290 réponses à ce sujet

[hawat333]

In my opinion, ME2 was a better game. In terms of gunplay (which is at least two thirds of the actual gameplay). It also looked better.
ME3 will be epic, no question about that, it'll top ME2 in basically every manner.

But yeah, to me, ME1 is the best experience. Simple: It's fresh, it was new, it was breathtaking, it was something we didn't expect, it got us to be stunned. That's something that you simply cannot top. It's like KotOR. Something so fresh, so new, so everything that you simply cannot find competition, even in more advanced games.
Yeah, I've just said that KotOR cannot be topped even by the Mass Effect games. Because I feel it that way every time I launch KotOR. And in the end of the day, that's what really matters.

[milena87]

hawat333 wrote...

In my opinion, ME2 was a better game. In terms of gunplay (which is at least two thirds of the actual gameplay). It also looked better.
ME3 will be epic, no question about that, it'll top ME2 in basically every manner.

But yeah, to me, ME1 is the best experience. Simple: It's fresh, it was new, it was breathtaking, it was something we didn't expect, it got us to be stunned. That's something that you simply cannot top. It's like KotOR. Something so fresh, so new, so everything that you simply cannot find competition, even in more advanced games.
Yeah, I've just said that KotOR cannot be topped even by the Mass Effect games. Because I feel it that way every time I launch KotOR. And in the end of the day, that's what really matters.

Agreed

Though I prefer Mass Effect to KotOR... I think

[from10to0]

True words,nothing more fun,to take down Colossus on foot from the hill with uber sniper rifle.
Me2 is popamole and boring. Hide/shoot/hide/shoot/. Me1 give you field to improvisation,Me2 feels more tained and every combat feels the same and enemy encounters are no fun when you're snipy.
Also i miss Me1 planet visuals - Combined with galaxy map music it it feels very moody and transcending.

[Texhnolyze101]

SomeKindaEnigma wrote...

101ezylonhxeT wrote...

SomeKindaEnigma wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Why can't people on BSN just accept that some people prefer ME1 and some people prefer ME2?

Won't matter when ME3 comes out and is better than both 

Yet il still play ME1 more than both

You don't know that yet 

After what i just found out as far as im concerned the ME franchise died with ME1.

[Quarters Alpha]

I already like ME2 better than ME1, so...yeah. Think that ship has already sailed.

[Il Divo]

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.

Excluding #1, you pretty much just listed all the things I hate about Mass Effect 1.

[Il Divo]

AlanC9 wrote...

shadowkiller74 wrote...

ME2 had a story? And here I thought I spent most of the game having to do things that had absolutely nothing to do with the main quest.

ME2 had a story in the same way a season of an episodic TV drama like, say, Buffy the Vampire Slayer has a story. Some episodes are about that season's Big Bad, some are about his minions, some are about the Scoobies, some are just the Slayer doing Slayer things.

I like that approach fine. Worked in BG2, works now.

Indeed. The way I typically describe it is Mass Effect 1 was a movie, Mass Effect 2 was a TV series. Each succeeded at what it was trying to accomplish, in my opinion.

[adamashepard]

101ezylonhxeT wrote...

^ I take offense to that mainly because i Play ME1 more than i do ME2 and ME2 bores me honestly and ME3 will bore me eventually to unlike ME1 which IMHO is better than ME2 and ME3.

^this statement makes no sense since ME3 isn't out yet.

[Texhnolyze101]

adamashepard wrote...

101ezylonhxeT wrote...

^ I take offense to that mainly because i Play ME1 more than i do ME2 and ME2 bores me honestly and ME3 will bore me eventually to unlike ME1 which IMHO is better than ME2 and ME3.

^this statement makes no sense since ME3 isn't out yet.

I know all i need to know about ME3 and it will be a one time play though for me.

[adamashepard]

Il Divo wrote...

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.

Excluding #1, you pretty much just listed all the things I hate about Mass Effect 1.

^this

[mechstone]

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.

