426 réponses à ce sujet

[2Shepards]

I don't have many massive complaints about 1's writing, more the gameplay mechanics. And only didI complain after doing another playthrough after playing 2 for the first time.

[AlexPorto111]

The story of ME1 is amazing.But thats it.The gameplay is terrible,there is a lot of bugs and frame rates issues.ME1 is awesome overall,but its the weakest game of the trilogy,IMO.

[andy6915]

GenericEnemy wrote...

The difference being those missions weren't the meat of the game.

I think what you mean is, they actually fleshed out the party member quests from simple sidequests to something involved and important feeling. Adding depth is hardly a bad thing.

Besides, how much meat did ME1 have outside of sidequests?

A planet that takes 40 minutes where you get Liara
A planet that takes about 2 and a half hours that has you dealing with corporations
A 2 hour planet where you kill tons of Geth and then kill a giant plant
An hour and a half planet where you kill a ton more Geth and leave a party member behind
An hour long planet where you even more Geth and talk to a VI
A half hour run up the tower killing, guess what, more Geth and you kill a glorified Geth Hopper as the final boss

REALLY meaty... Or not. Summing up how much meat ME2 has would take much longer then this did.

Modifié par andy69156915, 03 juillet 2012 - 02:33 .

[Seboist]

While certain things about ME1's writing were bad such as the atrocious portrayal of the council, nothing there matches the Ed Wood level derp of Lazarus,Space Terminator,Crucible,Cerberus Sith Empire or Starchild.

[Aaleel]

Well the first game introduced you to the world, and laid out the story. Plus you had a very well written antagonist in Saren. The flaws in the writing weren't as glaring as in ME3, probably since they didn't come at the very end.

As far as the gameplay. I played ME1 for the first time on the Xbox when it came out. The system couldn't handle the game at all. But when I got it on the PC gameplay wasn't an issue anymore. I played ME1 between ME3 and the EC and the change didn't bother me at all.

By far my favortie of the three.

Modifié par Aaleel, 03 juillet 2012 - 02:34 .

[SNascimento]

andy69156915 wrote...

GenericEnemy wrote...

The difference being those missions weren't the meat of the game.

I think what you mean is, they actually fleshed out the party member quests from simple sidequests to something involved and important feeling. Adding depth is hardly a bad thing.

Besides, how much meat did ME1 have outside of sidequests?

A planet that takes 40 minutes where you get Liara
A planet that takes about 2 and a half hours that has you dealing with corporations
A 2 hour planet where you kill tons of Geth and then kill a giant plant
An hour and a half planet where you kill a ton more Geth and leave a party member behind
An hour long planet where you even more Geth and talk to a VI
A half hour run up the tower killing, guess what, more Geth and you kill a glorified Geth Hopper as the final boss

REALLY meaty... Or not. Summing up how much meat ME2 has would take much longer then this did.

.
You can finish ME1 in 4 hours if you only do the main quests. 

[savionen]

Sorry, nothing in ME1 even compares to the terribleness of ME3.

ME1 had some bad dialogue, I'm sure it had quite a bit, but nothing compares to the bad dialogue at the end of ME3, nor the amount of character assassinations that take place in ME3.

Modifié par savionen, 03 juillet 2012 - 02:37 .

[savionen]

SNascimento wrote...

andy69156915 wrote...

GenericEnemy wrote...

The difference being those missions weren't the meat of the game.

I think what you mean is, they actually fleshed out the party member quests from simple sidequests to something involved and important feeling. Adding depth is hardly a bad thing.

Besides, how much meat did ME1 have outside of sidequests?

A planet that takes 40 minutes where you get Liara
A planet that takes about 2 and a half hours that has you dealing with corporations
A 2 hour planet where you kill tons of Geth and then kill a giant plant
An hour and a half planet where you kill a ton more Geth and leave a party member behind
An hour long planet where you even more Geth and talk to a VI
A half hour run up the tower killing, guess what, more Geth and you kill a glorified Geth Hopper as the final boss

REALLY meaty... Or not. Summing up how much meat ME2 has would take much longer then this did.

.
You can finish ME1 in 4 hours if you only do the main quests. 

You can beat ME3 in about 8 hours, and still get the best ending.

[andy6915]

SNascimento wrote...

You can finish ME1 in 4 hours if you only do the main quests. 

