Epic, solid story. Yeah I know alot of you are now screaming about plot holes and threads that never got tied off but so what?
Look at so many other popular games and their plot. Point A - Something happens. Point B You kick ass in the method set out by the writers. Point C Roll credits after an ending that has a 50-50 chance of making you look like a chump
Why did everyone love ME1?
Débuté par
sumSOTY
, sept. 30 2012 12:40
Retour en haut
#102
Posté 30 septembre 2012 - 06:55
MegaSovereign
-
- Members
- 10 794 messages
*excessive quote tree deleted by Moderator*
Modifié par Selene Moonsong, 01 octobre 2012 - 02:18 .
#103
Posté 30 septembre 2012 - 06:58
MassStorm
-
- Members
- 955 messages
Well...
- Exploration
- RPG elements dominant over shooter ones.
- No autodialogue
- Diverse approaches to same problem (see Noveria)
- Old school sci-fi (Blade Runner)
- The music
- The coherent story
- A charismatic antagonist like Saren
- The eerie feeling
but most importantly....
- Drew as lead writer
- Exploration
- RPG elements dominant over shooter ones.
- No autodialogue
- Diverse approaches to same problem (see Noveria)
- Old school sci-fi (Blade Runner)
- The music
- The coherent story
- A charismatic antagonist like Saren
- The eerie feeling
but most importantly....
- Drew as lead writer
#104
Posté 30 septembre 2012 - 07:10
Sanunes
-
- Members
- 4 378 messages
This might sound wrong, but I prefer the experience of Mass Effect 1, but I prefer to play Mass Effect 2 and 3. If they can recaputre the atmosphere of Mass Effect 1 while keeping the gameplay of Mass Effect 3, it might be a game I play for years.
#105
Posté 30 septembre 2012 - 07:11
Sanunes
-
- Members
- 4 378 messages
MassStorm wrote...
Well...
- Exploration
- RPG elements dominant over shooter ones.
- No autodialogue
- Diverse approaches to same problem (see Noveria)
- Old school sci-fi (Blade Runner)
- The music
- The coherent story
- A charismatic antagonist like Saren
- The eerie feeling
but most importantly....
- Drew as lead writer
Odd, if he was so good how did he ruin the story of The Old Republic for me.
#106
Posté 30 septembre 2012 - 07:24
tanisha__unknown
-
- Members
- 1 288 messages
[quote]sumSOTY wrote...
Was curious about this (why everyone loves ME1 over the other ME's.) Whenever I start a new character in ME1, its the one which I blow off the most side missions and try to run through it as quickly as I can to get it over with so I can transfer Shepard over to the next game. I've completed the game before with finishing all the side missions and exploring all the planets I found. I don't hate the game, but I find the two sequels much more enetertaining in almost all aspects.[/quote]taste differs...
[quote]My problems with the first Mass Effect:
-Combat wasn't all that great. It's usually walking into a overused room design with 20 enemies waiting there to charge you and gangbang you screaming "I'LL DESTROY YOU! THEY'RE EVERYWHERE! HOLD THE LINE! GO GO GO!" It's even more fun when multiple npc's are screaming them at the same time. [/quote]That's true, combat was best in ME3 and you'll hardly find anyone doubting that. Apart from that, in ME1 I never came across this feeling of "Oh god, MORE enemies? Just how many are there". In ME2 and ME3 I sometimes encountered this feeling, best examples are the derelict reaper and priority earth, where I had the impression that enemies were just added so the game was longer - fighting was more of a job than fun.
[quote]-Squadmates were useless. I only used Wrex and Liara for their biotics. They were killed very quickly, and whenever I command them to go to cover, they end up running elsewhere. [/quote]They are much more useful in ME2 in so far as you run out of ammo so quickly whereas they never do. Anyway, apart from that, they are dumb in 2nd and 3rd part, too.
[quote]-People go on about it being much more open-world. By open world, I assume they're talking about the giant wasteland with 2 objects to go smash a button pattern at, and one of the five overused side-mission-building-clones. Don't get me wrong, I like the concept of having a more open-world, adventure based Mass Effect, and the Mako was fun, but I found it was really done poorly in ME1. [/quote]Mako is much better that planet scanning. Pinging for war assets is not as boring as harvesting resources, granted, but ME1 is really the best game in the trilogy in this respect.
