283 réponses à ce sujet

[MassStorm]

Honestly i returned these days back on playing ME2 and let me tell you i have the somehow strange impression that the animations and the locations are much better estethically speaking in relation to ME3. I also noticed how in ME2 the game is providing me a much more satisfactory RPG experience,

I (through Shepard) feel part of the world which was in my opinion much wider and interesting in relation to ME3. I felt the feeling of an huge galaxy to explore full of dangerouf places and enemies, i felt also a much richer interaction with NPC and better control on Shepard actions which were not imposed on me but reflected my intentions.
I felt also a much wider variety of locations to visit and people to chat with as well as different architectural buildings and feelings.

Finally i also liked the grey morality system inside ME2 where was not just the good guys VS the bad ones but it also involved understanding the different factions inside the galaxy. ( for example I'm not a Cerberus fan but i still cannot accept the idea for renegade Shepard not being able to join with Cerberus in ME3). In ME3 everything is forced on the player and this not because of artistic integrity but because of poor design caused by rushed development.

[Rhalle]

fchopin wrote...

ME2 is irrelevant to Mass Effect.

This.  

The Collectors exist so Bioware could run clock until the third installment.  Placing Cerberus center-stage nullified what was hinted at in ME1 for ME2:  two major game paths; a paragon pro-alien one, as well as a renegade path in which Shepard was aggressively pro-human and anti-alien, like Cerberus. Bioware also added the superfluous Collector plot, basically ignoring the Reapers until they absolutely had to explain them.

ME2 excels at cinematics. The admirable developer responsible for them, however, is no longer at Bioware. The companion-character portraits are of course great, some of the most entertaining and probably the deepest ever in a videogame. The cover-shooter mechanics and enemy AI are vastly improved over the first installment. However good or bad, ME2 (like ME1) doesn't feel rushed or incomplete. The overall experience-- and whatever ME2's realationship to ME1-- strikes one as fully realized.

But ME3 is a big stupid mess. It's not just the ending.  It feels like it could fly apart at any moment. All that holds it together are a couple of strong major sequences (which aren't without their major problems, too) and fan love for the returning characters. The ending is like a bullfighter's cape and the fans are the bull.  While they attack the cape, there's little focus on the rest.  Perhaps that's the purpose after all.

There is effectively no more Paragon or Renegade. The dialogue trees have been trimmed until they have two branches. Talent building requiring any real planning or foresight is gone. There's only one quest hub instead of many. Movement and lip-synch animations are worse than ME1. Levels are an A---->B rail ride (GO! GO! GO!) in the mode of CoD, and virtually all of them end in a GoW horde-mode. Auto-dialogue once restricted to DLC is now de riguer. Enemy variety is small, despite it having been A-OK for Bioware to have rehashed every last alien and monster model they've featured previously. Heavy weapons implementation is nonsensical.  Minigames are gone. Space ninjas? XXXtreme omni-blade fatalities. The Udina-works-for-Cerberus twist-device is stupid and transparent.  Choices mean nothing.  EMS means nothing. The quest log is the absolute worst to appear in a Bioware game and probably the worst in any big-budget title, ever. Most of the cerebral sciency stuff once found in the universe is gone. The sense of a great big vast and dangerous universe is gone. Writing effectively two games-- one for new players and one for veterans-- pushed returning characters into scenarios they otherwise would have never been in.  

(By the way that  is a major narratological issue that I'm not sure anyone has really discussed at any length; it's probably because the affected scenes are so overloaded with emotional impact that Bioware has gotten away with it.) 

And on top of all of it-- and there's lots more, of course-- the game clearly was rushed and is basically incomplete.

EA wants their very own billion-seller, and they will ruin IPs and studios to try to get it.  Lopping off the parts of an IP that made it respectable and gave it a fanbase to begin with, and then dressing it up as something that it is not, something antithetical to itself, something that resembles another franchise of whose sales figures you are envious-- is that going to get it done?  And doing all that destructive stuff in a utterly half-assed way?

Ten million sales? 

Never.  It will never happen.  Never, ever.  Never never ever ever.

Drew Karpyshyn

This.

I've been playing ME1 for the first time in years recently.  His stamp is all over it.  It's his universe, from the big picture down to the little details.  Clearly there are no more Drew Karpyshyn's working on ME.  There are only grinning EA managerial-director types making bastards out of his imaginative effort.

I hope Mr. Karpyshyn gets good royalties.

Modifié par Rhalle, 18 juin 2012 - 08:15 .

[Allen Spellwaver]

ME2 is better in two parts:dialogue and character.Others,worse to hell.

