290 réponses à ce sujet

[RoboticWater]

N7Infernox wrote...

Sorry; by varied environments, I meant "combat environments that didn't always involve traveling in a relatively straight line, over generic cover". And maybe it just seems to me that there's more dialogue in the first game b/c I haven't played it as much as the second. In ME2, I know almost all of the points where characters chip in on missions-- usually with responses that have little deviation between different characters. Also, unless you're romancing a character, dialogues with characters kind of cut off after their loyalty missions (only exception I can think of is Mordin, i think). In ME1, characters would leave personal quips about the surroundings you were in, whenever prompted (aside from combat). Individuals would also seem to have more to say on the Normandy after/ in between missions (i.e. Wrex). So maybe there was more cumulative and cinematic dialogue in ME2, but ME1 made me feel like individual characters were more fleshed out. Just my 2cents

ME 1's levels may seem to be less linear but each planet was more like a hub world with only one mission on it. Sure, you can drive around aimlessly doing nothing but if you want to get an actual mission done you only have that same linear outpost to go to.

You can say it's less linear but the only non-linear part about ME1's missions were the fact that you could drive to them from any direction. But even that is made linear by the fact that the mountains usually force you to take a straight rout from the drop zone to the objective or pointless collection items.

And both games had perfect examples of generic cover, you just rarely saw any in ME1 because the cover mechanic was just tacked on.

Modifié par BlahDog, 29 février 2012 - 01:47 .

[Kakita Tatsumaru]

I personally prefered ME1 too ME2 too, back then squadmates were really part of the adventure (like they were in older games like Baldur's Gate 2).

[RoboticWater]

Kakita Tatsumaru wrote...

I personally prefered ME1 too ME2 too, back then squadmates were really part of the adventure (like they were in older games like Baldur's Gate 2).

How were they any different in ME2?

Modifié par BlahDog, 29 février 2012 - 01:54 .

[Tryphus]

Holy wow this thread haha, personally, I think both games so far have their awesome parts, just as EVERYONE here has noted...so it's nice to play through me1 because of the different feel of that game, and also nice to play through me2 because of the new take...it's what makes this series(to me) the best, I eagerly await both starting a new character and getting that character to me2.

It's certainly not a casual vs hardcore thing either, that's a ridiculous notion, some CoD and whatnot players I know of are pretty overly-hardcore...it's really just a matter of preference, and being a gamer who likes both RPGs, and (select)shooters - not to mention Racing, Fighting, etc, etc, it's nice to find a series that blends some together in varying degrees and ways.

So while me1 may have started focused more in a particular area, it didn't need to be that way throughout the series, and me3 is going to be awesome just for the fact that it's more of a marriage of the two - and a galactic resolution. So I'm verrryy excited to play through 1 AND 2 again to get straight into 3, and then do it all over again, and again...

[didymos1120]

N7Infernox wrote...
In ME1, characters would leave personal quips about the surroundings you were in, whenever prompted (aside from combat).

If you add up the various comments during convos with NPCs on various worlds, while moving through combat areas , and the points of interest in each hub, the ME2 squadmates still have significantly more to say than the ME1 crew does.  Also, those "personal quips" were:

a. actually very limited lists that would repeat endlessly.
b. often very generic "Wow, sure is cold here" type stuff. 

There was some good material in there, but not nearly enough, and it would have been better to just have them say it automatically at trigger points (something they also did in ME1 from time to time, and to better effect I thought).

Individuals would also seem to have more to say on the Normandy after/ in between missions (i.e. Wrex). So maybe there was more cumulative and cinematic dialogue in ME2, but ME1 made me feel like individual characters were more fleshed out. Just my 2cents

Yes, that was nice, but the fact remains that in terms of number of lines, ME2's group still has a lot more dialogue onboard the Normandy.  The exceptions would be Tali and Garrus, who are actually about even with their ME1 line counts.

Modifié par didymos1120, 29 février 2012 - 02:09 .