[quote]-People also talked about character lore and interactions being much better. I really felt there wasn't any more character conversations in ME1 than the other ME's. Sure, ME3 you didn't get as many dialogue wheels, but there was alot more dialogue in general. Squadmates would talk to eachother, be seen in different locations, and would have something to say or comment after every mission/side mission (minus the MP maps.) ME2 seemed to have alot more character depth with dialogue wheels and character backgrounds (ME1 might > ME2, but from what I remember it was about the same). ME1 conversations seemed to have a dialogue wheel pop up and whatever you pick would give you the same character reaction and/or same words Shepard will say. [/quote]
Character lore:
ME2>ME3>ME1
Characters were way more fleshed out in the 2nd and 3rd part. Since ME2 is essentially 80% recruiting and loyalty missions, you wouldn't expect otherwise. Granted, ME3 gave you many touching moments with your former squadmates, but keep in mind that the aim of the 1st game was to establish the central conflict and the universe. If I hadn't got to know them in ME1, ME2 and ME3 would be less impressive. In ME1, they come together for the 1st time ever and sort of grow together, the sequels build on that.
character interaction
ME2>ME1>ME3
ME3 last for its autodialogue. ME1's interactions were great, however the refined version of ME2 with then interrupts really stands out.
[quote]-Powers were really useless, minus the ones that increase your weapon abilities. Lift and throw were useful BC they kept the enimies CC'd, but everything else did minimal damage in comparison to your weapons. If you run into a boss, it's just spam all your available cooldowns and pew pew away. I felt the shared global cooldown design was a million times better.[/quote]I admittedly almost solely play on casual, but the tech powers do quite some damage there;-).
Apart from that, I guess that your perspective is a bit limited.
tech powers:
overload/this other damage dealing thing - quite useful since they have area effect
this bio suppressing thingy - deals some damage, helped a lot against biotics (I am thinking of the biptics who held the scientists hostage and it also helps on Feros against the Asari clone)
hacking - massively useful against geth
biotic powers: (I actually played an adept on insanity, so I am somewhat qualified here)
stasis: very powerful, takes an enemy out of battle, massively useful if you take the evolution where you can actually damage the target
lift/singularity - lift works on bosses and sigularity on groups, both extremely useful
throw - not much of use, I give you credit on that one
combat:
assault mode (or whatever it was called, this thingy that gives you damage reduction): massively useful, enhances survivability greatly
weapon skills: somewhat useful, I don't exactly know about the damage bonus, but the accuracy increase comes in handy, apart from that, sort of boring
assault thingy (increases melee largely and usual assault slightly): not that bad, but costs too much
medic thingy: increases regeneration, but if ou desperately need it, go with an armor module
so after all, for each of the fields one or two abilities really shine, some are less useful, the rest is meh, but from my list I have to conclude that it's actually the combat abilities which are mostly uninteresting and too expensive for what they grant
[quote]-From an role-playing perspective, I would think most people would be annoyed with Shepard carrying 4 weapons and only being able to use 1-2 if you weren't a soilder. Along with fixing that problem, I also liked the cooldown timer being affected by weapon weight. Definitely added an RPG element between available choices and how it affects your gameplay.[/quote]You had your RPG element in so far as you could only use one or two properly. Apart from that, I do not like the fact that every class can use any weapon in ME3 to the same extent. There should have been larger bonuses for infiltrators using sniper rifles and soldier using any weapon or punishments for adepts using weapons instead of powers besides the cooldown time.
Apart from that, choosing armor and weapons is not the heart of an RPG. For me it is dialogue and choice during the main plot. This will be covered later.
[quote]-The choices of gear and weapons was a nice RPG styled part of the game. But 99% of everything you pick up gets junked. And there really was nothing unique from one weapon to another, minus the damage done. I feel like ME3 did a much, much better job at nailing the different weapon choices and modifications, along with the custom gear, where ME1 was just one of the few skins with differen't stats. The ammo slot was the only part I really liked about it.[/quote] See above, choosing armor and weapons not makes it an RPG. Apart from that, you're right that 99% was crap and as soon as you got your hand on spectre X equipment, you wouldn't use anything else and that that aspect was treated better in ME3.