[OlympusMons423]

Strangely enough, the graphics in ME3 seem to take a step backwards from ME2's.... And then the ending of ME2 didn't leave me so down. I could logically get my head around that ending and I wanted to play the game that followed.

[Rhalle]

OlympusMons423 wrote...

Strangely enough, the graphics in ME3 seem to take a step backwards from ME2's..

Yeah.  They often do go backwards.  ME3 runs on Unreal 3, I think, while ME1/2 ran on earlier versions-- and I guess that's why you can't import an ME1 face into ME3.  

Perhaps getting all the old game assets into the new engine took more time and effort than Bioware had reckoned; that might explain a lot, with regards to the visuals, anyway.

ME3 does have the most complex environment design, generally, though.  

Of course it doesn't always mesh well with Shepard the acrobat.

Modifié par Rhalle, 18 juin 2012 - 05:15 .

[I SiR MartY I]

The characters were better, the locations were better, the gameplay felt better and doing the loyalty missions/suicide mission really was the high point of the 3 games IMO. Plus ME2 didn't have that horrible ending

I know that is more than one reason but there are so many more reasons why ME2 was better.

[Disgruntled Shepard]

I also prefer ME2 to ME3 given that ME3's story sucks. But let's be honest, ME2 story is far simpler than ME3's, hell ME2 story basically gets rid of ME1 story and just uses the universe for some easy going independent story telling that is more like a collection of tales than a single tale. That's so much easier to do than let's say ME3, ME3 has to wrap a whole universe all together and then provide closure for it all (or well that's what it should have done becuase it doesn very little of the sort)

So indeed ME2 story telling is better than ME3's becuase it was far easier to tell.

The previous statesment doesn't refute that ME3 story sucks, the fact that it was difficult to not suck, doesn't mean that it didn't suck, only explains why it does so. In my honest opinion Bioware wrote themselves into a hopeless corner the momment they decided to conquer earth in the first 5 minutes of the game, given that crushing blow to humanity they needed an all powerfull plot device that could undo that "game over"situation -> Catalyst nonsense.

Perhaps a genious writer could have pulled it off, but Bioware is a good and solid team of writers, just not in the genious division, there is a reasson why humanity only gets one genious per centruty after all.

Modifié par Disgruntled Shepard, 18 juin 2012 - 05:38 .

[kleindropper]

ME3 had fewer F-YEAH moments and was generally depressing the whole time (especially if you've played through once and know what's coming at the end.)

Some for-instances from ME2 include pushing the merc through the window, cutting off TIM at the end, blasting the Collector ship with the Thanix, addressing your team at the end, telling off Harbinger personally in Arrival, saving/shooting the hostage on Ilium in LOTSB etc... - these are all F-Yeah moments that gave you a good feeling.

The only big F-YEAH moments I can think of in ME3 are a) blasting the dying Reaper to oblivion on Rannoch and sticking my omniblade into Kai Lengs gut for Thane.

I go back to the launch trailer to point out the potential ME3 had for moments like this, but were wasted, especially at the end. Would it have killed Bioware to let us destroy one Reaper capital ship somehow?


Also, one hub world compared to four in ME2 made the galaxy and the game seem much smaller (running around the same areas the whole game got old)

Modifié par kleindropper, 18 juin 2012 - 05:39 .

[eye basher]

I remember when people cursed ME2 for all it was worth is no good they said now suddenly is better ha! hypocrasy at work.

[Disgruntled Shepard]

kleindropper wrote...

ME3 had fewer F-YEAH moments and was generally depressing the whole time (especially if you've played through once and know what's coming at the end.)

I am sorry but care to tell me of those F-YEAH momments in ME2?? Despite ME3's faults I think Bioware never did a better scene than that in which you CAN shot a certain team member in the back at tuchanka. I nearly cried of emotion on that scene and believe me I almost never cry and less when watching/reading a story.

ME3's problems aren't about the small things, those are probably the best Bioware has pulled off in its long story, the problem is about the big story that is a plot hole ridden pile of non sense that -as someone else puted- doesn't end but just stops.

[sTrYkZ1LLa]

Eyebrow scars.

[tanisha__unknown]

The ending was much better, less autodialogue and neutral dialogue choices, though I think in every other respect ME3 is far superior to ME2

[JB27]

*image removed per Site Rule #6*

Modifié par Selene Moonsong, 19 juin 2012 - 01:02 .

[xSTONEYx187x]

I had actual control of my Shepard and how I wanted to react to people, I didn't have to buddies with people I didn't want to, I could be a jackass in one playthrough and an angel in another, or could mix and match, be an absolute c**t to one person and treat another person with respect.