[SNascimento]

ME2 has: higher metacritic score, higher user metacritic score, it was the game of the year 2010 while ME won a couple awards and AIAS winner (which is a award choosen by game developers).
.
There is just nothing to argue about.

[tez19]

SNascimento wrote...

ME2 has: higher metacritic score, higher user metacritic score, it was the game of the year 2010 while ME won a couple awards and AIAS winner (which is a award choosen by game developers).
.
There is just nothing to argue about.

LOL, keep doing what the mainstream tell you to do son. Heaven forbid you think for yourself you sheep.

Modifié par tez19, 29 février 2012 - 02:16 .

[Gnarlesee]

Ryanianmc wrote...

 Hello my fellow mass effect fans.
I decided to provide a compresive analysis as to why I think it would be impossiable to top ME1. 

Number 1.

Virgin lore and epic background to the mass effect universe. (including first contact war)

Number 2.

Complete ability to gear you and your squad mates to min/max with armor/weapon mods and armor / weapons

Number 3.

More of a sand-box experience - Roaming around on charted worlds with the mako connected you with you galaxy in a more tangible way. (yes, somewhat annoying at times)

Number 4.

Dynamic Combat Freedom - IE: Attack that that pack of geth colossus's on foot instead of with mako (or foot attack that thresher maw)

These are the main reason's why I feel ME2 is behind ME1.  Sure ME2 is a great game, with clear advantages over ME1.
However I don't feel they make ME2 and better game.  From what I've seen so far it looks like ME3 is going to be a clone of ME2.   I have no dought I will spend many of hours with it.  

In the end however, I maintain when all the dust has settled, ME1 will remain the most comprehensive and complete rpg experience of the entire mass effect series.  Thank you for reading.

True.

If ME1 had ME3´s combat system and graphics it would win everything, simply because the worlds feels like a real world, and the lore is unbeatable.  ME2 had very poor lore compared. 
Alone the fact being able to run around the big citadel was wicked nice. I was dissapointed when i saw what little you could actually walk around doing in ME2.

[didymos1120]

tez19 wrote...

SNascimento wrote...

ME2 has: higher metacritic score, higher user metacritic score, it was the game of the year 2010 while ME won a couple awards and AIAS winner (which is a award choosen by game developers).
.
There is just nothing to argue about.

LOL, keep doing what the mainstream tell you to do son. Heaven forbid you think for yourself you sheep.

And of course "think for yourself" translates to "agrees with tez19".

[TFulls]

E-Type XR wrote...

They already have.

It was called ME2.

[didymos1120]

BlahDog wrote...

Kakita Tatsumaru wrote...

I personally prefered ME1 too ME2 too, back then squadmates were really part of the adventure (like they were in older games like Baldur's Gate 2).

How were they any different in ME2?

I know what he means: there was more dialogue from the squad about what happened on each of the story missions, and they also talked about one another more often. Plus there was more interaction with one another (elevator convos, debriefings, etc.)  In ME2, they basically just talked about themselves and usually only spoke about the overall "Stop the Collectors" mission in general terms.

[Volus Warlord]

TFulls wrote...

E-Type XR wrote...

They already have.

It was called ME2.

[SNascimento]

tez19 wrote...

SNascimento wrote...

ME2 has: higher metacritic score, higher user metacritic score, it was the game of the year 2010 while ME won a couple awards and AIAS winner (which is a award choosen by game developers).
.
There is just nothing to argue about.

LOL, keep doing what the mainstream tell you to do son. Heaven forbid you think for yourself you sheep.

.
good answer. 

[Kakita Tatsumaru]

didymos1120 wrote...
I know what he means: there was more dialogue from the squad about what happened on each of the story missions, and they also talked about one another more often. Plus there was more interaction with one another (elevator convos, debriefings, etc.)  In ME2, they basically just talked about themselves and usually only spoke about the overall "Stop the Collectors" mission in general terms.

That and they were basically as important during fights as Shepard, were in ME2 you barely notice they are trying to help you (sometimes).

