201 réponses à ce sujet

[incinerator950]

MassEffect762 wrote...

ME1= free of EA = ^^

ME2= rpg/story sacrificed = vomit

To me ME2 is kids stuff, I personally can only see youths enjoying that game. The story is bad and the combat is mediocre.

To me, ME 1 is for Casual RPG players and its story is remniscent of Eragon for Sci-Fi. 

[Elite Midget]

ME1 only fails at Gameplay, everything else it did better than ME2 and ME3 combined.

[dreman9999]

Isichar wrote...

At least the inventory was well handled

ROTFL..

[MakeMineMako]

xsdob wrote...

Dendio1 wrote...

ItsNotMyProblem wrote...

ME2 was great. Just the movement with so much smoother. ME2 was the best.

Me2 had inferior combat and the puzzles for every single lock were annyoing

Yes I too found the character specific locking system to be unnicisay. lol.

Oh wait, that was mass effect 1, where if you didn't bring your tech experts along you were screwed out of all the loot.

Which was very immersive and made you think about necessity and division of specialty in your squad, which was preferable to the  John Shepard: 007 in ME2.

I did like the hacking mini-game in ME2 though. It was a nice touch.

[Reikilea]

And still its my favourite game. I dont like shooters, I like RPG so thats why it will be alays my favourite. I agree it had best, story, best charaters, best boss, It had Ilos and vigil, it had freaking decision on Virmire.
And it had better romance build up. It wasnt dumbed down as in the second game - so only line like I want you thane or Hey Garrus lets f*** was all that was left. So better storytelling, thats what works for me.

And mako was fine. I know ME1 had flaws, but which game doesnt?

ME2 might have had better combat but in terms of a storytelling it was rubbish. I mean 7 samurai really? I got bored easily with all that You need to buy my loyalty... And all I care about in games is storytelling and immersive fictional world. This why i mostly play RPG.

So ME for me all the way.

[MakeMineMako]

AlexXIV wrote...

Icesong wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

ME1 had a more immersive world, a better story, better pacing, better music, more conversation options, best boss battle, best music

And yes I even liked the Mako.....I don't understand all the hate for the Mako really....

Honestly, combat with the mako was mostly cheating. Hide in cover, get out of cover, shoot, get back in cover. Just a matter of time to take all enemies down, not skill.

Sounds like you're describing ME combat in general.

Well to be fair the Mako only had it's canon that really worked well against enemies. In other combat you at least have biotics and tech skills for a tactical change of pace.

The support machine gun worked well against humanoid targets.

[MakeMineMako]

Missy_MI wrote...

Combat has its flaws for sure. I still remember getting boxed in by debris after using biotics in battle and having to reload the game.

It's impressive how much the combat improved from 1 to 2. But then, I enjoyed the story elements of both games.

Call me weird, but in my opinion, the only things ME2 and ME3 bought to the table combat-wise was the ability to vault over objects, combat rolls, and optics for weapons other than sniper rifles (which really made sniper systems redundant most of the time in ME3, considering the small-ish maps).

[Brockxz]

I see a lot of people complain about first games combat but I actually prefer first games combat more than seconds games run and gun combat. I really loved micromanage heat and be wise to take cover so that i would be more accurate with shots. Also I really loved micromanage my weapons and mods. The second game practically nullified all that and made game more gears of warish. It's not all that bad because you still need to conserve ammo but it is too simple and generic. And all those mods, it's just laughable compare to first game. Same goes for third game. There is no deapth in system as it was in the first game.

[Applepie_Svk]

If you mean gameplay, yes it is hard to compare with ME2 or ME3 but story plot of ME1 is far beyond an edge of ME3, you can´t even compare this as equal or at-least i see it that way.
ME1 creates one of the greatest story, universe and villians which we could compare with Star Wars or Battlestar: Galactica, Star Trek from movies and other tv series. For me it was never about gameplay but more about story, which is in Mass Effect so great written. So much details about events of Mass Effect universe, genophage, Morning wars, First contact War, Protheans .... everything was created in perfection but Mass Effect 3 creat a line which in some ways totaly smashed this perfection ....

