29 réponses à ce sujet

[bas273]

Don't get me wrong. I think ME2 is a good game and ME3 is probably going to be good as well.
But in my opinion they're both bad sequels to ME1. ME2 and ME3 should've been part of a different trilogy.

I'm not saying ME1 is perfect but I just don't like the direction Bioware is taking. The squad outfits that went from armor to catsuits. The make-over to Ashley. The change from a light-RPG to a hollywood cover shooter.

Immersion and realism are very important to me in games and ME1 was more immersive than ME2 imo. Even small details like high heels (Miranda) and long hair (Ashley in ME3) are immersion breakers for me. While they improved the combat, graphics and some other stuff, the immersion/realism/story took a really big hit.

I could write a book about all the changes in the ME series that I don't like. Shepard's death is terrible imo. So is the Human Reaper. Or when the crew leaves the Normandy on a 'mission' and then the remaining crew gets kidnapped. Then there's the removal of the Mako. I loved the Mako missions, even though they were all the same. But it was great to explore a planet and just look at the sky.

And why is ME so human-centric now? ME1 is just on a whole different scale than ME2/ME3 imo. Despite it's flaws, ME1 felt real. The universe, the species, the antagonist, the storyline, the choices, the finale.... it was one hell of a magical experience. One of the most epic gaming experiences I've had (on the same level as Half-Life 2 and Bioshock imo). I especially liked the conversation with Vigil.

The trailer of ME3 says it all. 'Only Shepard can save us'. Is Shepard a superhero now? In ME1, Shepard was a good leader and a good soldier, but he didn't save the galaxy by himself. Joker and the Normandy ultimately destroyed Sovereign. And Shepard had a whole team to help him.

ME went from a story of saving the galaxy and equality of species, to a story of humanity and saving the Earth.

So in short: ME2 and ME3 feel like a totally different trilogy to me. So now I'm just replaying ME1 and pretending that ME2 and ME3 don't exist. Does anyone else feel that way too?

Modifié par bas273, 10 juin 2011 - 09:17 .

[Dracotamer]

Totally the opposite for me. I didn't agree with all the decisions the devs made in ME2 but it was still a great game and it appears they are trying to make a blend of ME1 and ME2 for ME3 and please as many people as possible.

[scampermax]

bas273 wrote...
The trailer of ME3 says it all. 'Only Shepard can save us'. Is Shepard a superhero now? In ME1, Shepard was a good leader and a good soldier, but he didn't save the galaxy by himself. Joker and the Normandy ultimately destroyed Sovereign. And Shepard had a whole team to help him.

It may have been a team effort, but it takes the right leader to make that team a winning team. Shepard is that leader.

[Sparrow44]

bas273 wrote...

And why is ME so human-centric now? ME1 is just on a whole different scale than ME2/ME3 imo. Despite it's flaws, ME1 felt real. The universe, the species, the antagonist, the storyline, the choices, the finale.... it was one hell of a magical experience. One of the most epic gaming experiences I've had (on the same level as Half-Life 2 and Bioshock imo). I especially liked the conversation with Vigil.

The trailer of ME3 says it all. 'Only Shepard can save us'. Is Shepard a superhero now? In ME1, Shepard was a good leader and a good soldier, but he didn't save the galaxy by himself. Joker and the Normandy ultimately destroyed Sovereign. And Shepard had a whole team to help him.

ME went from a story of saving the galaxy and equality of species, to a story of humanity and saving the Earth.

So in short: ME2 and ME3 feel like a totally different trilogy to me. So now I'm just replaying ME1 and pretending that ME2 and ME3 don't exist. Does anyone else feel that way too?

I highlighted those because I used to share some of those views (some stuff I'm still concerned about though). I think the 'save Earth' and humanity stuff is or hopefully is part of the marketing to the new players to get them to care about this game and also Casey saying stuff like "ME3 is a great entry point into the trilogy" still has my eyes rolling thinking about it.

However as I said the game is getting the pre-release hype and as far as translating into the game itself the focus on humanity may lessen so to speak depending on how you play the game and what certain choices you make or how you make that choice. I think after seeing some Earth gameplay at the beginning with Anderson and Shepard which I thought was ok means I'm not too fussed about Earth being in ME3...for the moment....