[Mx_CN3]

didymos1120 wrote...

I know what he means: there was more dialogue from the squad about what happened on each of the story missions, and they also talked about one another more often. Plus there was more interaction with one another (elevator convos, debriefings, etc.)  In ME2, they basically just talked about themselves and usually only spoke about the overall "Stop the Collectors" mission in general terms.

As much as I prefer ME2 to ME1, this did bother me a little.  I also didn't really like how pretty much any "crew meeting," aside from the Suicide Mission, consisted solely of Miranda, Jacob, and EDI, and occasionally Mordin.  I remember being very (pleasantly) surprised during Samara's recruitment when you're talking to the detective and not one but both squadmates chip in (well, one chips in, and the other comments on that squadmate's comment).  The Sur'kesh part of the demo makes ME3 look very promising in that regard.

[AlanC9]

Mx_CN3 wrote...
 I also didn't really like how pretty much any "crew meeting," aside from the Suicide Mission, consisted solely of Miranda, Jacob, and EDI, and occasionally Mordin. 

Well, that's the problem with having  freedom in games like this. You have to script a whole bunch of superfluous lines if it's anyone but Miranda and Jacob present, and Mordin later on; the other squadmates may be unrecruited/deactivated/in stasis. Except Jack, but it's not likely she'd show up for a meeting.

ME1 had fewer NPCs and a higher ratio of guaranteed NPCs.

Modifié par AlanC9, 29 février 2012 - 03:27 .

[Draconis6666]

tez19 wrote...

Lol whoever thinks ME2 is better than ME1 is exactly the type of 'gamer' Bioware is catering towards now. These casual's wouldn't know a good game if it smacked their follow the crowd sheep mentality in the face.
They are not real gamer's, and they are all that is wrong with the gaming community.

If true gamer's include people like you, I think its time I find something else to classify myself as. Elitist snobs,(and trolls which is probably what this post is anyway) are even moreso whats wrong with the gaming community than casual gamers.

[Draconis6666]

AlanC9 wrote...

Mx_CN3 wrote...
 I also didn't really like how pretty much any "crew meeting," aside from the Suicide Mission, consisted solely of Miranda, Jacob, and EDI, and occasionally Mordin. 

Well, that's the problem with having  freedom in games like this. You have to script a whole bunch of superfluous lines if it's anyone but Miranda and Jacob present, and Mordin later on; the other squadmates may be unrecruited/deactivated/in stasis. Except Jack, but it's not likely she'd show up for a meeting.

ME1 had fewer NPCs and a higher ratio of guaranteed NPCs.

There are actualy the same number of forced squad members in ME 2 than ME 1 but a smaller ratio of the total number of squad members. You are forced to have Miranda, Jacob, Jack, Mordin and Garrus, the rest can be avoided if you want

In ME 1 you are forced to have Ashley, Kaiden, Liara, Tali and Either Wrex or Garus

so 5 forced squad members either way, difference is in ME 1 its a loss of 1 character if you dont recruit them all and in ME 2 its a loss of 5 (not including DLC chars like Kasumi and Zaeed) 

In relation to the original point though yes your probably right in why the dialogue goes that way, even in the first game in the briefings Garrus and Wrex both have almost no lines if they even have any (cant remember). Just like how in ME 2 all of the plot centric briefing and debriefing dialogue involves only Miranda, Jacob, Mordin, and Jack in a single instance after landing on the collector base.

[Randy1012]

Draconis6666 wrote...

There are actualy the same number of forced squad members in ME 2 than ME 1 but a smaller ratio of the total number of squad members. You are forced to have Miranda, Jacob, Jack, Mordin and Garrus, the rest can be avoided if you want

Just add Tali, Legion, and maybe Grunt, and that's really all you need anyway. The rest of the squad, while interesting in their own ways, don't really add much of value to the story.

Modifié par Randy1083, 29 février 2012 - 01:29 .

