617 réponses à ce sujet

[jkstexas2001]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Sorry jav.

Perfect review from Amazon methinks. And a consumer review is very credible. Much moreso as opposed to a review from IGN. Personally, I think he speaks for most RPG fans when it comes to the sentiment "The main focus of the game was the story and thedevelopment of your character, which is exactly how any good RPG should be.". Which is exactly what I've been saying since I joined the original board.

T. M. Palmieri's take:

Mass Effect (the first one) was an incredible game. There was great
depth to the characters and you had a great many choices in developing
your character. The battles, while not mind-blowingly difficult, were
challenging enough. The main focus of the game was the story and the
development of your character, which is exactly how any good RPG should
be. ME was not a shooter. It was a RPG with a few shooter elements. ME2
has little in common with the first game, save the main character's
last name and a few cameos by characters we saw (and liked) in the
first game.


Basically, to make a long story short, ME2 is a shooter, which just
happens to have a few RPG elements thrown into it (poorly, I might
add). The story is secondary to shooting things, which seem to be a
much higher level (with better equipment and weapons) than you. So if
you like shooters - and enjoy games that raise your blood pressure and
make you want to throw your XBox through a wall - you'll love it. If
you're a RPG fan who enjoyed games like KOTOR, Dragon Age, and ME1,
then save your money. I'm sure the BioWare fanboys will tell you this
is a lie and that ME2 is "even better" than the first one, and it is up
to you whether to believe them or believe me. But as someone who
resents paying $60 for a game I truly wanted to love, all I can say is
that I am extremely disappointed with BioWare. I was expecting a RPG on
the same level as ME1 (or Dragon Age), but instead I ended up with Call
of Duty...starring Commander Shepard.

I agree.  They completely dropped the ball regarding RPG/Character continuity and sold out to the HALO crowd.  Of course, they are so arrogant that they really don't care what we think about it, so these non-fanboy posts don't matter.

[Jaysonie]

jkstexas2001 wrote...

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Sorry jav.

Perfect review from Amazon methinks. And a consumer review is very credible. Much moreso as opposed to a review from IGN. Personally, I think he speaks for most RPG fans when it comes to the sentiment "The main focus of the game was the story and thedevelopment of your character, which is exactly how any good RPG should be.". Which is exactly what I've been saying since I joined the original board.

T. M. Palmieri's take:

Mass Effect (the first one) was an incredible game. There was great
depth to the characters and you had a great many choices in developing
your character. The battles, while not mind-blowingly difficult, were
challenging enough. The main focus of the game was the story and the
development of your character, which is exactly how any good RPG should
be. ME was not a shooter. It was a RPG with a few shooter elements. ME2
has little in common with the first game, save the main character's
last name and a few cameos by characters we saw (and liked) in the
first game.


Basically, to make a long story short, ME2 is a shooter, which just
happens to have a few RPG elements thrown into it (poorly, I might
add). The story is secondary to shooting things, which seem to be a
much higher level (with better equipment and weapons) than you. So if
you like shooters - and enjoy games that raise your blood pressure and
make you want to throw your XBox through a wall - you'll love it. If
you're a RPG fan who enjoyed games like KOTOR, Dragon Age, and ME1,
then save your money. I'm sure the BioWare fanboys will tell you this
is a lie and that ME2 is "even better" than the first one, and it is up
to you whether to believe them or believe me. But as someone who
resents paying $60 for a game I truly wanted to love, all I can say is
that I am extremely disappointed with BioWare. I was expecting a RPG on
the same level as ME1 (or Dragon Age), but instead I ended up with Call
of Duty...starring Commander Shepard.

I agree.  They completely dropped the ball regarding RPG/Character continuity and sold out to the HALO crowd.  Of course, they are so arrogant that they really don't care what we think about it, so these non-fanboy posts don't matter.

Said the pot to the kettle.

[Tennyochan]

Gamer Reaction The Podcast: ME2 Special
(Length: 1hr 27min)

"Alex and our good friend Jen dork out about everything you can think of
regarding Mass Effect 2."