1. While the lore is an excellent part of 1 a lot of it is only mentionedin passing whereas in 2 you actually see places like Tuchanka and the flotilla. Me1 is better for lore but 2 expands on it

2. That inventory system is horrible. It isn't a choice but rather a series of increasing numbers wgere as in 2 there is notable differences in weapons. Rate of fire, damage and accuracy are all different in the small but notable weapon choices.

3. The level design for exploration was awful and made the mako seem much crappier than it actually was.

4. The difficulty curve is broken in me1. It starts really hard and becomes easier until around level 20 when difficulty ceases to exist and you are all but a god. Also on higher difficulties it shouldn't be way easier to kill a geth armature then every  random merc

Me1 had a much better paced main plot and had the advantage of everything being new. Me2 had the burdon of being a bridge between 1 and 3 since they decided to keep the main plot away until the third game. Me2 does show more of the galaxy.
ME was always more of a shooter with rpg elements than a straight rpg but by moving more to shooter they removed the rpg element of your character becoming a god among mere mortals

[sunnydxmen]

me2 was better then me1 though this is just my opinion just like it is your opinion they have not top it.

[Cainne Chapel]

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.

1. Yes the lore was new and everything was shiny, First games are usually good for that as their setting the back drop.  ME2 DID expand on the lore and show more of the universe, so you really cant list that as a bonus for the first game, its really just setting the foundation for the whole series.

2.  The weapons and armor were really just reskins of each other and really had no discernible difference OTHER than the stats, which while some people like spreadsheets and the like, I felt ME2 did it MUCH better in that each weapon is actually mechanically different from each other and more prone to people using what they prefer over what has the better stats.  (I'm a vindicator/Widow man myself, Im also partial to the eviscerator shot gun).

3. Yes ME1 DID have more of a sand box feel and while the worlds were pretty repetitive except for different hills/impassabile terrain, they were all basically just big boxes. and while it DID give the illusion of freedom, ME has never been a space exploration franchise... well as far as shepard is concerned so I'm not really missing the big empty planets as much as some.  I actually prefer tighter side missions with more of a narrative than casually roaming some random planet for no other reason than I can.

4. Combat in ME2 was MUCH MUCH better.  Sure its your standard Cover shooter fare with powers but I found it infinitely more enjoyable than ME1 which as others have stated after a certain level and mod... you can fire infinitely and just steamroll through enemies which, while some like God mode, Isn't really challenging. In fact I can remember in one play through I never even used cover... I just waded right into the middle of the fire fight and killed everything with barely a scratch, Fun? Yes, for a while, but then its just tedious after that.  and I wasn't even playing on casual

So no I dont think either game was the most comprehensive and compelling RPG. But as for me, they were very fun games that i love immensely.  As an aside, MAss effect was never a comprehensive RPG to begin with... its ALWAYS been a RPG/Shooter Hybrid

[av196vad]

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.

Good for you, now let me explain my opinion on why ME1 was worse than ME2.

1. Virgin lore: I agree.

2. Mods and gear: cumbersome and too many pointless items.

3. Pointless exploring without any real reward. Plus all the worlds looked very similar.

4. Combat felt awkward. It felt like an RPG attempting to be a third-person shooter.

5. ME2 felt like a cleaner and more refined experience to me. Plus we get to romance Tali!  

Modifié par av196vad, 28 février 2012 - 04:32 .

[BatmanPWNS]

E-Type XR wrote...

They already have.

It was called ME2.

I was just about to write this.

Anyway I think horrible gameplay (ME1) is easily topable.

[Daywalker315]

101ezylonhxeT wrote...

SomeKindaEnigma wrote...

101ezylonhxeT wrote...

SomeKindaEnigma wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Why can't people on BSN just accept that some people prefer ME1 and some people prefer ME2?

Won't matter when ME3 comes out and is better than both 

Yet il still play ME1 more than both

You don't know that yet 

After what i just found out as far as im concerned the ME franchise died with ME1.

Yeah I saw you posting in the "rumored ending" thread as well. Thanks for not posting a bunch of spoilers in here too like everybody is over there. Sorry the ending isn't like you wanted (which I assume was cheery, joyful, everybody lives and goes to get ice cream?).

