407 réponses à ce sujet

[Max Legend]

Even though ME2 had a better gameplay,ME1 was for me much more enjoyable.Sure,the gunning action was mediocre,but what made the game special was how the narative flowed,the atmosphere+so many memorable moments like Noveria,Virmire,Vigil.I also loved the rpg set that was unfortunately thrown out in ME2.

ME1 hands down.

[Rudy Lis]

suprhomre wrote...

I can imagine if you played ME2 and then go and play ME1 you might experience the bad gameplay. But, for those like me who played in the right order, ME1 is still a awesome game mostly due to it's story.

I played in reverse order in terms of "learning gameplay" (if we talk about action part).

[FosterBr717]

I get what your saying. When ME first came out, I was obssessed with the game. But after ME2 came out, I find myself really dreading playing ME1 again. It feels like work, not fun. The Mako is just a terrible gameplay mechanic, the combat is slow and boring, and the overall paceing of the game is just really slow. My last play through I made the mistake of exploring every resource on every planet (I was trying to get from leve 50 to 60 in one insantiy playthrough) and it was AWEFUL. I pretty much decided never to play it again (I already have all the achievments for the game). Thank God for Genesis. I recently lost all my save data for ME. I refuse to play ME3 until I have a save to import, and was really not looking forward to playing the 1st one again. Then I found Genesis, thank god.

[Forsythia]

ME1 is my favourite of the series, although I can clearly see how aged it is compared to ME2 and 3.

[Zaalbar]

ME1 was the best in the series in my opinion, I love ME2 and ME3 but it sometimes feels as if Bioware are trying to hard to create a Gears Of War shooter,
I still think they are great games but they just don't have that sense of exploration and classic sci fi feel of ME1.
ME1 I feels like I'm taking part in an epic sci fi movie.
ME2 & 3 feels more like a glorified shooting gallery with a decent story and great characters tact on.

[avatar2396]

i replayed me 1 a few months ago and i remember it being better than it was. The combat is pretty bad. The game is a lot shorter than i remember as well. I like the rpg aspect with power selection and more choices of armor and equipping squadmates. Conversations were extremely limited. Also the planet exploration was cool if that was your thing, the mako was good but controls werent great for it. The story is great and is really the only reason i played it 2x when it came out.

[Rudy Lis]

PresidentCowboy wrote...

Mako exploring the planets takes aeons.

Aeons? I thought they were in fact quite easy to travel. No rivers, no lakes, no forests, only obstacles are mountains (including ridges, of course) and given Mako grip, most of them are not impassable. But it wasn't necessary to play cliffhanger on most planets, with exception of 3, IIRC, which required certain amount of climbing and falling.

avatar2396 wrote...

i replayed me 1 a few months ago and i remember it being better than it was. The combat is pretty bad. The game is a lot shorter than i remember as well. I like the rpg aspect with power selection and more choices of armor and equipping squadmates. Conversations were extremely limited. Also the planet exploration was cool if that was your thing, the mako was good but controls werent great for it. The story is great and is really the only reason i played it 2x when it came out.

Well, I'm replaying ME1 now, helping my "CoD-adoring fan" buddy to earn Insanity award. All games have approximately same length - 25 hours if you don't skip everycutscene you can skip, and less, toward 20, if you do. ME3 longer because there are more cutscenes you cannot skip, I'm starting to hate those biks, dream sequence and events past Marauder Shields. ME2 takes about 30-25 hours, with all DLCs, but without scanning every possible planed dry of resources.

Modifié par Rudy Lis, 24 mars 2012 - 12:19 .

[Drake-Shepard]

blasphemy!

[Jestina]

zaalbar76 wrote...
ME2 & 3 feels more like a glorified shooting gallery with a decent story and great characters tact on.

That's pretty much what happened to the series. We had a great story in ME1, then it was more about the pew pew than the story in the following games.

[Kronner]

ME1 is easily the best story in the series. It has the best pacing and best atmosphere.

ME2 has far superior combat and more characters that are interesting.