Recap: (brackets are general conversation rather than criticism) 
0:02:50 -Combat (improvement: More player-skill based than build/rolldice, coversystem: better but still has issues. also no crouch button.)
0:06:35 -Inventory (love/prefer ME2 system. Want auto-Armour-helmet toggle during combat/conversation)
(0:11:55 -General conversation; VA's, playing shepard)
0:20:40 -Planet Exploration (Good that shepard can unlock safes/etc without 'electronics' skills-more player skill based.  Prefer ME2 mining/exploration but planet scanning is slow)
(0:24:24-Graphics upgrade; +eyeball-emotions in eyes except jacob's(?))
0:27:24-Dialouge: +streamlined conversations +interupt system
(0:32:40-hosts Roleplaying shepard)
(0:39:40-Characters: +love. General dork-out/fanism. -Wanted more Legion(0:54:00) because players recruit him late. General plot etc)
0:57:03-0:58:20 -Cerberbus/Shep origin tie in/relation/dialouge
(0:58:20 - General plot, TIM/VA, Characters eyes)
(1.00.05 - Paragon and renegade dialouge improvement.)
(1.01.00 to End- General ME2 plot. Sucide results. Host Romance talk, +Pets/Shepard quaters customizing. Newplayers&decision pressure of trilogy)

summerised for easy viewing for feeback

Modifié par tennyochan, 23 mars 2010 - 11:03 .

[Seraphael]

Drakron wrote...

Jaysonie wrote...

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Sorry jav.

..................And a consumer review is very credible. Much moreso as opposed to a review from IGN.......... .....I think he speaks for most RPG fans when it comes to the sentiment .......

No and no.

No.

http://www.gamasutra...php?story=23926

I hope you know who he is ...

Nobody (at least with half a brain cell) trusts the so called "gaming jornalists" anymore, even less the reviews ... as unprofessional user reviews are at least they are untainted by publisher influence of the editorial board.

The interviewee claims user reviews are the new benchmark for games. Guess what? The users like ME2 better than they did ME1. In fact, they prefer ME2 to ME1 about as much as the reviewers do. Despite the fact there's clearly a sizable number of hardcore RPG-fundamentalists that are disappointed with the direction the series has taken and slams the game in user reviews for that reason alone. On top of that, the ME2 sales are significantly better than ME1's which is obviously a crucial meter for how well liked a game is.

To claim that a purposely selected user review the poster agrees with, is more credible than a large number of professional reviews he doesn't agree with, is not only self-serving in the extreme - it's rather infantile and exceedingly transparent as well. We see the usual suspects on these boards repeating their same grievances ad infinitum. As of late, perceived storyline- and character deficiencies have been added to the old dumbed-down shooter-, ammo-, no loot-, no nudity-, no gay sex-, and no-mako- bag of complaints.

Personally, I've got a hard time understanding why some people prefer the ME1 characters to their ME2 counterparts. Apart from nostalgia that is. ME2 characters are invariably more complex and interesting. ME1 Liara was as dull as any sexed-up blue skinned space alien sorceress could possibly be for instance. As for the storyline, a sequel seldom lives up to the prequel for many reasons: Some of the novelty is lost, they major story outline has already been drawn, different and unrealistic expectations all play a part. Personally I found it to be a quite good "intermission", but fully expect the finale to blow it out of the water. How is that for unrealistic expectations?

Modifié par Seraphael, 17 mars 2010 - 09:31 .

[TJSolo]

"

The interviewee claims user reviews are the new benchmark for games. Guess what? The users like ME2 better than they did ME1. In fact, they prefer ME2 to ME1 about as much as the reviewers do. Despite the fact there's clearly a sizable number of hardcore RPG-fundamentalists that are disappointed with the direction the series has taken and slams the game in user reviews for that reason alone. On top of that, the ME2 sales are significantly better than ME1's which is obviously a crucial meter for how well liked a game is."



Wow a sequel to a hit game that already sold millions has big sales the first week.



Nice try on nostalgia. It might hold true for some but there are others who have gotten or recently played ME1 only a few weeks before ME2 just to have some saves created, that say they prefer ME1.

There are others still playing ME1 just for the hell of it.

Nostalgia isn't a sweeping claim that disregards everyones feelings on the two games.

[Seraphael]

TJSolo wrote...

Wow a sequel to a hit game that already sold millions has big sales the first week.

Your point being ME2 would have made significantly less sales (than ME1) if it wasn't a sequel? Despite being widely better received by gamers and professional reviewers alike? Come on, it's like you're not even trying.

Nice try on nostalgia. It might hold true for some but there are others who have gotten or recently played ME1 only a few weeks before ME2 just to have some saves created, that say they prefer ME1.
There are others still playing ME1 just for the hell of it.
Nostalgia isn't a sweeping claim that disregards everyones feelings on the two games.