[quote]-ME1 had less drastic choices you had to make (from what I recall.) Besides having Kaidan or Ashley die and the council live or die, there wasn't all that much. Sure, you send Anderson to fight the guards or deck Udina, but it gave you the same results. If you killed everyone at Feros or not it really didn't play a roll in the story. ME2 was the same way with a lack of choices. ME3 had many more options with who dies by saving them or ignoring/completing a side mission, what glactic races are affected by your choices, etc. [/quote]Look at the overall story arc. ME1 established the universe. In ME3, the galaxy is at war. By the very nature of the setting, you'd expect the choices of ME3 to have a greater impact than the ones in ME1.
There were some major decisions in ME1, like the Rachni-live-or-die-choice, wether or not you saved the council, who survives Virmire. Apart from that there were many minor decisions you could make especially in the sidequests. There was no major impact to be expected since they were SIDEquests. It's a pity that the sequels pretty much gave up on your decisions, however the main ones should have had some impact.
[quote]-ME3 did a good job with the skill points and giving you a selection of choices to pick from as you go farther up the talent tree. ME1 was just a big 'ol list to drop points into to increase stats slightly. [/quote]I think the skill system in ME3 is very good, no doubt on that.
[quote]I'm not trying to rip on ME1, but I personally didn't enjoy it nearly as much as I did with 2 & 3. I can see why people could complain about 2, alot. But 3 seemed to have the best of both worlds, between combat, character interaction, lore, & RPG elements with gear and leveling (minus the horrible, horrible, horrible ending. I feel like people hate on the game simply bc of that, but I can kinda understand that. I was seriously pissed when I completed the game. But that's a conversation for a different page.)
Please don't start raging and sh*t over this. Just leave your reasons why you dis/agree.
Cheers[/quote]ME3 TRIES to combine the best of both worlds. There are some parts were it succeeded, like the combat system and I liked the fact that it was more focused on the plot. However it also partly failed. Even though the autdialogue was not that bad (some of it was very good, other parts were mediocre at best), I expect an RPG to offer me dialogue CHOICES. Additionally, even though the actual plot could have had some potential (probably a ME2.5 to establish the crucible would have been much better than "process of elimination mixed with a little desperation"), it was done quite poorly and has so many plotholes and throws over a lot of what has been established (reapers not going for the citadel first etc.). As overall plot I consider the introduction on earth, mars, thessia, sanctuary, illusive man base and priority earth. The rest of them are subplots which are mandatory, but rather contribute troops and solve some of the major conflicts like geth/quarian war or genophage.
As for the argument that people hate the game because of the ending: that may be partly true. If the original ending would have been halfway decent, I could have ovelooked the flaws of ME3. However, since there are lots of them left even with EC, the game lacks redeeming properties, even though some parts were awesome.
Was curious about this (why everyone loves ME1 over the other ME's.) Whenever I start a new character in ME1, its the one which I blow off the most side missions and try to run through it as quickly as I can to get it over with so I can transfer Shepard over to the next game. I've completed the game before with finishing all the side missions and exploring all the planets I found. I don't hate the game, but I find the two sequels much more enetertaining in almost all aspects.[/quote]taste differs...
[quote]My problems with the first Mass Effect:
-Combat wasn't all that great. It's usually walking into a overused room design with 20 enemies waiting there to charge you and gangbang you screaming "I'LL DESTROY YOU! THEY'RE EVERYWHERE! HOLD THE LINE! GO GO GO!" It's even more fun when multiple npc's are screaming them at the same time. [/quote]That's true, combat was best in ME3 and you'll hardly find anyone doubting that. Apart from that, in ME1 I never came across this feeling of "Oh god, MORE enemies? Just how many are there". In ME2 and ME3 I sometimes encountered this feeling, best examples are the derelict reaper and priority earth, where I had the impression that enemies were just added so the game was longer - fighting was more of a job than fun.
[quote]-Squadmates were useless. I only used Wrex and Liara for their biotics. They were killed very quickly, and whenever I command them to go to cover, they end up running elsewhere. [/quote]They are much more useful in ME2 in so far as you run out of ammo so quickly whereas they never do. Anyway, apart from that, they are dumb in 2nd and 3rd part, too.
[quote]-People go on about it being much more open-world. By open world, I assume they're talking about the giant wasteland with 2 objects to go smash a button pattern at, and one of the five overused side-mission-building-clones. Don't get me wrong, I like the concept of having a more open-world, adventure based Mass Effect, and the Mako was fun, but I found it was really done poorly in ME1. [/quote]Mako is much better that planet scanning. Pinging for war assets is not as boring as harvesting resources, granted, but ME1 is really the best game in the trilogy in this respect.
