159 réponses à ce sujet

[TMA LIVE]

I heard from a bunch of people that ME2 is still the better game, and the "Empire" of the series. It had better individual stories. You were more closer to the characters because of the loyalty missions. It had more hub worlds. The combat was harder. And the Suicide Mission actually was different, depending on your actions.

Me personally, prefer ME3, because the story is more focused and emotional, and there was more variety with the enemies.

But what do you guys think?

Modifié par TMA LIVE, 31 mars 2012 - 06:54 .

[Gemini1179]

Let's not all look at ME2 with rose-coloured glasses because ME3 falls flat on its face. ME2 had a number of problems that FORTUNATELY weren't overshadowed by a horribly nonsensical ending. Also, the overall gameplay of ME2 was better than 1 so it had that going for it.

Let's not forget, however:

- Thermal Clips- Just how did Shepard know her gun needed one after she woke up?
- "Mission Complete" screens.
- The Upgrade system
- The Cerberus railroading.
- Tali recognizing Shepard immediately even though she may be wearing a helmet
- Horizon
- The Barney Fife CSI guys who never found evidence of the GIANT COLLECTOR SHIP blasting off from a colony?
- Jacob (just kidding, Jacob was alright. Too bad femShep can't say hello without sounding like a sexual predator. I still know next to nothing about the man)

There is a bunch more, but the point is that overall, none of it really overshadowed the game as a whole like the ending of ME3 does. And that's not the only real issue with that game either.

[The Harmonizer]

Except for shooting mechanics and music, Mass Effect 1 by far was the best game in the series. The story in the first game far exceeds that of the other 2, simply because it's well-written and most importantly well executed.

[JasonPogo]

Yeah ME1 hands down the best. But I would say I injoyed ME2 more then ME3. So there you have it...

[Gemini1179]

The Harmonizer wrote...

Except for shooting mechanics and music, Mass Effect 1 by far was the best game in the series. The story in the first game far exceeds that of the other 2, simply because it's well-written and most importantly well executed.

This.

[CheeseEnchilada]

ME2 is my favorite of the three, as I play mainly for the characters. All of my favorites were introduced in that game, I loved each and every one of the loyalty missions, and the suicide mission is still amazing even after I've played through it a dozen times. It was also the one where I felt the most control over my Shepard; even though s/he's a brick most of the time, I thought they struck a nice balance with the dialog and choices, and I was able to really define my Shepards. That was lacking in the third game with the auto-dialog and emotion, and the missing neutral option.

There are things wrong with it, like the P/R system and anemic main storyline, but Mordin and Legion and Thane are worth it, and make me enjoy it far better than ME3. Even without the endings, I don't get the same enjoyment out of playing it as I do the second game.

[Talogrungi]

Hmm, kind of a tricky one.

There are a crapton of things that I liked/disliked about each title, but I'd have to say that the fluidity of the combat (which is a very large part of the game experience imo) in ME3 puts it ahead of the other two, even despite the ending.

[Silpheed58]

The atmosphere is more popular, portrays you as the indestructible, unstoppable hero, death machine to all things evil.

[Aaleel]

I actually prefer the first game, had the best written, best paced story of all the games. Saren was the best written antagonist.

If I had to chose I would probably put ME3 in second place out of the trilogy good ending or not. I thought the story was poorly paced, and the Collectors/Harbinger storyline just got lost and became an afterthought.

[ahandsomeshark]

Gemini1179 wrote...

Let's not all look at ME2 with rose-coloured glasses because ME3 falls flat on its face. ME2 had a number of problems that FORTUNATELY weren't overshadowed by a horribly nonsensical ending. Also, the overall gameplay of ME2 was better than 1 so it had that going for it.

Let's not forget, however:

- Thermal Clips- Just how did Shepard know her gun needed one after she woke up?
- "Mission Complete" screens.
- The Upgrade system
- The Cerberus railroading.
- Tali recognizing Shepard immediately even though she may be wearing a helmet
- Horizon
- The Barney Fife CSI guys who never found evidence of the GIANT COLLECTOR SHIP blasting off from a colony?
- Jacob (just kidding, Jacob was alright. Too bad femShep can't say hello without sounding like a sexual predator. I still know next to nothing about the man)

There is a bunch more, but the point is that overall, none of it really overshadowed the game as a whole like the ending of ME3 does. And that's not the only real issue with that game either.

I thought Miranda told Shepard he needed thermal clips?

[ahandsomeshark]

I like the fluid combat in ME3 but frankly I don't buy bioware games for combat. ME2 had more exploration, and more characters, more interaction with the game more things to see and discover and more variance in the side missions. That's why it's better for me. Plus the Suicide Mission.