Nice try? Clearly nostalgia plays a part, in all likelyhood a significant part. The Liara threads are among the largest in board history...for a somewhat awkward girlish figure with little personality that is saying something. I have more fond memories playing Mume a text-based MUD than I did the clearly superior WoW for instance. First loves are hard to forget after all.

[TJSolo]

[quote]Seraphael wrote...
Your point being ME2 would have made significantly less sales (than ME1) if it wasn't a sequel? Despite being widely better received by gamers and professional reviewers alike? Come on, it's like you're not even trying.
[/quote]
My point was ME2s sales is greatly effected the by already established fan base.
If you want to go out and guess what the sales would be if ME2 was a stand alone game and not a sequel, you can try.
I am just basing my statement off what is.

[quote
Nice try? Clearly nostalgia plays a part, in all likelyhood a significant part. The Liara threads are among the largest in board history...for a somewhat awkward girlish figure with little personality that is saying something. I have more fond memories playing Mume a text-based MUD than I did the clearly superior WoW for instance. First loves are hard to forget after all.
[/quote]

Nostalgia is a claim some try to make but with ME1 being only 2 years older,  on the same platform as ME2, and with in the same trilogy it is not the case. For people like I have stated that have picked up ME1 recently either new purchase or just making more import saves, nostalgia is not the case.

[subject_117]

The changes (for the sake of change) from ME1 have been disappointing. As much as I like the improvements to combat, I don't care for pushing the series in the shooter direction. Lack of a crouch button, coupled with it being a shooter is just plain baffling. I loved ME1, but the inventory system sucked. Removing it completely though? The XP system is quite odd also. No XP points for killing enemies? Collecting ammo? Shooterish.

Hey Bioware, it's not a bad game, in fact the story seems that it will be interesting. But it's supposed to be an RPG. This is too much of a departure. Will ME3 be an FPS? Sorry guys, wrong direction.

[hwf]

Can't help but like Mass Effect 2.
And like it better then the first game of the trilogy at that. Heck, even liking it better then Dragon Age Origins - even though that game does some things better then Mass Effect 2.

Sure, the plot's a disappointment, but the characters and how you actually get to experience their personal stories first hand makes up for it.
A lot of the pointless frustrations of ME1 have been removed and the things it excelled at have been polished and improved. Playtime for a regular run through the game felt identical to ME1 - but since everything is condensed you spend less time walking, driving and more time actually playing the game. The gun-play has improved massively and the Vanguard class' play-style in particular impressed me - especially when compared to the game play of modern shooters.

Bioware compared "Mass Effect 2" to "Star Wars 5"; this comparison is true on just one point - nothing gets done, the heroes are spinning in place.
While there is foreshadowing, some more subtle then others, on what will happen come the trilogy's end, I feel SW5 handled the evolution of the characters from SW4 a lot better; since the characters actually featured in the entire film rather then have a cameo as happens in ME2. Dialogue and characterization have improved significantly from the first game; so much in fact that it felt a bit like a drag going back to replay the first game for a few choice imports.

Any review is subjective so here's my personal preference on games: Liking shooters I have played many competitively like QuakeWorld CTF, CounterStrike and TeamFortress - yet my gaming experience started, as a little kiddo, with the "Sierra Quests" and I was stunned by the plot content and general experience of games like the Ultima Underworld series (which inspired Bethesda's games, like Oblivion and Fallout 3), PlaneScape: Torment, the Fallout series and the Baldur's Gate series (which inspired the Dragon Age franchise).
Mass Effect 2 was worth my money and I am glad I purchased it. Detailed opinion on Mass Effect 2 is on a colossal blog entry on my forum profile, reader beware.
I rated ME1 a 7½ out of 10 in 2008 whereas ME2 scored an improved 8 out of 10.

Once I was done with ME2 I got the same feeling I had way  back when I installed Baldur's Gate 2's Throne of Bhaal; a weird mix of excitement and concern - the feeling that it'll all be over soon enough.
I haven't played a game that made me feel that for a long time.

[Bigdoser]

OneBadAssMother wrote...

ME1 is still the winner when comparing to ME2 in terms of its plot/story/twists/universe. It introduced the world to us so of course it's going to have a higher score. Loot management in ME1 was a pain however, and combat mechanics in ME2 is much better. ME2 Squad AI is developed and it's much more tactical and intense. Not to mention ME2 runs so much faster then ME1 (probably due to being ported by Demiurge Studies to PC) Combat in ME1 was rather meh in my opinion. You just hit immunity or barrier then go around killing things. In ME2, it's much better.