In regards to ME2 it had it's flaws yes, but I actually enjoyed the game more than ME itself and while some people will say differently but the combat is a big feature of the ME series and ME2 was an improvement over it's predecessor in that department for sure.

[Spaghetti_Ninja]

Uuuum, no. ME1 was horrible. The story was horrible, the characters had almost no backstory, and the romances were awkward.

And let's just not touch on the gameplay.

It was Mass Effect 2 that was a true masterpiece, which improved on everything that was wrong with ME1.

[Asari Commando]

Spaghetti_Ninja wrote...

Uuuum, no. ME1 was horrible. The story was horrible, the characters had almost no backstory, and the romances were awkward.

And let's just not touch on the gameplay.

It was Mass Effect 2 that was a true masterpiece, which improved on everything that was wrong with ME1.

maybe this is true for fans who wanted a shooter, but not if you are there for the RPG story element of mass effect. not sure how you could think the characters had no backstory, you must of never actually taken the time to talk to your crew members.  the customization of squaddies and shepard is watered down in ME2, everything from the weapon mods/stats to the armor and biotic/tech amps. the lack of weapons is astonishing, and the whole thermal clip change almost morphs the game into a full pledged shooter. overall the sequal was just a shooter with dialogue trees.

great changes that ME2 DID improved on..

• snapping in and out of cover (vaulting over obstacles)
• normandy is better in every way
• DLC
• graphics
• dialogue interrupts
• loyalty missions
• slightly harder boss fight :/ (still too easy)

[Antivenger]

So much so that I pretend the story goes a different path.

[eye basher]

I like to pretend that the horrible gameplay of ME1 and the fact that shepard makes superman look like a joke even on insanity doesn't exist but guess what it's still there.

[TomY90]

Too me ME1 was the weakest of them all by far because ME1 lacked direction it did not know whether it was a free roaming explorer game, a story based game or a shooter and in the end it became a confused game with huge amounts of exploring (too much in my opinion) a story based game (had too much dialogue at times) and the shooting was woeful at best.

ME2 was alot more focused to the key points that most people loved about mass effect which was the idea of a sci-fi RPG that was a 3rd person shooter with an amazing story and great voice acting which was a 1st for the gaming industry really to have an RPG main character voiced.

they focused on that key point which makes it feel more enjoyable and create a more special way of story telling which overall created an amazing product that annihilated ME1.

Currently it is hard to comment on ME3 due to not playing on it but it seems they are focusing further onto the gameplay and visuals to create something that feels more action packed and more like something out of sci-fi films which is bang on for the plot of ME3 considering ME1 and ME2 were more compact scenarios whereas ME3 is not in any shape or form.

[FireEye]

bas273 wrote...

So in short: ME2 and ME3 feel like a totally different trilogy to me. So now I'm just replaying ME1 and pretending that ME2 and ME3 don't exist. Does anyone else feel that way too?

Yes.

[Babli]

bas273 wrote...
So in short: ME2 and ME3 feel like a totally different trilogy to me. So now I'm just replaying ME1 and pretending that ME2 and ME3 don't exist. Does anyone else feel that way too?

Indeed.

I would probably like ME 2 if it wasnt...well...ME...2.

[Rawke]

I'll pretend this thread doesn't exist.

I mean - seriously? ME3 isn't even out yet. Yes, everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion. But stick with ME2 for now, since none of us have played ME3 and therefore cannot judge whether it is a good game or not.

Having said that, I strongly disagree with the OP. ME2 was a huge leap forwards both gameplay AND storywise. Yes, the overall graphic style changed, sometimes it wasn't an improvement, but it wasn't worse than ME either. It really depends on your personal taste, but to say that things like different hairstyles are immersion breakers...I don't get it.

[Captain_Obvious]

I will always love ME1 the most, without a doubt. It enchanted me in a way no game ever has. I think the difference is whether a player feels obligated to plan for ME2 or ME3 waaaay back in ME1, and I don't. I play it because I love it. That being said, I now find it obligatory to play ME1 to import into ME2. I can't do a new game in ME2 without it. My OCD won't let me. I'm sure ME3 will be the same. Not that I'm complaining.