[quote]-People also talked about character lore and interactions being much better. I really felt there wasn't any more character conversations in ME1 than the other ME's. Sure, ME3 you didn't get as many dialogue wheels, but there was alot more dialogue in general. Squadmates would talk to eachother, be seen in different locations, and would have something to say or comment after every mission/side mission (minus the MP maps.) ME2 seemed to have alot more character depth with dialogue wheels and character backgrounds (ME1 might > ME2, but from what I remember it was about the same). ME1 conversations seemed to have a dialogue wheel pop up and whatever you pick would give you the same character reaction and/or same words Shepard will say. [/quote]
Character lore:
ME2>ME3>ME1
Characters were way more fleshed out in the 2nd and 3rd part. Since ME2 is essentially 80% recruiting and loyalty missions, you wouldn't expect otherwise. Granted, ME3 gave you many touching moments with your former squadmates, but keep in mind that the aim of the 1st game was to establish the central conflict and the universe. If I hadn't got to know them in ME1, ME2 and ME3 would be less impressive. In ME1, they come together for the 1st time ever and sort of grow together, the sequels build on that.
character interaction
ME2>ME1>ME3
ME3 last for its autodialogue. ME1's interactions were great, however the refined version of ME2 with then interrupts really stands out.
[quote]-Powers were really useless, minus the ones that increase your weapon abilities. Lift and throw were useful BC they kept the enimies CC'd, but everything else did minimal damage in comparison to your weapons. If you run into a boss, it's just spam all your available cooldowns and pew pew away. I felt the shared global cooldown design was a million times better.[/quote]I admittedly almost solely play on casual, but the tech powers do quite some damage there;-).
Apart from that, I guess that your perspective is a bit limited.
tech powers:
overload/this other damage dealing thing - quite useful since they have area effect
this bio suppressing thingy - deals some damage, helped a lot against biotics (I am thinking of the biptics who held the scientists hostage and it also helps on Feros against the Asari clone)
hacking - massively useful against geth
biotic powers: (I actually played an adept on insanity, so I am somewhat qualified here)
stasis: very powerful, takes an enemy out of battle, massively useful if you take the evolution where you can actually damage the target
lift/singularity - lift works on bosses and sigularity on groups, both extremely useful
throw - not much of use, I give you credit on that one
combat:
assault mode (or whatever it was called, this thingy that gives you damage reduction): massively useful, enhances survivability greatly
weapon skills: somewhat useful, I don't exactly know about the damage bonus, but the accuracy increase comes in handy, apart from that, sort of boring
assault thingy (increases melee largely and usual assault slightly): not that bad, but costs too much
medic thingy: increases regeneration, but if ou desperately need it, go with an armor module
so after all, for each of the fields one or two abilities really shine, some are less useful, the rest is meh, but from my list I have to conclude that it's actually the combat abilities which are mostly uninteresting and too expensive for what they grant
[quote]-From an role-playing perspective, I would think most people would be annoyed with Shepard carrying 4 weapons and only being able to use 1-2 if you weren't a soilder. Along with fixing that problem, I also liked the cooldown timer being affected by weapon weight. Definitely added an RPG element between available choices and how it affects your gameplay.[/quote]You had your RPG element in so far as you could only use one or two properly. Apart from that, I do not like the fact that every class can use any weapon in ME3 to the same extent. There should have been larger bonuses for infiltrators using sniper rifles and soldier using any weapon or punishments for adepts using weapons instead of powers besides the cooldown time.
Apart from that, choosing armor and weapons is not the heart of an RPG. For me it is dialogue and choice during the main plot. This will be covered later.
[quote]-The choices of gear and weapons was a nice RPG styled part of the game. But 99% of everything you pick up gets junked. And there really was nothing unique from one weapon to another, minus the damage done. I feel like ME3 did a much, much better job at nailing the different weapon choices and modifications, along with the custom gear, where ME1 was just one of the few skins with differen't stats. The ammo slot was the only part I really liked about it.[/quote] See above, choosing armor and weapons not makes it an RPG. Apart from that, you're right that 99% was crap and as soon as you got your hand on spectre X equipment, you wouldn't use anything else and that that aspect was treated better in ME3.
