticeably better job in ME1. Now the dialogue writing and the "direction" (i.e. cuts, pans, camera movement and placement) in ME2, there I'd agree with you - ME1 is littered with needlessly wordy exposition delivered by talking heads "filmed" by motionless cameras.

> gameplay

Depends on your definition of gameplay. Is the combat in ME2 vastly better? I think so, and I'm a bit baffled by the people here who claim they prefer the ME1 combat. But this being an RPG, inventory management, item upgrading and stats leveling are part of the gameplay too, and these parts... well, they've pretty much been removed altogether.

> settings

Personal preference.

> missions

Generally, I'd agree here, especially because ME2 is blissfully free of copy/paste sidequests, but the main story missions basically follow the same linear format as the recruitment and loyalty missions, and if you compare that to the structure and scope of Feros or Noveria... not really an improvement. Of course ME1 only had a small handful of quests like that, but ME2 has, well, none.

> both from a personal stand point and critical stand point, it is their best game.

Totally subjective.

> I haven't had a game build up a final mission so much and have it be much more satisfying than anticipated.

Most people, including me, feel the Suicide Mission was a letdown after all the buildup. Too easy, too linear, too short, and you practically have to try to get people killed. So if nothing else, this is also entirely subjective.

ME1 is often a bit of a chore to play through for me too - ME2 is more fun and accessible, and I'd be lying if I said that isn't the reason why I've played it almost three times more than ME1. But some people don't mind the gameplay elements that you and I think are a chore, and then it comes down to the fact that ME1 has a more cohesive game world and a more compelling and coherent story.

[Jake467]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Personal taste. I hate sweet potatoes, but the rest of my family loves 'em.

And Fiery, I disagree with you--ME2 was a better game and experience for me.  But like I said, sweet potatoes.

Yeah, My family is the same way... Dam Sweet potatoes...

But, I would have to say, (playing ME2 before ME, then going back playing ME-then importing it to ME2) That on just the basic Default playing (ie, no import) that ME had a more entertaining story that ME2. But with the import, I saw the game come to life more or less, and enjoyed ME2 on a new level.

Once you get past the lack of auto save where if you die at the end of a mission, you almost always start over. And the akward auto cover. Its still a good game, as far as game play goes.

But everyone is entitled to say what they gotta say, and hopefully ME3 is the best of them all.

[Tarek]

hmmm

well ME 2 had better combat and more missions.

ME 1 just seemed bigger although it really was not (MAKO drops and all that)

both games are great but ME 1 had a more epic spacey feeling to it (the moment when the reaper docks with the citadel I almost cried), and the mission in MAKO just gave life to the planets we visited although the maps needed more work.

[Praetor Knight]

These threads need to stop before they start.

[N7Infernox]

Praetor Shepard wrote...

These threads need to stop before they start.

So true

[Manic Sheep]

Personal taste. Not everyone like the same thing and people place different values on different aspects.

I personally much prefer ME2 overall. There are somethings I don’t like about ME2 and prefer from ME1 and a number of things that I think needed to be more in the middle. For example I found the characters to be a bit overblown especially when compared to the likes of Kaidan, Ashley and Wrex but I think the story was presented better, you got more interation with the characters off the ship (tho no party banter *sniff*) and the gameplay and visuals are much much better in ME2. Also I think the plot wasn’t that bad (TBH I never thought ME1s plot was brilliant in the first place, the setting yeah but the main plot not so much) and it was a the 2nd game as you said which is almost always the weakest part of a trilogy. 1st one is setup, everything is fresh and new and the big bads are introduced, the 3rd in a trilogy is where everything comes together in an epic finish. If you take out the middle on its own it’s just not going to be as epic as the other parts.
While the main plot wasn't great the LM were excellent and well written and the side quest where better.

Also I can play ME2 over and over again, ME1 I just can’t. The combat is just not fun for me. I replayed it enough times to see most of the variables but it’s not a game I just pick up and play and once I have seen it all there is little point. I already know what happened. But then some people will read the same book or watch the same movie over and over again too.


Edit: I always miss thing out and have a ton of typos and then see them after I post

Modifié par Manic Sheep, 10 mars 2011 - 10:41 .

[Whoo71]

ME1
Pros: Excellent execution of plot and back story, introduction of bright characters
Cons: Gameplay, PC port quality, squad interactions

ME2
Pros: Squad interaction, PC version quality, gameplay
Cons: Plot, RPG Elements, Health recharge, impact of ME1 choices

[Praetor Knight]

Both games have health recharge.

[Whoo71]

Praetor Shepard wrote...

Both games have health recharge.

You needed an armor upgrade to get health recharge in the first game, and even then the recharge was slow.

[Matt VT Schlo]

To me, it was two main things in ME1 that trumps ME2: dynamic story and stronger RPG menu system

[Thompson family]

I was playing EuroFighter 2000 on full difficulty before some of the people on this forum were born.

ME2 is a vast improvement.

[AdmiralCheez]

Nyoka wrote...

Only if "videogame" means "pewpew!"

But I like pewpew.