My thoughts exactly.

[Seraphael]

TJSolo wrote...

Seraphael wrote...
Your point being ME2 would have made significantly less sales (than ME1) if it wasn't a sequel? Despite being widely better received by gamers and professional reviewers alike? Come on, it's like you're not even trying.

My point was ME2s sales is greatly effected the by already established fan base.
If you want to go out and guess what the sales would be if ME2 was a stand alone game and not a sequel, you can try. I am just basing my statement off what is.

Nah, your arguing for the sake of arguing.

ME1 sold very well and it stands to reason ME2 would have sold significantly better based on reviews and user ratings alone even if ME2 had been the first in a new series. You can try to argue this further - but you'd be just as wrong and look more desperate to boot.

Nostalgia is a claim some try to make but with ME1 being only 2 years older,  on the same platform as ME2, and with in the same trilogy it is not the case. For people like I have stated that have picked up ME1 recently either new purchase or just making more import saves, nostalgia is not the case.

Trying to claim? Are you so eager to discredit ME2 that you (indirectly) refute human nature? Look, the ME1 characters were, obviously, introduced before their ME2 counterparts, people bonded and a rather significant fan base (on the boards at least) developed. And if anything, this fan base grew with time. Since the ME2 characters are more complex, better written, generally better looking (though clearly taste, they would probably would have had a significantly larger fan base if they had a similar head start. Is this really so hard to understand or accept?  

Lastly, I'd like to compare Mass Effect with Command & Conquer. Both series are published by EA, both have developed a large following. The last iterations of both series made rather significant changes upon the prequels. The last full C&C game has a 85/7.6 rating at metacritic (the first is ranked 7 through all time). Guess what? The C&C fans HATED the changes eventhough they are inarguably less radical than the ME changes. It is ranked at 70/3.1 (!) at metacritic. Clearly Bioware has pulled off something remarkable with ME2; only alienating a very small but vocal minority on the boards while gaining loads of new fans. You may not like the changes, but give credit where credit is due. 

Modifié par Seraphael, 20 mars 2010 - 10:21 .

[Tennyochan]

Latest reviews sourced from Gamestats.com
Newest listed is on the 3/10/10.

[Tazzmission]

Bigdoser wrote...

OneBadAssMother wrote...

ME1 is still the winner when comparing to ME2 in terms of its plot/story/twists/universe. It introduced the world to us so of course it's going to have a higher score. Loot management in ME1 was a pain however, and combat mechanics in ME2 is much better. ME2 Squad AI is developed and it's much more tactical and intense. Not to mention ME2 runs so much faster then ME1 (probably due to being ported by Demiurge Studies to PC) Combat in ME1 was rather meh in my opinion. You just hit immunity or barrier then go around killing things. In ME2, it's much better.

My thoughts exactly.

me1 will always be better because it was the first of something new. now i loved me2 and i beat it 11 times i do agree me1 had a better  boss battle ending  but me2  may feel more of a shooter but to me it was more story driven with the crew alone. i noticed alot of people say this isnt a true rpg but lets be real this is a rpg shooter and yes some rpg elements were skimmed down wich i didnt mind because i personaly  skip half of the cutscenes. my only real complaints are the level up system and the final boss battle and the 30 second  side quests i.e being  save crashing ship and w/e. i still give this game a 9

[lastpawn]

Seraphael wrote...
Look, the ME1 characters were, obviously, introduced before their ME2 counterparts, people bonded and a rather significant fan base (on the boards at least) developed. And if anything, this fan base grew with time. Since the ME2 characters are more complex, better written, generally better looking (though clearly taste, they would probably would have had a significantly larger fan base if they had a similar head start. Is this really so hard to understand or accept?  

It's hard to understand why you undermine your claims with universally sweeping statements like "ME2 characters are more complex, better written...". Some ME2 characters are phenomenal, like the universally-loved Mordin. Others are so boring I literally didn't bother talking to them after their loyalty mission. Yet others I wanted to talk to but they had noting to say (to John Shepard anyway). Hell if I didn't play ME1 and thus had access to his background, I'd think that Garrus is one of the most boring characters ever created.

I'll put it another way. If you ask me to choose between Wrex and Ashley on the one hand and Grunt and Jacob on the other, it's obvious to me that the former are far more interesting than the latter. The story in ME1 was told with 6 NPCs, one of which had relatively little screen time (yet is still more interesting than some ME2 characters). The story of ME2 is told with twice as many characters. Claiming that writers managed to double the number of characters while making them all "more complex, better written" seems rather disingenuous.