[Applepie_Svk]

Ragabul the Ontarah wrote...

 I think ME1 is Bioware's weakest game overall.  Extremely "meh" gameplay.
 

Much worst gameplay was for me Kotor1 and 2, it was realy insane in some way, graphic for year 2006 was a equal and RPS was never about perfect graphics ... if i want such a thing i could buy next year Crisis 1 which has still almost one of the best graphic

[twisty77]

I want BioWare to remake ME1 with ME3's engine and gameplay tactics. Holy hell that would be one amazing game.

[halbert986]

I thought the conversation was best in 1 mostly because you got to pick 99.99% of the lines shepard said. The odd little glitches in conversation flow were easily overlooked simply from the sheer level of detail. Even if I picked the wrong line, I still picked it.

In 3 I got railroaded into more than half my dialog and hated every minute of it. Totally killed my immersion even if my enter/exit transition from cover was seamless.

I never cared for ME2. The gameplay upgrades didn't matter to me. I never got over the fact that shepard just joined up with cerberus because it seemed like a good idea at the time. They should have at least walked me to it. Let me live through the frustration of the alliance denying reapers and stonewalling me into patrolling for geth. I spent the whole game telling TIM where to stick it hoping that I'd eventually get the chance to make nice with the alliance again.

[xxSanitysuxx]

ME1 has awful gameplay frankly... the so-called rpg gameplay which people complained was missing in ME2 was trimmed for a reason... it sucked big time... i hated the mako's jellyfish handling, the needlessly complicated modding (one-button ammo-modding of ME2,3 ftw), hate the sidequests, and the framerate gets awful at points too... but still somehow its tied with ME2 as my fav bioware game.
The epic story made up for the gameplay flaws... Every single main quest in the game ties together with the central storyline perfectly...
eden prime: u get the vision, saren, geth and sovereign introduced
feros: obtained cipher to the vision
noveria: location of mu relay discovered
virmire: saren's initial concerns about indoctrination explained
ilos: epic conversation with vigil fits together all the pieces beautifully

[MstrJedi Kyle]

I just played through ME1 not too long ago and I have just one thing to say. Frictionless Materials FTW

[MOELANDER]

I miss how Shepard leaned into the curves he ran.

[Baihu1983]

ME1>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>2 and 3

[Mobius-Silent]

I still love ME1 (On PC, it makes a lot of difference) The combat took some getting used to but I'll say this, I never found myself crouching against a wall instead of activating a door/item the way I do in ME2/ME3. I could never get over how... small ME2 and ME3 felt, like you were on rails, which was such a shame.

Simply put if someone asked me "What would you like more of ME1, ME2 or ME3?" I'd pick ME1 every time.

[arathor_87]

I love all of them. Yesterday I started a new save in the first Mass Effect game, and it's alot of fun. I spam my screenshot button, I'm goin to make a slideshow with music in a movie maker program: )

[Shajar]

ME1 and ME2 are perfect, ME3 combat is dumbed down for Call of Duty audience

Just started ME1 again, on Insanity ahh it is hard and exciting, unlike ME3 which is rush easy even with Insanity diffi

Modifié par Shajar, 02 mai 2012 - 09:43 .

[Dude_in_the_Room]

I've played for about 6 hours now and I'm starting to lean to enjoying the combat. Not being able to roll dodge out of the way of Krogan charges or having to press capslock to duck when it should be automatic is not as bad when you have heat, aim, and stability to worry about.

I mean, I can aim in ME2 and ME3 but in ME1 I forgot it's more RPGish.

Also, the way the fights are set up aren't as straight forward as ME2 and ME3. Theres a lot of tricky situations that can't be solved with just aim and shoot or some quick fix.