In ME 3 I couldn't do that, BioWare chose the majority of the dialogue so every one of my Shepards all felt the same.

It's the main reason I haven't touched the game since I dragged myself to Mars on my second playthrough.

Whoever thought it was a good idea deserves a smack upside the head.

[Nefla]

In ME2 I liked:

-So much character interaction both with squadmates, crewmembers, and random NPCs
-Quests within quests ex: You go to recruit Thane but you can search out and rescue all the Salarian workers trapped in the building, also having conversations with them.
-Multiple safezones/hub worlds.
-You control all conversations (except generic stuff that anyone would say like "get us out of here Joker")
-Middle option in all conversations, also investigate options in almost all conversations
-Fun details of the world like listening in on the Salarian's bachelor party on Illium, listening to the Batarian preacher on Omega, hearing all the Tupari sports drink pitches on the citadel. Also citadel ads that were talking to you "commander Shepard, you've recently been dead. Don't you deserve the quality and distinction of a traditional Asari burial robe?" I loved those! Plus Citadel news net and news terminals. Other details like being able to crush and jettison trash in Zaeed's room and have EDI correct you for going into the wrong bathroom were fun too.
-Your crewmembers have something to say during every mission. They always comment on your actions and the situation such as Garrus commenting on hospitals being crappy to fight in and a classy antique store would be better XD Or if you send the Biotic God to his death Jack says "That was mean...but funny!" Stuff like that adds more life to the game and makes it seem as though you're not fighting alone with 2 robots following you.
-ME2 was completely character driven and characters are one of the top reason I play a game. I loved doing all the loyalty missions.
-ME2 had varied missions and self contained goals/stories. I always felt like I was acomplishing something and there was always something interesting to learn or do. On Jacob's loyalty mission you find all these crazy people plus a slave harem all orchestrated by his father, they were all interesting like that. In ME3 a lot of the time I was like "what am I doing here again?" as I fought through wave after wave of the same 2 types of enemies: Cerberus, and reaper husks. No conversations mid mission, nothing cool to discover or learn, no decisions in all but 3 and that was at the very end of each one. Mars was the exception, it reminded me more of the ME2 missions. Also non-combat missions made an interesting change. Sammara's loyalty mission was one of my favorites.
-The romances were really fleshed out and cool (except Garrus but he made up for it in ME3)
-You saw the consequences of your choices from ME1, sometimes in a few different ways. EX: if you let the council die not only does the new council want nothing to do with you (and I think you can't get your spectre status back) but certain NPCs are hostile towards you and there is a general anti-human attitude going around. You hear from the Rachni queen, Helena Blake, Fist, Nassana Dantius, etc...
-Shepard's stirring, epic speeches! (also in ME1) I felt very inspired like "Yeah we're gonna win this!" In ME3 no Shepard speech/peptalk
-You can see Shepard's cybernetic enhancements in action such as:
            -Using extremely heavy rifles no human should be able to use without shattering their bones
            -Headbutting Krogan without being Injured
            -Melee with the Shadow Broker O_O
            -Throwing Turians in a bar fight
            -Lifting big heavy slabs of metal off of fallen squadmates
-Shepard is very impressive! Shepard is human with feelings but also larger than life, he is very capable and determined and can do things most others could never do. Shepard of ME2 would never accept defeat, would never stop thinking for himself and say "I...don't know" when talking to the boss of the reapers, with everything hanging in the balance. Shepard would be able to find a way to win. In ME3 Shepard is just a normal person who is not impressive. The most impressive thing about him is his diplomatic skills. He's now a politician instead of a hero.
-Cerberus and TIM were very interesting in ME2. They were the only ones doing good for humanity but they had a horrible past and also you continue to find gruesome things they are doing. You never know for sure one way or the other. In ME3 they are one dimensional throw-away villians. It would have been cool if in ME3 you were faced with the possibility of fighting Jacob or Miranda.
-Paragon and renegade were completely different
               In ME2 traumatized Salarian worker points gun at you saying "please don't make me hurt you!":
                       -Paragon: "It's ok, you're safe now"
                       -Renegade: (Beats worker into unconsciousness) "Hurt me? I hardly felt a thing"
               In ME3 Anderson is saying he wants to stay on Earth and lead the troops
                        -Paragon: "We're in this fight together Anderson!"
                        -Renegade: "We're In this fight together!"
In ME3 Shepard was way more paragon by default. He would act automatically without your consent. He would console people you wanted to insult, automatic buddies with Liara who I dislike, etc...
-I like the suicide mission and all the elements that went into it: picking the exact right people for each job, getting their loyalty, getting ship upgrades.
-I like the tense, yet hopeful ending of ME2. (and it made sense!)
-I like boss battles and I like that each one was different. In ME3 the only Boss battles were all Kai Leng and they were easy and boring. No final boss
-Femshep had MUCH better clothes in ME2 and her body didn't look all saggy, dumpy and gross like in ME3. (and I say this from a woman's perspective)
-I liked being able to talk to all the squad after each mission. I hate autodialogue. (well Kasumi and Zaeed actually had interesting stuff to say)I hate Shepard doing things and making decisions without me. Apparently Shep and Steve were screwing around behind my back. I was like "What? When did this happen? "
-I liked side missions in ME2. Also liked that you could find them by scanning a planet then land on it and do the mission. I HATE the fetch quests of ME3 and DA2.
-I miss the hacking mini games T_T