[Tazzmission]

lastpawn wrote...

Seraphael wrote...
Look, the ME1 characters were, obviously, introduced before their ME2 counterparts, people bonded and a rather significant fan base (on the boards at least) developed. And if anything, this fan base grew with time. Since the ME2 characters are more complex, better written, generally better looking (though clearly taste, they would probably would have had a significantly larger fan base if they had a similar head start. Is this really so hard to understand or accept?  

It's hard to understand why you undermine your claims with universally sweeping statements like "ME2 characters are more complex, better written...". Some ME2 characters are phenomenal, like the universally-loved Mordin. Others are so boring I literally didn't bother talking to them after their loyalty mission. Yet others I wanted to talk to but they had noting to say (to John Shepard anyway). Hell if I didn't play ME1 and thus had access to his background, I'd think that Garrus is one of the most boring characters ever created.

I'll put it another way. If you ask me to choose between Wrex and Ashley on the one hand and Grunt and Jacob on the other, it's obvious to me that the former are far more interesting than the latter. The story in ME1 was told with 6 NPCs, one of which had relatively little screen time (yet is still more interesting than some ME2 characters). The story of ME2 is told with twice as many characters. Claiming that writers managed to double the number of characters while making them all "more complex, better written" seems rather disingenuous.

you know i use to hate morin until i got him to sing? now hes my new favorite charachter from this game. i think the charachters who had the best written time was mordin legion samara grunt thane and jack. as for miranda and jacob i found those 2 really  a borefest....

[TheDarkHuntress]

My Review? 10 stars on everything including game concept, game play and game interaction!

If 10 stars is not the highest rating I can give than make it 100 stars.

[Embrosil]

Well I have started to play ME1 again and it is simply better. ME2 is not bad, but it should be a standalone game without ME franchise. I hope that ME3 will be better, but I will not make a preorder and I will be very careful before buying.

[Faz432]

Faz432 wrote...

I'm about half way through ME2 after completing ME1 and so far I actually think that ME1 is better. The ME2 universe seems like it's been shrunk, everything's tiny, the Citadel has gone from a massive place where you actually had the feeling of how big it was to essentially 3-4 rooms.

The feeling of smallness is carried on to how you explore planets, the frigging scanner OMFG!! how annoying!?? that lasted about 5 planets with me what happened to driving around on the planets surface doing back flips in my Mako? lol Ok the Mako could get annoying too but nowhere near the annoyance the repetitive scanning of planets is and if more of the planets weren't ridiculously mountainous that wouldn't of been a problem at all.

I like epic games to feel...EPIC!!! ME1 did BioWare's newer games like ME2 and DA:O do fall short I feel.

Edit*

I do like they way they've handled Armor and Weapon upgrades although I would like a slightly larger selection. ME1 there was too much and ME2 I think there's slightly too little.

I do have 1 fairly big gripe though with weapons, I'm playing as a Inflitrator and I find it hard to believe that in the time Mass effect is set that they still use bolt action sniper rifles, the most powerful sniper rifle around today (Barrett 50 cal) is semi-automatic.

So I completed ME2 last week and on the whole I would say it's a good game but doesn't compare to ME1 which is now one of my favorite games. I think ME2 has improved on the combat mechanics although in ME1 I played as a Vangaurd and ME2 I was a Inflitrator just because I found the controls too difficult when selecting the numerous powers that a Vangaurd has.

It's a bit ironic for me that I originially got ME1 just to run though it, get an understanding of the game and to have a charater to import into ME2 so I could have a full and enjoyable experience of playing ME2. Whereas what has actually happened is while playing ME1 I became totally emmersed and loved the experience then when I enthustiastically ported my character over to ME2 and started playing my enthusiasm began to dwindel and found myself just playing it to completion which felt like a chore.

The ending of ME2 wasn't as climatic as ME1 in fact it was a total anti-climax (massive WTF moment when I seen the end boss), I felt like I had gone back in time to the early 90's / late 80's not just in the design but also the attack movements.

So to summerise, it seems that they have taken more things away from the game in the making of ME2 which is counter intuative in what they should be trying to do.

Mass Effect 1 - 9.5/10 - Nearly perfect

Mass Effect 2 - 7.5/10 - Would be a good game if I hadn't played ME1

Modifié par Faz432, 24 mars 2010 - 03:26 .