[quote]-ME1 had less drastic choices you had to make (from what I recall.) Besides having Kaidan or Ashley die and the council live or die, there wasn't all that much. Sure, you send Anderson to fight the guards or deck Udina, but it gave you the same results. If you killed everyone at Feros or not it really didn't play a roll in the story. ME2 was the same way with a lack of choices. ME3 had many more options with who dies by saving them or ignoring/completing a side mission, what glactic races are affected by your choices, etc. [/quote]Look at the overall story arc. ME1 established the universe. In ME3, the galaxy is at war. By the very nature of the setting, you'd expect the choices of ME3 to have a greater impact than the ones in ME1.
There were some major decisions in ME1, like the Rachni-live-or-die-choice, wether or not you saved the council, who survives Virmire. Apart from that there were many minor decisions you could make especially in the sidequests. There was no major impact to be expected since they were SIDEquests. It's a pity that the sequels pretty much gave up on your decisions, however the main ones should have had some impact.
[quote]-ME3 did a good job with the skill points and giving you a selection of choices to pick from as you go farther up the talent tree. ME1 was just a big 'ol list to drop points into to increase stats slightly. [/quote]I think the skill system in ME3 is very good, no doubt on that.
[quote]I'm not trying to rip on ME1, but I personally didn't enjoy it nearly as much as I did with 2 & 3. I can see why people could complain about 2, alot. But 3 seemed to have the best of both worlds, between combat, character interaction, lore, & RPG elements with gear and leveling (minus the horrible, horrible, horrible ending. I feel like people hate on the game simply bc of that, but I can kinda understand that. I was seriously pissed when I completed the game. But that's a conversation for a different page.)
Please don't start raging and sh*t over this. Just leave your reasons why you dis/agree.
Cheers[/quote]ME3 TRIES to combine the best of both worlds. There are some parts were it succeeded, like the combat system and I liked the fact that it was more focused on the plot. However it also partly failed. Even though the autdialogue was not that bad (some of it was very good, other parts were mediocre at best), I expect an RPG to offer me dialogue CHOICES. Additionally, even though the actual plot could have had some potential (probably a ME2.5 to establish the crucible would have been much better than "process of elimination mixed with a little desperation"), it was done quite poorly and has so many plotholes and throws over a lot of what has been established (reapers not going for the citadel first etc.). As overall plot I consider the introduction on earth, mars, thessia, sanctuary, illusive man base and priority earth. The rest of them are subplots which are mandatory, but rather contribute troops and solve some of the major conflicts like geth/quarian war or genophage.
As for the argument that people hate the game because of the ending: that may be partly true. If the original ending would have been halfway decent, I could have ovelooked the flaws of ME3. However, since there are lots of them left even with EC, the game lacks redeeming properties, even though some parts were awesome.
#107
Posté 30 septembre 2012 - 07:33
Delta095
-
- Members
- 592 messages
I loved the music, and the story. And the characters, and the voice acting, and the epic cinematic scenes.
However, gameplay, graphic, music, and everything-wise, it seems more like a beta-phase indie game compared to Mass Effect 2 and 3. And with good reason because back then, it was sort of an indie game. It was like Halo with 500% less publicity. It was a new game.
I like the game, but I like ME 2 and 3 better.
However, gameplay, graphic, music, and everything-wise, it seems more like a beta-phase indie game compared to Mass Effect 2 and 3. And with good reason because back then, it was sort of an indie game. It was like Halo with 500% less publicity. It was a new game.
I like the game, but I like ME 2 and 3 better.
#108
Posté 30 septembre 2012 - 07:43
MassStorm
-
- Members
- 955 messages
Sanunes wrote...
MassStorm wrote...
Well...
- Exploration
- RPG elements dominant over shooter ones.
- No autodialogue
- Diverse approaches to same problem (see Noveria)
- Old school sci-fi (Blade Runner)
- The music
- The coherent story
- A charismatic antagonist like Saren
- The eerie feeling
but most importantly....
- Drew as lead writer
Odd, if he was so good how did he ruin the story of The Old Republic for me.
MMORPG structure
#109
Posté 30 septembre 2012 - 07:54
C9316
-
- Members
- 5 638 messages
The story was the most coherent in ME1. Sure the combat and mako bits were mediocre, but what ME1 is remembered for is its brilliant story and potential said story had with its well crafted universe and great characters. Sadly it all fell flat with the last installment.