Modifié par Nefla, 18 juin 2012 - 10:20 .

[Sergeant Dre]

Shelled wrote...

ME2 was certainly better, just look at the places we can visit like Omega, look at how much better the citadel was. Honestly I don't know if it's just me or not but the visuals seemed better in ME2 as well. Graphically speaking.


Oh yeah, the ending actually made sense and it was amazing.

I remember the opening cutscene with TIM was visually stunning. It took my breath away.

While ME3 has good graphics, I don't think they are as good. But ME3 isn't as clunky with controls.

Modifié par Sergeant Dre, 18 juin 2012 - 10:00 .

[apascone]

Just 1? well ok, which do i pick... 1 lets see. Better squad mates

[M2S SOLID JOSH]

apascone wrote...

Just 1? well ok, which do i pick... 1 lets see. Better squad mates

^ just 1 is kinda hard. better missions

[spirosz]

Rhalle wrote...

fchopin wrote...

ME2 is irrelevant to Mass Effect.

This.  

The Collectors exist so Bioware could run clock until the third installment.  Placing Cerberus center-stage nullified what was hinted at in ME1 for ME2:  two major game paths; a paragon pro-alien one, as well as a renegade path in which Shepard was aggressively pro-human and anti-alien, like Cerberus. Bioware also added the superfluous Collector plot, basically ignoring the Reapers until they absolutely had to explain them.

ME2 excels at cinematics. The admirable developer responsible for them, however, is no longer at Bioware. The companion-character portraits are of course great, some of the most entertaining and probably the deepest ever in a videogame. The cover-shooter mechanics and enemy AI are vastly improved over the first installment. However good or bad, ME2 (like ME1) doesn't feel rushed or incomplete. The overall experience-- and whatever ME2's realationship to ME1-- strikes one as fully realized.

But ME3 is a big stupid mess. It's not just the ending.  It feels like it could fly apart at any moment. All that holds it together are a couple of strong major sequences (which aren't without their major problems, too) and fan love for the returning characters. The ending is like a bullfighter's cape and the fans are the bull.  While they attack the cape, there's little focus on the rest.  Perhaps that's the purpose after all.

There is effectively no more Paragon or Renegade. The dialogue trees have been trimmed until they have two branches. Talent building requiring any real planning or foresight is gone. There's only one quest hub instead of many. Movement and lip-synch animations are worse than ME1. Levels are an A---->B rail ride (GO! GO! GO!) in the mode of CoD, and virtually all of them end in a GoW horde-mode. Auto-dialogue once restricted to DLC is now de riguer. Enemy variety is small, despite it having been A-OK for Bioware to have rehashed every last alien and monster model they've featured previously. Heavy weapons implementation is nonsensical.  Minigames are gone. Space ninjas? XXXtreme omni-blade fatalities. The Udina-works-for-Cerberus twist-device is stupid and transparent.  Choices mean nothing.  EMS means nothing. The quest log is the absolute worst to appear in a Bioware game and probably the worst in any big-budget title, ever. Most of the cerebral sciency stuff once found in the universe is gone. The sense of a great big vast and dangerous universe is gone. Writing effectively two games-- one for new players and one for veterans-- pushed returning characters into scenarios they otherwise would have never been in.  

(By the way that  is a major narratological issue that I'm not sure anyone has really discussed at any length; it's probably because the affected scenes are so overloaded with emotional impact that Bioware has gotten away with it.) 

And on top of all of it-- and there's lots more, of course-- the game clearly was rushed and is basically incomplete.