For me there's just no real replay value in ME3 besides the combat, and frankly if I I get a yearning for combat I can go buy Gears of War 3 or RDR for like 20-30 bucks used from gamestop.

Modifié par ahandsomeshark, 31 mars 2012 - 07:10 .

[krukow]

Gemini1179 wrote...

- Thermal Clips- Just how did Shepard know her gun needed one after she woke up?
...
- Horizon
.

To be fair, Miranda tells you to get thermal clips.  And what was wrong with Horizon?

[EAadembroski]

ME1 was the best written, but the combat was poor. I also believe there was a simplicity in design... a grounded, believable style to ME1 that ME2 and ME3 failed to capture.

ME2 was the best characterized, and had the best replayability. However, the level design was awful and didn't take advantage of improved combat.

ME3 had the best combat and (imho) best equipment acquisition and upgrade system. The ending is horrible and the ROLE playing (character dialogue choices) being rolled SO far back was REALLY disappointing. In fact, the more I move past the ending bugging me, I'm starting to come back to those dialogues being ripped out. Really, really disappointing.

Modifié par EAadembroski, 31 mars 2012 - 07:17 .

[EAadembroski]

krukow wrote...

Gemini1179 wrote...

- Thermal Clips- Just how did Shepard know her gun needed one after she woke up?
...
- Horizon
.

To be fair, Miranda tells you to get thermal clips.  And what was wrong with Horizon?

Miranda says to get the pistol, and Shepard replies that it doesn't have a clip. He knew before she ever mentioned it.

[Zix13]

EAadembroski wrote...

ME1 was the best written, but the combat was poor. I also believe there was a simplicity in design... a grounded, believable style to ME1 that ME2 and ME3 failed to capture.

ME2 was the best characterized, and had the best replayability. However, the level design was awful and didn't take advantage of improved combat.

ME3 had the best combat and (imho) best equipment acquisition and upgrade system. The ending is horrible and the ROLE playing (character dialogue choices) being rolled SO far back was REALLY disappointing. In fact, the more I move past the ending bugging me, I'm starting to come back to those dialogues being ripped out. Really, really disappointing.

Pretty much this. Although I disagree to some degree with the me3 description. IMO, ME3 was fine in terms of story and character up until the ending, which destroyed the saga. Sure I wouldn't have minded more conversations with crew mates on the normandy, but the interaction between characters was nice to see.

[Humakt83]

Mass Effect 1 is a little like Baldur's Gate 1: it is where you explore your surroundings and the whole galaxy is fresh and new.

Mass Effect 2 is a little like Baldur's Gate 2, where characters and quests play a lot bigger role. There is still a lot to explore but there are also familiar faces and places.

Modifié par Humakt83, 31 mars 2012 - 07:22 .

[EnerPrime]

Honestly, even discounting ME3's ending, I prefer ME2 more.

The main difference is in the choices and dialog in 2. In 3 you lose a lot of the ability to define your Shepard. I just got lucky my Shepard was pretty close to the Paragon ME3 Shepard, except for the whole caring for Earth in any way beyond how he cares for any other inhabited planet. (he went to Earth for training and his trial. That's it.) If your Shepard doesn't match the the suddenly much narrower range of options in 3, you are SOL. And most of the time the dialog choices weren't all that different. Renegade dialoge seemed to boil down to being the same as Paragon, but being angry and/or an **** about the issue.

While I will admit that ME3's combat system is better, that's merely a consequence of being the newer game. And quite frankly any combat improvments are not improved enough to make up for the earlier mentioned deficincies when comparing the two games. 

And when ending are factored in, it becomes no contest. ME2 has an awesome storming the stronghold type ending where your actions over the game have a large and noticable effect on the success of your attack. The ending in this game can range from success at the cost of every member of the Normady crew except for Joker and EDI to the No One Gets Left Behind-earning ending with the crew sucessfully rescued. In ME3 your choices have minimal effect at best with extremely little variance in the ending sequence. Heck, after the TIM confronattion, It feels as if it starts being written by an entrely different team.

So, while it isn't obviously better in every category, ME2 definitly is overall a stronger, more satisfying experience to me.

[ahandsomeshark]

EAadembroski wrote...

ME1 was the best written, but the combat was poor. I also believe there was a simplicity in design... a grounded, believable style to ME1 that ME2 and ME3 failed to capture.

ME2 was the best characterized, and had the best replayability. However, the level design was awful and didn't take advantage of improved combat.