[Heather Cline]

I preferred 1. The first game though it had some problems was better by far. The power cool down was better in ME2. However ME2 had issues like putting FemShep on a male rig/skeletal structure. ME2 you could not mod your weapons the way you could in ME1. Exploration of a planet was severely gimped. ME1 had the better story and the characters were fleshed out just fine. ME2 failed in the story aspect because it was a mish-mash of short stories with no real connecting plot or overarching storyline.

The Mako could have been done better, the Hammerhead was failure out of the box. The streamlining to make the game more shooter and less rpg in ME2 was also fail in my book. The removal of being able to take off your helmet was also fail in ME2. Also fail was that they went with a breather mask for characters out in hostile environments. Hell they didn't even give characters proper body protection in hostile environments. LotSB is a great example of this. Sure the story in LotSB was top notch but it still failed in places like being in a hostile atmosphere that could rip your skin off and they still went with very little protection and a breather mask instead of full out body armor and helmet like they did with Shepard.

These are the reasons why I think ME2 failed more than ME1. I still play ME1 off and on. ME2 I did one final play through and that's it. I don't even look at ME2 all that much anymore. Because ME2 just sucks to me. To others who are fanboys of the shooter with no rpg elements it's fine. To those of us who liked the good story telling, the good rpg elements in ME1 and the overall game play, it's the best game in the series.

[Il Divo]

Draconis6666 wrote...

tez19 wrote...

Lol whoever thinks ME2 is better than ME1 is exactly the type of 'gamer' Bioware is catering towards now. These casual's wouldn't know a good game if it smacked their follow the crowd sheep mentality in the face.
They are not real gamer's, and they are all that is wrong with the gaming community.

If true gamer's include people like you, I think its time I find something else to classify myself as. Elitist snobs,(and trolls which is probably what this post is anyway) are even moreso whats wrong with the gaming community than casual gamers.

Pretty much this.

[nickkcin11]

Mass Effect 1 had one of the worst physics engines of all time. The Mako... and Biotics were wacky as hell. But it's story, universe, characterization, and tone (it felt so different than ME2) are unparalleled in any game I've played thus far. ME3 is going to hands down beat ME1 in combat, gameplay, and just playability. But I don't think it could ever top that feeling you got from playing through ME1 for the first time.

Mass Effect 1 was the first. As with most sequels, the budget is higher, the special effects better, and the action is greater but it still doesn't match the first one. It also depends what you think is core to Mass Effect. Gameplay, Decisions, or story? 

Modifié par nickkcin11, 01 mars 2012 - 06:19 .

[Aimi]

Draconis6666 wrote...

so 5 forced squad members either way, difference is in ME 1 its a loss of 1 character if you dont recruit them all and in ME 2 its a loss of 5 (not including DLC chars like Kasumi and Zaeed)

You can't actually avoid recruiting all of the post-Horizon squad. Individual squadmates are avoidable, not the whole lot.

[KreeCapt]

Unicronshepard wrote...

if they dont manage to fix the HORRID running animations on the demo that looked like they had a geth shotgun up their whatsits then i too will agree outright.

IGN got an early copy of the game and said the running animation in the game is better than the Demo

[didymos1120]

daqs wrote...

Draconis6666 wrote...

so 5 forced squad members either way, difference is in ME 1 its a loss of 1 character if you dont recruit them all and in ME 2 its a loss of 5 (not including DLC chars like Kasumi and Zaeed)

You can't actually avoid recruiting all of the post-Horizon squad. Individual squadmates are avoidable, not the whole lot.

You can with Kasumi and Zaeed, which together with Miranda, Jacob, Garrus, Mordin, Jack and Grunt gives the you the minimum required for the Suicide Mission.  Just keep doing N7 and Loyalty missions, and you'll eventually be able to trigger the Collector attack.  The only one that's pseudo-required is Legion, but you can either avoid activation, or go the "sell to Cerberus" route.

Modifié par didymos1120, 01 mars 2012 - 06:23 .