29 réponses à ce sujet

[Raizo]

ME2 is my favourite game in the Trilogy. Despite its many short comings it is the most fun game in the series, heck I've had more fun playing ME2 than most of the games I have played in my entire life. As much as I like ME I don't have fun playing it. My attitude to ME3 is similar, despite the fact that I hate it, deep down I know it's not a bad game ( I'm just prejudiced against it ) but at the end if the day none if that matters, I don't have fun playing it. Playing ME and ME3 feels to much like work, I have force myself to play them.

I would argue that ME2 is a game where almost all of its individual components are mediocre but when combined together they create a product that is vastly superior to the sum of its parts. ME3 fixes a lot of ME2's shortcomings, it's individual components are superior to ME2's but when combined together they create a product that is inferior to the sums of its parts.

ME3 lacking something that the first 2 games had ME1 just needs rebuilding altogether in order to make it fun, it did not play well when it first came out and it has aged very badly.

[Shepard_Commander11]

I think part of the reason I love the ME trilogy so much is that each game is different from the previous. They all feel completely different in certain ways (ME open world concept, ME 2 had the mini games that I loved, ME 3 was made more like a movie and had a ton of emotion).

[Dale]

I think part of the reason I love the ME trilogy so much is that each game is different from the previous. They all feel completely different in certain ways (ME open world concept, ME 2 had the mini games that I loved, ME 3 was made more like a movie and had a ton of emotion).

Excellent point there Legion (SC11).  I trust you are fully-functional and operating within normal parameters.

 

From what I've read on the forums, many folks (including me) have a similar viewpoint.     If all 3 were the same, then the "game analysts" would write about (and rate) saying "well, the same old thing".   What they write can have megabuck impact.   They can't do that with this trilogy.  

 

I can imagine the game designers having lengthy discussions how ME2 should be different than ME1.   As mentioned in other threads, there is lots of "frustration" why the trilogy does not have synergy.   Since there seems to be more Bioware "bashing" than "complementing" I created a post (a week or two back -- forget which thread) pointing out the [basic] business aspects of game creation (that I've read).   In short, they have so many $$$ to start with, a few months to come up with a story, put the development team to work, and deliver before they turn into a pumpkin (holding up cardboard at the intersection).  Put yourself in their shoes.

 

Realistically (I said) can you expect them to predict 5 years down the road how this will turn out?   So (IMHEO) they deliver a fantastic ME1 in a short time -- while we on the forum take YEARS to pick it apart & point out every flaw (like Monday morning quarterback).   "well done Bioware!"

 

Yes, it's been pointed out by numerous folks on the forum that ME2 had ZERO, ZYLCH, NADA to do with the ultimate goal of defeating the Reapers.   Well, technically Shep slowed them down a couple years (DLC asteroid into mass relay).  To me, ME2 was a GREAT side step.

 

These developers & designers are lots SMARTER than we give them credit for.  Just look at how they FANTASTICALLY improved the galaxy map in ME2 & weapons inventory.  Smooth & with what polish!   Who would have dreamed up TWELVE different characters that we get to know well (and some romantically)?

 

One comment I can identify with 100% is ME1 & ME3 were "work" whereas ME2 was just [dumb] fun to play!   Now playing for the 10th time.   Others here have played it 20+ times.

 

"well done Bioware!" keep up the good work!

[JCFR]

Why is ME2 better than 3?

Easy! The Ending didn't suck, it was an improvement in any way according to ME1 (while Me3 was just more of the same and nowhere better or improved - except for the RPG-elements.... but like that was hard to do) and the NPCs and writings were superior. The only negative thing about ME2 is it's focus on action more than RPG.

[PANTHEON]

Because Metascore is based on subjective reviews?