I know that, but I was listing how long it takes me to do the plot planets, at my speed of not skipping dialog, taking my time, not rushing stuff in general. If you're rushing though, as you said, you can cut the times I gave literally in half.

savionen wrote...

You can beat ME3 in about 8 hours, and still get the best ending.

That's still more meat then ME1.

Modifié par andy69156915, 03 juillet 2012 - 02:39 .

[Shaleist]

My problem with ME3 isn't the story. It's the story telling. ME1 was not lazy story telling, ME3 was. Part of this is that it was impossible for ME1 to give up on previous story arcs and characters the way ME3 could *and did repeatedly*... but that's not an excuse for ME3 to be so spotty sometimes.

Modifié par Shaleist, 03 juillet 2012 - 02:46 .

[GenericEnemy]

andy69156915 wrote...

GenericEnemy wrote...

The difference being those missions weren't the meat of the game.

I think what you mean is, they actually fleshed out the party member quests from simple sidequests to something involved and important feeling. Adding depth is hardly a bad thing.

Besides, how much meat did ME1 have outside of sidequests?

A planet that takes 40 minutes where you get Liara
A planet that takes about 2 and a half hours that has you dealing with corporations
A 2 hour planet where you kill tons of Geth and then kill a giant plant
An hour and a half planet where you kill a ton more Geth and leave a party member behind
An hour long planet where you even more Geth and talk to a VI
A half hour run up the tower killing, guess what, more Geth and you kill a glorified Geth Hopper as the final boss

REALLY meaty... Or not. Summing up how much meat ME2 has would take much longer then this did.

True enough. Still, I just found it annoying that the bulk of ME2 was your crew whining about family issues. I like the idea of fleshing out the characters with personal missions, but it shouldn't have been the main focus of the game, at least IMO. It made it feel like the filler that it was.

Modifié par GenericEnemy, 03 juillet 2012 - 02:40 .

[Aiyie]

Sajuro wrote...

DinoSteve wrote...

Me1's writing > ME3's writing

sorry had to be said.

Me3's atmosphere> Me1's atmosphere

totally different atmosphere.

ME3 is about desperation and steadfastness in the face of certain defeat by merciless forces of darkness that don't discriminate between man or woman, old or young.

ME1 is about exploration and taking those first tentative steps into a brave new world full of potential threats, but tempered by the great expectation of something better than you've ever known before.

[Seryl]

AlexPorto111 wrote...

The story of ME1 is amazing.But thats it.The gameplay is terrible,there is a lot of bugs and frame rates issues.ME1 is awesome overall,but its the weakest game of the trilogy,IMO.

My opinion of the Mass Effect games are:
- Mass Effect 1 - best story
- Mass Effect 2 - best characters/characterization
- Mass Effect 3 - best gameplay

[CronoDragoon]

GenericEnemy wrote...

True enough. Still, I just found it annoying that the bulk of ME2 was your crew whining about family issues. I like the idea of fleshing out the characters with personal missions, but it shouldn't have been the main focus of the game, at least IMO. It made it feel like the filler that it was.

In my opinion, this makes ME2 the best standalone game by far. Like, whenever I try and get someone into ME, I have them play 2 first. It's a satisfying story with (imo) much better gameplay than 1.

[LinksOcarina]

the reason Mass Effect 2 is the best game in the series is the writing was focused on the best part of the series; the characters. Their interpersonal conflicts and the resolutions thereof were downright fascinating to watch and be a part of.

Mass Effect 1 and 3 were more about a major story arc, and the characters were along for the ride. It was 2 that fleshed them out.

So you can say the main plot in the entire game is pretty weak, which it is. But the reason we like the games is the characters and their storylines, not the main plotline. And no one can deny the fact that all of the characters had amazing personal storylines throughout, from game 1 to game 3.

[The Heretic of Time]

Mass Effect 1 had flaws, yes. But at least it had a logical and sound plot, with relatively few plot holes.

ME3 however is like cheese, cheese with giant holes in it, like... Swiss cheese!

[OblivionDawn]

ME2's writing was better than ME1's, but both were better than ME3.

Ever taken the renegade options when talking to Benezia after defeating her? Makes you want to bang your head against your TV/Monitor.

Modifié par OblivionDawn, 03 juillet 2012 - 02:52 .