EA wants their very own billion-seller, and they will ruin IPs and studios to try to get it.  Lopping off the parts of an IP that made it respectable and gave it a fanbase to begin with, and then dressing it up as something that it is not, something antithetical to itself, something that resembles another franchise of whose sales figures you are envious-- is that going to get it done?  And doing all that destructive stuff in a utterly half-assed way?

Ten million sales? 

Never.  It will never happen.  Never, ever.  Never never ever ever.

Drew Karpyshyn

This.

I've been playing ME1 for the first time in years recently.  His stamp is all over it.  It's his universe, from the big picture down to the little details.  Clearly there are no more Drew Karpyshyn's working on ME.  There are only grinning EA managerial-director types making bastards out of his imaginative effort.

I hope Mr. Karpyshyn gets good royalties.

Basically sums it up for me.  

[kleindropper]

Disgruntled Shepard wrote...

kleindropper wrote...

ME3 had fewer F-YEAH moments and was generally depressing the whole time (especially if you've played through once and know what's coming at the end.)

I am sorry but care to tell me of those F-YEAH momments in ME2?? Despite ME3's faults I think Bioware never did a better scene than that in which you CAN shot a certain team member in the back at tuchanka. I nearly cried of emotion on that scene and believe me I almost never cry and less when watching/reading a story.

ME3's problems aren't about the small things, those are probably the best Bioware has pulled off in its long story, the problem is about the big story that is a plot hole ridden pile of non sense that -as someone else puted- doesn't end but just stops.

Like I said, shooting a friend in the back is depressing, not an F-Yeah moment like the examples I cited above. 

Maybe it correlates to a lack of named "bosses", of which ME2 had ample examples:

- Tarek in a gunship
- Warden Kuril
- Jedore
- Nassanna
- Captain Wasea
- Harkin / Sidonus
- Thresher Maw / Uvenk
- Jacob's father
- The Heretics
- Niket / Enyala
- Maelon
- Morinth
- Hock in a gunship
- Vido
- TIM
- Harbinger

In most of these cases, Shepard is able to interact with his/her foe and decide their fate on a Paragon/Renegade path.  It is this interaction that results in the enjoyable moments and  RPG experience .

In ME3 for boss foes we have:

- Generic Reaper foes
- Generic Cerberus foes
- Generic Geth
- Rachnii queen
- Miranda's father
- Kai Leng 

No personalization, no trash talking, no enjoyment (except for stabbing Leng, which was a major F-Yeah moment.).

Modifié par kleindropper, 18 juin 2012 - 10:44 .

[KDD-0063]

You guys said so much.
I'll add one.
class and weapon system. The six classes, especially the three 'caster' classes, all have unique combat styles. Especially the shotgun sentinel.

[Vormaerin]

ME3 suffers somewhat from having to show the the consequences of decisions in the previous two games. The entire game was one long ending sequence of wrapping up old plot threads while trying to keep a half interesting plot going along with it. Often, changing what you did requires replaying ME1 or ME2 to make different decisions there. That's a painful burden for a game.

On the plus side, it did have a story that made some semblance of sense up until the very end. ME2 was a giant red herring. Or maybe a reality tv show about how to form the best buddy movie duo. H

ME2 is a giant exercise in being led by the nose by TIM on a meandering course around the galaxy with no real urgency to save the tens of thousands supposedly dying. "Hmm, thousands of missing people? They can wait. Let's go see what Jack's old school looks like. I love reunions."

ME2 also created the idea that Shepard was somehow a Messianic figure that no other badass in the universe could possibly replace.

Frankly, the less said about the so called "story" in ME2 the better.

The final quest was clearly superior in ME2, though the choices were such that you needed a guide to actually get people killed, not to keep everyone alive. I liked the gameplay a bit more, too. The different layers of defenses made a balanced party more useful.

[ChurchOfZod]

Squadmates, varied side missions, heavy weapons, and the best goddamn epic victory in the series if you play the suicide mission right.

[AlanC9]

Vormaerin wrote...
ME2 is a giant exercise in being led by the nose by TIM on a meandering course around the galaxy with no real urgency to save the tens of thousands supposedly dying. "Hmm, thousands of missing people? They can wait. Let's go see what Jack's old school looks like. I love reunions."

This seems a little unfair to ME2. Plenty of RPGs have structured their plots the same way. Most of BG2 is sidequests that have nothing to do with the PC or Irenicus. Two of DA:O's major required quests have nothing to do with the Blight or Loghain or anything else in the main plot.

Modifié par AlanC9, 19 juin 2012 - 01:09 .

[fainmaca]

Squadmates.

'nuff said.