159 réponses à ce sujet

[clarkusdarkus]

well after playing all 3 and looking back my fave is mass effect 1, then 2, then if theres time 3... just felt so immersed in 1 when it came out.

[michael99887766]

I really liked ME2. Some people have complained that there wasn't enough interaction between the squad members, which is a fair point, but I think the team was still quite well done. I liked the number of characters (made the ship seem rather fuller than in the first game) and the way they were all involved in the final mission. The story diverged rather from the main arc, but it worked well in a self-contained sort of way.

Also, Lair of the Shadow Broker was awesome, especially that incredibly epic music.

[Ariaya]

Antiquated combat aside, ME1 was the best game in the series. The storytelling was excellent. I felt (and still feel) totally immersed when I play ME1.

ME2 told individual stories well but it lacked the grand scope of story that the first game had. The main story was not as involved as what we got in ME1.

The best way I can sum up my feelings about ME3 is to say that the parts are greater than the whole. There are parts of ME3 that are just brilliantly done. (Rannoch, genophage, Garrus-Shepard romance arc, Udina conspiracy) but then there are other parts that were sorely lacking. It's like reading a student essay where parts of it are PH.D. material but other portions lack the rudiments of good grammar and basic sentence structure. To be fair, most of ME3 is very, very good. But the parts that are not are rather glaringly so. If the game had only been polished, it really could have been an incredible experience. It still is--just not consistently throughout.

[ahandsomeshark]

Dear Bioware,

Basically if you could take ME2's planets+characters+side missions+the suicide mission gameplay+ ME1's story (and an optional side mission to set the mako on fire) and exploration+ ME3 combat and equipment system I would give you all my money.

all of it.

[Dartbeast54q]

ME2 is by far my favorite of the three. If it had more worlds to explore like in ME1, and could go back to pinnicle station then that would have been boss. Personally I didnt like the hammerhead, not that I was a mako fan either. ME2 just felt the most like DA-O to me, though I didnt like the really simplified leveling system ( only like 3/4 skills).

[michael99887766]

ahandsomeshark wrote...

Dear Bioware,

Basically if you could take ME2's planets+characters+side missions+the suicide mission gameplay+ ME1's story (and an optional side mission to set the mako on fire) and exploration+ ME3 combat and equipment system I would give you all my money.

all of it.

I agree.

[tjc2]

ME1 is the lower budget art film that gamers accepts lacks polish, but are impressed by the passion and hard work that went into it.

ME2&3 are never winning the Oscar for Best Picture, Fans expect a big budget blockbuster that hits it out of the park, if being a little predictable.

ME2 was the Dark Knight Rises, ME3 was the Eric Bana Hulk.

[ediskrad327]

ME2's ending made you feel like you accomplished the impossible and had you waiting for more, ME3's ending makes you never touch anything with Mark Vanderloo's face never again, so yes i still preffer ME2

[ticklefist]

tjc2 wrote...

ME1 is the lower budget art film that gamers accepts lacks polish, but are impressed by the passion and hard work that went into it.

ME2&3 are never winning the Oscar for Best Picture, Fans expect a big budget blockbuster that hits it out of the park, if being a little predictable.

ME2 was the Dark Knight Rises, ME3 was the Eric Bana Hulk.

I normally do an Empire/Jedi comparison but that works too.

[Chrishenanigans]

Mass Effect 2 is definitely my "Empire/Two Towers" and favorite of the three (ahead of 1 by a bit, ahead of 3 by a great deal). My first playthrough felt like gaming perfection marred only by Liara's bumbled treatment. My second run allowed me to assess the title more critically, and I found myself a little disappointed that the main campaign really didn't advance the Reaper story arc very much, instead sending Shepard on a glorified side mission against the Collectors.

The dozen plus full replays I've finished since then is a testament to the fact that saving the galaxy is, ultimately, not the reason so many people play this game. It's the character development, setting, and adventures that take place often irrespective of the Reapers. Heists, prison breaks, urban sieges, Citadel shoot-outs, Geth bases, Illium car chases, and Quarian political dramas all with some of my favorite fictional characters? Yes, please!