[Binary_Helix 1]

I'll concede Shepard fully buying into the reapers makes me cringe given how little evidence there is to support it early on.

However if Saren is willing to go rogue and the Geth leave their territory for the first time then something big is in motion.

I wouldn't call the reaper stuff a a plot hole just a little forced.

Modifié par Binary_Helix 1, 03 juillet 2012 - 03:01 .

[txgoldrush]

DinoSteve wrote...

Me1's writing > ME3's writing

sorry had to be said.

WRONG

ME3 portraying its characters as multifacted, multidimenisionl, and more "human" beings >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>. ME1 treatement of characters as "talking codex entries".

Try Again.

[Calibrations Expert]

andy69156915 wrote...

GenericEnemy wrote...

The difference being those missions weren't the meat of the game.

I think what you mean is, they actually fleshed out the party member quests from simple sidequests to something involved and important feeling. Adding depth is hardly a bad thing.

Besides, how much meat did ME1 have outside of sidequests?

A planet that takes 40 minutes where you get Liara
A planet that takes about 2 and a half hours that has you dealing with corporations
A 2 hour planet where you kill tons of Geth and then kill a giant plant
An hour and a half planet where you kill a ton more Geth and leave a party member behind
An hour long planet where you even more Geth and talk to a VI
A half hour run up the tower killing, guess what, more Geth and you kill a glorified Geth Hopper as the final boss

REALLY meaty... Or not. Summing up how much meat ME2 has would take much longer then this did.

And the sidequests, all dungeon crawlers. SO MANY DAMN DUNGEON CRAWLERS!

[xsdob]

Why does nobody recognize the rachni when there would have been technologically advanced enough to have pictures of the rachni easily available? What other race is composed of giant insectoid biotics bugs?

[Jamie9]

LinksOcarina wrote...

the reason Mass Effect 2 is the best game in the series is the writing was focused on the best part of the series; the characters. Their interpersonal conflicts and the resolutions thereof were downright fascinating to watch and be a part of.

Mass Effect 1 and 3 were more about a major story arc, and the characters were along for the ride. It was 2 that fleshed them out.

So you can say the main plot in the entire game is pretty weak, which it is. But the reason we like the games is the characters and their storylines, not the main plotline. And no one can deny the fact that all of the characters had amazing personal storylines throughout, from game 1 to game 3.

This. I've always played BioWare games for it's characters. That's why I'm so interested when squad mates are first revealed.

And ME1 had the least fleshed out characters of the series, so it's my least favourite. Tali has no role in ME1, she is a walking Quarian codex. Garrus hardly has a role either, it's only in ME2 where Garrus becomes really awesome.

[The Heretic of Time]

LinksOcarina wrote...

the reason Mass Effect 2 is the best game in the series is the writing was focused on the best part of the series; the characters.

Seriously? You think a game that doesn't have an actual plot and largely revolves around the daddy issues of Shepard's goon squad makes a better game than a game with an actual story and plot?

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 03 juillet 2012 - 02:56 .

[txgoldrush]

GenericEnemy wrote...

andy69156915 wrote...

GenericEnemy wrote...

Better than ME2 at least.

SHEPARD, I KNOW WE HAVE IMPORTANT THINGS TO DO, BUT SOLVE MY DADDY ISSUES PLOX!

As opposed to ME1?

SHEPARD, I KNOW WE HAVE IMPORTANT THINGS TO DO LIKE FINDING THE CONDUIT BEFORE SAREN DOES AND THE REAPERS COME BACK, BUT FIND MY FAMILY'S ARMOR/FIND DR SALEON/KILL A BUNCH OF GETH AND GIVE ME THEIR DATA FOR THE FLOTILLA FOR ME

Yeah, not seeing a difference here.

The difference being those missions weren't the meat of the game.

However, the way the missions are set up in ME1, its a HUGE plot hole.

Why the HELL would Shepard be doing other things when he is chasing Saren and the Geth to stop their plans? You know, a race against time...

[Seboist]

txgoldrush wrote...

DinoSteve wrote...

Me1's writing > ME3's writing

sorry had to be said.

WRONG

ME3 portraying its characters as multifacted, multidimenisionl, and more "human" beings >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>. ME1 treatement of characters as "talking codex entries".

Try Again.

Yeah, there was such depth with Alliance officials acting like five year old retards groveling at the feet of the player.