[Giantdeathrobot]

1. Horribly, and I mean horribly designed interface. Seriously, on consoles it's an example on what not to do. Thank the Lord I play on PC.

2. Hilariously clunky and unbalanced combat. After level 20, my Adept entered a room, cast Singlularity, then spent the last few minutes shooting flying guys.

3. Yeah, the mako was cool. The mako maps most definitely were not. And those cheap-ass Thresher Maws...

4. 4 weapons and 6-7 armors for the entire damn game. No, reskins and stat-ups are not considered new items, sorry. Oh, right, 5 weapons with Geth Assault Rifles. Wee. ME3 has more weapon variety merely in the Assault Rifle category, without mentioning SMGs, Shotguns, Pistols, Sniper Rifles, and the dozen Heavy Weapons. Also far more armor than Human, Quarians, Turian and Krogan.

5. Horrible inventory system. You know, when you dread to enter the inventory because you KNOW you will be showered with absolutely useless crap that you have to tediously Omni-Gel.

6. Story isin't what it's cracked up to be. Convincing the Citadel Council of the guilt of their top Spectre because of an easily falsified audio recording? lulz. Also you don,t know what ME3's story actually is, so useless point anyhow.

7. Humanoid enemies all using Immunity. Requiring you to shoot at them endlessly for the better part of a minute. ****. That.

[SNascimento]

ME2 is very superior to ME1, so this thread doesn't make sense.

[AlanC9]

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

6. Story isin't what it's cracked up to be. Convincing the Citadel Council of the guilt of their top Spectre because of an easily falsified audio recording? lulz. 

Especially since that recording mentions the Reapers.

[wrdnshprd]

the problem with mass effect 2 is that its not really an rpg from a gameplay perspective..

very little in the way of gear
hardly any stat customization (what little ME2 had was laughable)
the skill system was simplified and there was very little consequence to picking skills

also, the main story was practically non-existent IMO.. i understand this is a subjective opinion, but you are never going to convince me that the story in ME2 was compelling.. cause it just wasnt IMO. i will grant you that some of the crew members had some decent backstory though.. and layer of the shadowbroker was extremely well done.. but when a 2 hour DLC pack is the best part of ME2, there is something wrong.

also, there were very little impact on the choices that we made.. yes, there was one or two choices that had some impact (the one at the end for example), but overall not really.

and finally, the sniper rifle was god mode on default difficulty. like it made combat a yawn fest..

was ME1 perfect? absolutely not. there were some graphic glitches and the inventory system WAS a bit overdone (ME2 just went in the opposite direction). but at least it had some resemblance of an rpg (gameplay wise), there was more than a couple of compelling choices in the story, and the overall story arc was phenomenal.

as for ME3. well, the fact that we arent going to be able to customize the stats of our squad's armor, and there are no mods for shepard's armor, already put it at a disadvantage when comparing to ME1.. im not looking for an omni-gel inventory system again.. but can we at least get some modification slots? if someone could link me proof that this is incorrect, i would GLADLY take being proven wrong.

edit:  one area i will also agree on that ME1 fell short in was exploration.. for the most part it was pointless, as were the mining and material missions.

just my 2 cents.

Modifié par wrdnshprd, 28 février 2012 - 05:24 .

[HTTP 404]

ah yes.... sweet lovely virgin lore.

[double02]

I agree with ME2 not topping ME1, but I'll reserve judgement until I've actually played the 3rd game in its entirety. I have high hopes for ME3.

[AlanC9]

wrdnshprd wrote...

the problem with mass effect 2 is that its not really an rpg from a gameplay perspective..

very little in the way of gear
hardly any stat customization (what little ME2 had was laughable)
the skill system was simplified and there was very little consequence to picking skills

Lots of gear = RPG? Ick.

and finally, the sniper rifle was god mode on default difficulty. like it made combat a yawn fest..

Differs from ME1... how? Oh, right... on defalt difficulty all combat in ME1 was a yawn fest

[Matt VT Schlo]

Lets all be honest: ME2's story consisted of 25 hours of somewhat pointless crew recrutiing, and 3 hours of MAIN STORY. How can anyone say ME2 had the 'superior' story? Just delusional