[Jamie9]

Also let me compare hub worlds.

ME1 - The Citadel, Noveria

ME2 - The Citadel, Illium, Omega, Tuchanka

ME3 - The Citadel

Modifié par Jamie9, 31 mars 2012 - 08:02 .

[kilgorek]

What's with the complaints against ME 3 for lack of exploration, while liking ME 2?

ME 1 is the only game in the series with any type of exploration.

[Jaysh]

ME2 is the successor of the trilogy.

[kilgorek]

Jamie9 wrote...

Also let me compare hub worlds.

ME1 - The Citadel, Noveria

ME2 - Omega, the Citadel, Illium, Tuchanka

ME3 - The Citadel

Fixed. And the ME 1 Citadel is better than any of the hub worlds in the rest of the series.

[Abraxas Krios]

The first had the best plot and i just felt fresh, even after 10 playthroughts.
ME2 was the best for characters and missions and had great combat.
ME3 had me attack orphans sooooooo.....

[JaKaSa]

I think mass effect 2 was best.

First game had really bad inventory system and there was some other things that I did not like. Story was great, but I liked me 2 story more and me 2 was technically better working than first one.

I can't remember anything that dissappointed me in mass effect 2 than final boss aka terminator.. Well dlc squadmates especially zaeed was pretty badly done. Not on same quality level than other squadmates.

I don't have much good to say about me 3 when comparing to two other games of trilogy. It is mostly because of ending, but there is other reasons. Sidequests are pretty much eavesdrop, fetch and deliver it's ok for while, but they over did it. Combat/rpg balance feels little off maybe it is because of faster combat, but I felt like I used 80% of game talking to people and doing those fetch and deliver missions and only 20% was combat. Shortness of game was dissappointing too. I used like 50h on me 1 per character and around 30-40h on me 2, but only like 25h on me 3. Third game was pretty good game before endings, but still not as good as first two games.

[eventhewaves]

"Mass Effect 2" is one of my favorite games of this console generation, hands down. It's basically the gaming equivalent of a short-story collection, different missions pushing you into wildly different locations and (on occasion) provokingly wildly different responses. It is, or was, also a great game to just... hang out in for a while.

[my Aim is True]

TMA LIVE wrote...

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

I would argue that Mass Effect 2 was more focused.  It's focused on building a team and executing a mission with a fairly limited scope.  That's why it is so good.
ME3 tries to be massive in scale and ultimately fails because they cut corners everwhere.  The sidequests are shallow (hunting for 'war bibles' and such) the journal system is terrible, choices don't really matter, there is too much autodialouge and the plot completely unravels at the end.

I've heard the complaint that ME2 is the 'Facebook of videogames, nothing but talking to your friends and doing worthless sidequests.' But those sidequests are about team building, and determine the outcome of the Suicide Mission.  It ME3, ultimately nothing matters. 

So yes, in my opinion ME2 is still the better game.

[SilentPhenomed]

ME3 is better gameplay wise. Story wise, I like ME2 just a LITTLE MORE. There's more character depth and hub worlds to go to. The first time you go to Omega, meet thane, etc....then do the loyalty missions...it's great!

ME3 is awesome because you see SO MANY THINGS you've done from ME1 and ME2 come right back. There's not much development in ME3, because it's the last game of the trilogy. You can't expect development because everything has been established. The ending was fine IMO, btw

[SilentPhenomed]

my Aim is True wrote...

TMA LIVE wrote...

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

I would argue that Mass Effect 2 was more focused.  It's focused on building a team and executing a mission with a fairly limited scope.  That's why it is so good.
ME3 tries to be massive in scale and ultimately fails because they cut corners everwhere.  The sidequests are shallow (hunting for 'war bibles' and such) the journal system is terrible, choices don't really matter, there is too much autodialouge and the plot completely unravels at the end.