[kglaser]

ME1 will always be my favorite, unless they pull off a bloody miracle in ME3. Which, after playing DA2, I'm not holding my breath. >_>

[ZJR7621]

Spaghetti_Ninja wrote...

Uuuum, no. ME1 was horrible. The story was horrible, the characters had almost no backstory, and the romances were awkward.

And let's just not touch on the gameplay.

It was Mass Effect 2 that was a true masterpiece, which improved on everything that was wrong with ME1.

Just shut the hell up you're speaking priveleges are revoked for saying ME sucked.

[SSV Enterprise]

No. ME2 adds to the ME galaxy and expands it. I couldn't imagine the ME galaxy now without ME2. I'm sure ME3 will be the same. Don't be so quick to judge it.

And as for ME1 being all about equality of species? Tell that to Councilor "Shepard would go to any lengths to save a human colony" Velarn.

[Hallusinaatti]

I disagree with you. But I understand you. All game forums I've been to, I've seen the same argument.
"I loved [Original] and don't get me wrong, [Sequel] is good in its own right but it's too flashy FPS with limited RPG elements... It should not be named [Sequel] but [Another Game]" and so on.

And I admit, I wrote that before I read your whole post. But there it was, ME2 is allegedly too much a flashy FPS than an RPG but argument is justified with some sort of doublethink (ME2 is good, BUT..). I've heard the same story over and over again. But I love statistics and by that I believe they are reasonable arguments being so common, and there is no truth in opinion.

But to the point: IMO ME2 was a huge improvement over ME1. I liked its dialogue, for one, more. It was much more colorful and Shepard was no longer 100% official in everything. And as a more minor aspect ME2 works much better on older computers.

On things I found better in ME1, first comes to mind the larger amount of skills and talent points. I admit I like seeing a long row of blue dots marking my experience in skill "X", rather than the four I have in ME2.
Secondly, there was much more mystery in ME1. More silent planets with dark pasts (Ilos was my favorite), a feeling that you are alone on a sinking boat, and no clue what you're up against. Virmire was also a fantastic drama bomb.

That is all.

[ZJR7621]

Hallusinaatti wrote...

I disagree with you. But I understand you. All game forums I've been to, I've seen the same argument.
"I loved [Original] and don't get me wrong, [Sequel] is good in its own right but it's too flashy FPS with limited RPG elements... It should not be named [Sequel] but [Another Game]" and so on.

And I admit, I wrote that before I read your whole post. But there it was, ME2 is allegedly too much a flashy FPS than an RPG but argument is justified with some sort of doublethink (ME2 is good, BUT..). I've heard the same story over and over again. But I love statistics and by that I believe they are reasonable arguments being so common, and there is no truth in opinion.

But to the point: IMO ME2 was a huge improvement over ME1. I liked its dialogue, for one, more. It was much more colorful and Shepard was no longer 100% official in everything. And as a more minor aspect ME2 works much better on older computers.

On things I found better in ME1, first comes to mind the larger amount of skills and talent points. I admit I like seeing a long row of blue dots marking my experience in skill "X", rather than the four I have in ME2.
Secondly, there was much more mystery in ME1. More silent planets with dark pasts (Ilos was my favorite), a feeling that you are alone on a sinking boat, and no clue what you're up against. Virmire was also a fantastic drama bomb.
I agree with both you and the OP.  I think anytime you change the recipe on something tons of people love you're going to get a few grunts and groans.  I LOVED ME1 but I also enjoyed ME2, however my worry lies on ME3, I think they're going to try and hollywood it up.  And make Shepard this unstoppable force along the lines of Masterchief.  Which he is not, he's supposed to be a badass but still human and vulnerable to death and bullets.

That is all.

[TomY90]

I do feel that ME2 was much stronger than ME1 as both a game and story wise because ME1 was just about the main story and having too many sub stories going on which were so minor they were pointless.

in ME2 they had the primary mission which too be fair it is challenging to build tons of story for that but the character side of things was brilliantly done to such an extent I feel I know the ME2 characters so much better than ME1 characters.

I understand why people dislike this but to me it helps add more realism to the characters in the mass effect universe which to me that is key to getting both the game and the characters under skin.

ME3 appears to be going down towards the ME2 style of being cinematic which to me that is best because such a style is brilliant at making you feel you are actually there rather than the ME1 confused style of story telling.