ME3 further improved the combat (though made Insanity a joke ), but the endings are half-assed.

Hard to tell which game is the best. Each of them has something special.

[Calemyr]

Storywise, ME1 was great. Compelling and fascinating and well constructed. It is in many ways the vastly superior product. It was not, however, all that fun to play. The huge empty levels with bad controls and little to do, the infinitely reused set pieces. Heat wasn't a big deal for me either way, ME1 felt new partly because of the mechanic, but the heat sink mechanic in ME2/ME3, does add a level of immediacy and need for conservation you just didn't find in the first game.

ME2 was much more fun to play, and the N7 Mission setup made them flow better, because they each had their own design. You had more limited options, but those options were much better implemented.

ME3's gameplay is probably the best of the bunch. It's a lot of fun to play, though I won't be taking the Normandy to Thessia again as long as the ending remains the useless pile of "art" it currently is. I can't tell the Asari ambassador to go suck a lemon, but I can't tell people who deserve it more to do so either, so I'm not really out much ending the game there.

[MeanderingMind]

avatar2396 wrote...

i replayed me 1 a few months ago and i remember it being better than it was. The combat is pretty bad. The game is a lot shorter than i remember as well. I like the rpg aspect with power selection and more choices of armor and equipping squadmates. Conversations were extremely limited. Also the planet exploration was cool if that was your thing, the mako was good but controls werent great for it. The story is great and is really the only reason i played it 2x when it came out.

Which game are we talking about? Conversations in ME1 were really great and very far from limited (unlike ME3).

[Avolie]

I don't hate ME 1, it has a nice story and I like the characters. But gameplay was just terrible. In my opinion it is the weakest part of the Mass Effect trilogy (not only because of the gameplay).

[Calemyr]

No interrupts, for one. Those were a major leap forward in ME2.

[andomguy666uk]

having played them all, i'd say the order of best to worst goes ME2 - ME1 - ME3

I rate ME3 worse because of several reasons:

1 - lack of urgency - you don't have any reason not to take your time for any missions, which kinda goes against the idea of a galactic invasion - war is anything but a slow paced beast, especially on the scale in ME3

2. DLC character - being asked to pay to unlock Javik - who is already on the freaking disk - is just pure monetising, through and through.

3. Ending - the endings in no way represent the choices you've made during your time in the Mass Effect universe. For a game where we were promised everything we do would have some sort of effect, it felt like we might as well not have bothered.

4. Insanity - insanity difficulty is all about the challenge... well, where is it? I breezed through it, there was no challenge!

Modifié par andomguy666uk, 24 mars 2012 - 12:28 .

[Avolie]

Croak99 wrote...

avatar2396 wrote...

i replayed me 1 a few months ago and i remember it being better than it was. The combat is pretty bad. The game is a lot shorter than i remember as well. I like the rpg aspect with power selection and more choices of armor and equipping squadmates. Conversations were extremely limited. Also the planet exploration was cool if that was your thing, the mako was good but controls werent great for it. The story is great and is really the only reason i played it 2x when it came out.

Which game are we talking about? Conversations in ME1 were really great and very far from limited (unlike ME3).

I found conversations to be VERY limited too. Only about 4 "real" dialogues, no comments on missions (except ashley and kaidan but only on the 3 main missions). After beating 1/4 of the games, Garrus only said "I wanted to thank you commander", Tali "Do you need anything?" Wrex "Shepard".

I think it is mostly nostalgia, that makes people think ME 1 was much better - but it was clearly not.
I played ME 1+2 only 4 months ago for the first time, maybe that is because I'm more neutral.

[DJ CAVE SLAVE]

I admit, after playing ME2, finishing a ME playthrough can be chore-ish. I wouldn't say I hate it, but the gameplay is definitely outdated now.

[Tirigon]

andomguy666uk wrote...
4. Insanity - insanity difficulty is all about the challenge... well, where is it? I breezed through it, there was no challenge!

That I cant agree with, I found it more challening than in ME1 and 2.