ME3 had the best combat and (imho) best equipment acquisition and upgrade system. The ending is horrible and the ROLE playing (character dialogue choices) being rolled SO far back was REALLY disappointing. In fact, the more I move past the ending bugging me, I'm starting to come back to those dialogues being ripped out. Really, really disappointing.

agreed with this though I don't mind the level design in ME2. On the PS3 it is obnoxiously bright though, that's my only complaint. I played it on my 360 back in 2010 and bought it again this december for my PS3 (because I got the game, LoTSB, Kasumi and Zaeed, plus the comic for 19 bucks) and I've played through it 4 full times since then without getting tired of it. Where as with ME3 I've only gotten halfway through a second play through, the lack of dialogue and exploration really kills it's replayability for me. I feel like once you know how the story plays out you're either in combat or spending most of your time just watching things happen rather than actually interacting.

Modifié par ahandsomeshark, 31 mars 2012 - 07:26 .

[Jamie9]

Yeah, Mass Effect 2 is my favourite. Despite having the most squad members, 13, I felt they were the most characterized in this game. The dossier/loyalty mission dynamic was awesome and almost all of them had major variations in the story depending on what you chose.

The Collectors were a very menacing threat, and Harbinger taking a personal interest in Shepard after defeating Sovereign was awesome. Made me feel quite scared at times that I'd incurred the full wrath of the Reapers.

Hammerhead missions were much more fun than the Mako IMO.

The Suicide Mission is still my favourite 'level' of any video game of all time. The music was top-notch all the way through. Recruiting and completing every character's missions actually paid off, resulting in a variety of gut-wrenching deaths if you did not complete them.

Awesome, awesome game was ME2.

[Khevan77]

ME2 was a great game despite it's flaws. The gameplay was good, and individual character stories were often very emotionally engaging, and taken seperately, made for some great story telling. However, they lacked a singular narrative focus, or to be more accurate, the central narrative wasn't strong enough to pull all of the disparate character stories along with it in a successful manner. This left ME2 feeling disjointed, a series of short stories instead of a cohesive whole. This is my opinion, by the way, and I know many people feel differently. I respect their opinion just as much as I respectfully disagree.

ME3 had it's own share of flaws before the ending. The dialogue system was more streamlined, with fewer options to truly define our Shepard in comparison to the previous games. There was a large amount of auto-dialogue, and there was a smaller amount of in-depth conversations with crew compared to ME1 and ME2. Biotic powers went a little back overboard to the OP side of things, with too many biotic explosion combinations, that left some of the biotic powers redundant. There are perhaps a few more examples, but that's enough for this post.

Even with the issues I pointed out, ME3 feels like a more cohesive game overall. The feel of the game was better, the flow of the story worked better, the ambient dialogue, the way the Citadel grew more crowded and desperate as the game progressed...the story arcs and their EPIC conclusions...

I mean, seriously, watching Mordin cure the genophage was perhaps the most emotionally engaging moment in all of entertainment history for me. The way he was singing as the explosions happened around him, his smile as the cure was released successfully...the best line in the game was "I MADE A MISTAKE!!!" Character growth and development? Yes please, and more of it!

If we ignore the last 10 minutes of the game, Mass Effect 3 is easily the best game I've ever played. Hands down, full stop, that's it, it's over. Best game ever. THIS is why I'm so upset over the ending, because it ruined that. This isn't an ending discussion thread so I'll leave that alone, but for the topic: ME2 was a great game, but flawed. ME3 is flawed, but it's so epic that the flaws disappear, except the ending.

ME3>ME1>ME2 (but ME2 is still in my top 5-10 games of all time)

[Flyprdu]

Let's not forget the plot twist that Harbinger was actually a Reaper... and not the collector general.

Man that ending was 7 ways epic.

[ahandsomeshark]

basically IMO ME3's issues come from trying to be everything for everyone. Like I can deal with games like GTA and RDR that have long cut scenes where control is taken away from you and auto dialogue and linear stories because you spend the rest of the game literally running around doing whatever the hell you want, but in an RPG when you insert those kind of things you're suddenly taking away what makes an rpg an rpg, and you don't have the same sandbox type play to make up for it. I'd take less smooth combat and fewer big cut scenes for more dialogue and more exploration.

[jstme]

I also think that ME2 was the best of the three.
IMO:
ME3 is better in few technical aspects but is worse in other ones. More enemies is good but it is counterbalanced by less squadmates. And the story in ME2 makes sense throughout the game.
ME1 had richest universe and best story among the three, but was the most buggy one and i hated land exploration.

[ENorman94]

Me2 was the best imho.

[Zu Long]

For the 99% of ME3 that was awesome, it was the better game. ME2 takes the cake with ease as long as the ending remains though.