#110
Posté 30 septembre 2012 - 07:56
Ghost
-
- Members
- 3 512 messages
MassStorm wrote...
Sanunes wrote...
MassStorm wrote...
Well...
- Exploration
- RPG elements dominant over shooter ones.
- No autodialogue
- Diverse approaches to same problem (see Noveria)
- Old school sci-fi (Blade Runner)
- The music
- The coherent story
- A charismatic antagonist like Saren
- The eerie feeling
but most importantly....
- Drew as lead writer
Odd, if he was so good how did he ruin the story of The Old Republic for me.
MMORPG structure
How about that god awful KOTOR book?
#111
Posté 30 septembre 2012 - 09:18
Pelle6666
-
- Members
- 1 198 messages
That game blew my mind. The opening scene was the first indication that this would be one for the ages. The story was just so well written, the main character was interesting, the crew members had brilliant background stories and the plot never got boring.
The way they little by little turned Saren from a bad-ass villain to a victim of the reapers and the way they introduced Sovereign as the true nemesis was just fantastic! And of course the deeply emotional passages in the game like the Virmire mission and the ending sequence. The music still give me chills when I hear it.
So, there are my reasons for loving Me1, not saying that everything was better in that game, over all I liked Me2 the best but Me3 made me cry like five times on my first play through... I can't decide which one is best.
The way they little by little turned Saren from a bad-ass villain to a victim of the reapers and the way they introduced Sovereign as the true nemesis was just fantastic! And of course the deeply emotional passages in the game like the Virmire mission and the ending sequence. The music still give me chills when I hear it.
So, there are my reasons for loving Me1, not saying that everything was better in that game, over all I liked Me2 the best but Me3 made me cry like five times on my first play through... I can't decide which one is best.
#112
Posté 30 septembre 2012 - 09:29
Icinix
-
- Members
- 8 188 messages
Curunen wrote...
Well the mako had one thing that nothing else could match - the feeling of a planetary rover. Yes I agree the controls with thrusters, and more importantly some of the terrain you had to traverse were not excellent.
But slowly driving across the barren surface of a planet/asteroid, with a gigantic red star (or whatever) on the horizon... it's the small things like that that really capture the imagination.
This as well.
Everytime I play there is at least once in each game where I'm driving the Mako on some random world - and I'll catch a moment with some amazing view and I'll just stop and enjoy it for a second.
The very first time I played ME3 this moment was on an ice planet with strong winds blowing snow horizontally across the screen - a hazy sun just visible through the snow. It was a moment that just stopped me in my tracks. There was no story based gameplay involved, it was just some random planet that many players may not have seen if they didn't go exploring - but man was it awesome.
Nothing in ME2 or ME3 comes close to the experience provided by ME1 for me.
#113
Posté 30 septembre 2012 - 09:34
Fixers0
-
- Members
- 4 434 messages
It's like Watching Star wars (the orginal) for the first, There were a lot of technical issues and some things didn't turned out as well as thought or even downright ugly, but it feels genuine, you just know a lot effort has been put into making this game/film a succes, some elements were innovative and unconventional for that time, it all deviates just that little bit from the standard forumla, making it great overall experiance and even manages to impress you again and again even though the actual content of the game/film can be considered outdated or being improved at later installments.
#114
Posté 30 septembre 2012 - 10:42
Alien Number Six
-
- Members
- 1 900 messages
I have yet to play Mass Effect. I personally can't wait to try the game and see the introduction of my two favorite characters in the series. Garrus and Tali.
#115
Posté 30 septembre 2012 - 10:53
Zubie
-
- Members
- 867 messages
Mass Effect 2 and 3 had a more refined combat system but that's about it. Mass Effect 1 offered a much richer experience.
#116
Posté 30 septembre 2012 - 11:21
KotorEffect3
-
- Members
- 9 416 messages
I loved ME 1 back in it's day and it was arguably my favorite game on the xbox 360 but when ME 2 came out it was such an upgrade over ME 1 it blew ME 1 out of the water for me. I would still play ME 1 but only to make Shepards I can import into ME 2 and get the entire ME experience. In comparison to the sequels ME 1 feels like a chore in places. Flaws in ME 1 I could look over at the time are harder to look over when in comparison to the sequels since the sequels fixed many of those flaws. Now the sequels aren't perfect but they have alot more fun factor going for them than ME 1 has. ME 1 feels like a chore in comparison to ME 2 and ME 3.