[flyboy85]

Yeah the combat in ME1 was really clunky, but the game overall was just... magical. The story is one of the best I've ever experienced, the character development was really good, and the atmosphere was breathtaking. I know the Mako side quests were little more than re-skinned copy pasta, but I still find myself staring at the screen and imagining a place in the galaxy that looks exactly like what I'm looking at in game. The main missions had some funky pacing, but they were still emotionally engaging. I found Noveria kind of repetitive, but the battle on the Citadel still makes me hurl insults at the Geth and at Sovereign. Virmire is still gut-wrenching, and Ilos is just amazing (Vigil ftw). Even the Normandy SR-1 was amazing, it actually FELT like a warship! The SR-2 from ME2 felt like a cruise liner with guns, and in ME3 it felt like a repainted cruise liner with guns. The SR-1 is the best Normandy hands down. Years and countless playthroughs later, I still find myself saying "wow" while playing ME1. It's still magical for me.

ME2 was an amazing game, but it felt hollow in comparison to ME1. The game mechanics were greatly improved, but the mystique from the first game was gone. More characters to develop was a definite plus, but the game as a whole just felt different. It was lacking something that I just can't describe. The mission pacing was excellent, but they felt unrefined and had virtually no emotional engagement. There is not a single moment in any ME2 mission that sticks out in my mind, except the DLC missions. Lair of the Shadow Broker was perfect, and Overlord is almost as good. ME2 still has high replayability for me for the game mechanics, but the quality of the story pales in comparison to that of ME1.

ME3 for the most part managed to recapture some of the magic from ME1, but not much of it. It felt richer than ME2, but the story felt rushed and somewhat empty at times. The Rannoch and Tuchanka missions were pure brilliance and just downright fun from beginning to end, even more so than Lair of the Shadow Broker.
(Wreav: "Kalros must be smelling fresh Salarian meat." Mordin: "...or Krogan halitosis!") If the whole game was like Rannoch and Tuchanka, it would be a masterpiece. That said, there are some missions that are pretty shallow. The panoramics of Thessia recapture the awe of some of the Mako missions from ME1, which is why it's one of my favorites, but it is still a pretty shallow mission unless Javik is there. The mission with Aralakh company has some amazing gameplay and one of the more emotional moments with Grunt, but the Rachni Queen is glazed over regardless of your decision in ME1. The Citadel is bigger, but feels emptier. The Sanctuary mission is quite good, but the whole Miranda/Henry Lawson thing feels like a footnote when it should have been a chapter of its own. The final mission on Earth has kickass gameplay, but the story is severely lacking. This mission SHOULD have been the crescendo of the game before the resolution, but it is severely lacking the necessary emotional engagement (I know I say this a lot). For comparison, the Suicide Mission (ME2) and Ilos/Battle through the Citadel (ME1) was one HELLUVA crescendo for the ultimate resolution to each game. A lot of the goodbyes feel half-hearted and ingenuine. Only the goodbyes from romanced Tali or Garrus (either bro or LI) are really memorable (I romanced Ash for the record). Jack, Miranda, and Grunt deserved more than a vid-comm goodbye. As for replayability, I expected to be a slave to ME3 for months going through all of my different Shep builds, but after one playthrough I'm done. It is just too depressing for me to see this whole journey have such a hollow, empty, and meaningless ending. I originally liked the ending a lot, until I thought about starting a second playthrough and realized how worthless the ending really is.

To sum this whole thing up -
Story: ME1 >>>> ME3 > ME2
Gameplay: ME3 > ME2 >>>> ME1
Wow Factor (aka "magic"): ME1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ME3 > ME2
Characters: ME2 > ME1 > ME3
Character development: ME1 > ME2 > ME3
Mission pacing: ME2 > ME3 > ME1
Emotional Engagement: ME1 > ME3 >ME2
Normandy: SR-1 > SR-2(ME3) > SR-2 (ME3)
Replayability: ME2 > ME1 >>>>> ME3 (this should concern Bioware/EA the most)

[spiriticon]

DarthKilby wrote...

I just played through ME1 not too long ago and I have just one thing to say. Frictionless Materials FTW

Frictionless Materials X + HMWA X = DAKKA DAKKA DAKKA DAKKKKKKK (credit to that guy in the gameplay forum who coined this term, love it )

Add Colossus X armor and you're basically Robocop. Awesome.

ME1 isn't terrible, I've just completed my 3rd complete runthrough. It's still feels like it has a place today even though it's a five year old game. The cover system is truly awful but workable when you need it. The main quest is a bit short though. I guess its the same for all RPGs these days.