[Train00]

I agree the ME1 Gameplay wasn't the best, but i still loved the game.

[MeanderingMind]

Avolie wrote...

Croak99 wrote...

avatar2396 wrote...

i replayed me 1 a few months ago and i remember it being better than it was. The combat is pretty bad. The game is a lot shorter than i remember as well. I like the rpg aspect with power selection and more choices of armor and equipping squadmates. Conversations were extremely limited. Also the planet exploration was cool if that was your thing, the mako was good but controls werent great for it. The story is great and is really the only reason i played it 2x when it came out.

Which game are we talking about? Conversations in ME1 were really great and very far from limited (unlike ME3).

I found conversations to be VERY limited too. Only about 4 "real" dialogues, no comments on missions (except ashley and kaidan but only on the 3 main missions). After beating 1/4 of the games, Garrus only said "I wanted to thank you commander", Tali "Do you need anything?" Wrex "Shepard".

I think it is mostly nostalgia, that makes people think ME 1 was much better - but it was clearly not.
I played ME 1+2 only 4 months ago for the first time, maybe that is because I'm more neutral.

As I said in my first post I'm 15 hours in in my current playthrough and really enjoying the side quests and conversations that goes along with them. To call them "extremely limited" is clearly wrong. Maybe certain aspects of some conversations are limited. Perhaps we are paying attention to different things depending on how we play?

Modifié par Croak99, 24 mars 2012 - 12:40 .

[Mastone]

ME1 has still got the best story of all of them, they got it right with that one, even the gameplay is something I can forgive I mean if you play ME3 in 4 years from now it will feel archaic to.
ME1 imo is the best of the series, it made me want to play ME2 which wasn't that awesome and even wanted to make me play ME3, after ME3 I wish they put the gameplay elements in 1 revise the graphics in there somewhat so I can play that again....

[andomguy666uk]

Tirigon wrote...
That I cant agree with, I found it more challening than in ME1 and 2.

Seriously? I didn't die once on my insanity run, not once. I bbarely broke a sweat, the Ai was just too easy to read and out-move to give me any kind of trouble.

[Rudy Lis]

andomguy666uk wrote...

4. Insanity - insanity difficulty is all about the challenge... well, where is it? I breezed through it, there was no challenge!

You getting more experienced.
But I think real challenge on Insanity is freaking spacebar. Killed my Shepard most.

Avolie wrote...

I found conversations to be VERY limited too. Only about 4 "real" dialogues, no comments on missions (except ashley and kaidan but only on the 3 main missions). After beating 1/4 of the games, Garrus only said "I wanted to thank you commander", Tali "Do you need anything?" Wrex "Shepard".

AFAIR, Garrus, Tali and Wrex stories (Dr. Splean Kidney Bladder, Geth porn and Krogan pajama) are tied to missions too.

Avolie wrote...

I think it is mostly nostalgia, that makes people think ME 1 was much better - but it was clearly not.
I played ME 1+2 only 4 months ago for the first time, maybe that is because I'm more neutral.

I think every game has as positive sides as well as negatives. And it depends on us, how we spread our preferences and how changes from game to game suits us.
ME3 too has great parts, good improvements, but mostly it felt like premature release with story written to "****-off" principle - "just to have story" (IIRC Doom has story too). So for me ME3 is sort of most expensive demo I ever played. Four times, dammit.

[Icinix]

ME1 is the best for interactive store telling and engagement with the player.

ME2 is the better paced of the three but my least favourite personally, if only because it seems to be the most unconnected in the trilogy.

..and ME3 decided it was better than the other two and its arrogance led to it shooting itself in the foot on a few occasions but still managed to be quite a good stand alone game..until the ending when it commited story telling suicide.

I still prefer ME1 combat in a lot of ways, Krogan were terrifying when they charged and watching them regen was nightmarish stuff, the exploration etc - it was a slower paced game designed to give you the sense of the galactic wonder missing in games for a while. It achieved that in truck loads.