#117
Posté 30 septembre 2012 - 11:22
Ghost
-
- Members
- 3 512 messages
Alien Number Six wrote...
I have yet to play Mass Effect. I personally can't wait to try the game and see the introduction of my two favorite characters in the series. Garrus and Tali.
Tali in ME1 is a walking codex.
#118
Posté 30 septembre 2012 - 11:28
KotorEffect3
-
- Members
- 9 416 messages
Ghost1017 wrote...
Alien Number Six wrote...
I have yet to play Mass Effect. I personally can't wait to try the game and see the introduction of my two favorite characters in the series. Garrus and Tali.
Tali in ME1 is a walking codex.
I didn't feel much of a connection to Tali as a character until ME 2. She showed more personality in Freedom's Progress alone than she did in all of ME 1.
#119
Posté 30 septembre 2012 - 11:39
KotorEffect3
-
- Members
- 9 416 messages
Raizo wrote...
JamieCOTC wrote...
Nostalgia plays a big part of it, but compare ME1 to other games AT THE TIME and you'll get a better understanding. ME1 has a lot of problems, but it has the better overall plot, imo.
This more or less sums up my opinion on this matter.
I also agree that ME1 is only prefered here on BSN. Almost everyone I kow that gives a crap about the ME series likes the 'idea' of ME1 but prefers ME2 and ME3 over it.
How I view it. Sure ME 1 got me into Mass Effect but the sequels kept it going and made it stronger.
#120
Posté 30 septembre 2012 - 11:44
Morty Smith
-
- Members
- 2 456 messages
ME villains never got better than Saren in my opinion. I still think it was a waste to kill him off, so much awesome potential.
#121
Posté 30 septembre 2012 - 11:51
KotorEffect3
-
- Members
- 9 416 messages
Kroitz wrote...
ME villains never got better than Saren in my opinion. I still think it was a waste to kill him off, so much awesome potential.
I don't argue that Saren was a great villain because he was a great antagonist but it made sense killing him off in ME 1 because by the time you hit Virmire you realized he was just a puppet of the real villains and the series had to be about them not some indoctrinated Turian.
#122
Posté 01 octobre 2012 - 12:00
SnapJackalPop
-
- Members
- 33 messages
Atmosphere and story is what really stuck with me. It's a lonely universe in ME1, scattered outposts here and there, I always felt relieved at the hubs to find people. The colours and music really lift it in that respect. Combine that with being able to navigate my way through a pretty compelling story however I wanted and I couldn't help but be sucked in.
#123
Posté 01 octobre 2012 - 12:00
Morty Smith
-
- Members
- 2 456 messages
KotorEffect3 wrote...
Kroitz wrote...
ME villains never got better than Saren in my opinion. I still think it was a waste to kill him off, so much awesome potential.
I don't argue that Saren was a great villain because he was a great antagonist but it made sense killing him off in ME 1 because by the time you hit Virmire you realized he was just a puppet of the real villains and the series had to be about them not some indoctrinated Turian.
I guess were some only see a corpe I see potential ...
... wait ...
No what I meant was keeping him for a different kind metamophosis. I guess having him as a character in ME2 could have been a great way to explore the aftermath of indoctrination or "soul searching". But well rotten ist rotten. No sense in dwelling on the subject.
#124
Posté 01 octobre 2012 - 12:00
iSousek
-
- Members
- 948 messages
Best story
Best squadmate interaction
Best overall atmosphere
Best squadmate interaction
Best overall atmosphere
#125
Posté 01 octobre 2012 - 12:06
KotorEffect3
-
- Members
- 9 416 messages
Kroitz wrote...
KotorEffect3 wrote...
Kroitz wrote...
ME villains never got better than Saren in my opinion. I still think it was a waste to kill him off, so much awesome potential.
I don't argue that Saren was a great villain because he was a great antagonist but it made sense killing him off in ME 1 because by the time you hit Virmire you realized he was just a puppet of the real villains and the series had to be about them not some indoctrinated Turian.
I guess were some only see a corpe I see potential ...
... wait ...
No what I meant was keeping him for a different kind metamophosis. I guess having him as a character in ME2 could have been a great way to explore the aftermath of indoctrination or "soul searching". But well rotten ist rotten. No sense in dwelling on the subject.
The only person to ever come back from indoctrination is Shiala and that is due to the Thorian.