I've heard the complaint that ME2 is the 'Facebook of videogames, nothing but talking to your friends and doing worthless sidequests.' But those sidequests are about team building, and determine the outcome of the Suicide Mission.  It ME3, ultimately nothing matters. 

So yes, in my opinion ME2 is still the better game.

I hate it when people say choices don't matter in ME3 when in fact, it's all about finalizing Shepard's story, not developing it more. And I can't see how the plot completely unravels at the end unless you are one of the people who didn't understand it. Not only that but it's generous we got even more than one ending. Mass Effect isn't about making your own story it's just picking different paths to the same/similar end. You start from a same/similar beginning, and finish from a same/similar end.

Plus ME3 has waayyyy more sidequests than ME2. You talk about hunting the war assets by scanning in ME3 but those are the mini sidestuff....just like ME2's mini sidestuff was gathering resources from planets by scanning to upgrade the Normandy (and it was terrible, tedious, and boring IMO).

[ahandsomeshark]

kilgorek wrote...

What's with the complaints against ME 3 for lack of exploration, while liking ME 2?

ME 1 is the only game in the series with any type of exploration.

because there's hub worlds at least in ME2, and you don't just land on a planet, do a mission, then leave forever. And you can find random missions scanning planets.

[ahandsomeshark]

kilgorek wrote...

Jamie9 wrote...

Also let me compare hub worlds.

ME1 - The Citadel, Noveria

ME2 - Omega, the Citadel, Illium, Tuchanka

ME3 - The Citadel

Fixed. And the ME 1 Citadel is better than any of the hub worlds in the rest of the series.

meh, I disagree. The Citadel in ME1 was awesome the first play through but after that you just spend a ton of time running from spot to spot because it's so spread out. I like Omega better (though I'd prefer the hub worlds in ME2 have as many available sidequests as ME1 did).

[Jamie9]

SilentPhenomed wrote...
I hate it when people say choices don't matter in ME3 when in fact, it's all about finalizing Shepard's story, not developing it more. And I can't see how the plot completely unravels at the end unless you are one of the people who didn't understand it. Not only that but it's generous we got even more than one ending. Mass Effect isn't about making your own story it's just picking different paths to the same/similar end. You start from a same/similar beginning, and finish from a same/similar end.

Plus ME3 has waayyyy more sidequests than ME2. You talk about hunting the war assets by scanning in ME3 but those are the mini sidestuff....just like ME2's mini sidestuff was gathering resources from planets by scanning to upgrade the Normandy (and it was terrible, tedious, and boring IMO)

Going to have to disagree. BioWare strictly said that our choices would matter, and that this game would have the most variation of all the trilogy. The last installment in a trilogy is where everything hits breaking point, where every character hits their ultimate moment of change, therefore it should have the most development.

Fair enough, you defeat Sovereign in ME1, and you defeat the Collectors in ME2. But does the Council survive? Did you keep the base or destroy it? Each respective game put HEAVY weight on these two decisions, and yet they make no difference to ME3, when we were told they would.

ME3 has less sidequests, but they arguably play more like main quests due to their high quality. Those N7 missions being the multiplayer maps was annoying though.

If we wanted a game that always ended the same way, we wouldn't spend hours thinking about our choices and what those repurcussions of those choices would be. If BioWare hadn't explicitly told us our choices would matter in a big way, even just in the final battle, we wouldn't have expected this kind of choice.

ME2's suicide mission had you choose which characters did what, and everyone, including Shepard, could die. Much more choice than ME3's endgame.

[lyleoffmyspace]

ME1 - best overall "feel", best story, best levelling system, best classes and best hub worlds. I also liked the ammo types. It also had the best level design for me

ME2 - best characters and character development, best universe exploration.

ME3 - best gunplay, and best finding equipment.armour and stuff. Best character moments like Garrus on the Citadel, Mordin's death etc.

Overall I think I like ME1 best.