ME2 is my favorite, but my issues is having 12 squadmates when only 8 is needed for everyone to survive and then everyone can be dead or alive depending on the playthrough
To be fair, getting out everyone with only 8 squadmates isn't exactly easy. The chances of Mordin or Tali or another lightweigth dying if you left them holding the line is high. Even with 10 that can happen fairly easy.
To be fair, getting out everyone with only 8 squadmates isn't exactly easy. The chances of Mordin or Tali or another lightweigth dying if you left them holding the line is high. Even with 10 that can happen fairly easy.
I find it to be fairly easy. Have Mordin escort the crew back to the Nomandy and then take two lightweights to fight the reaper leaving the stronger squadmates to hold the line. I've done it several times and a few of those 8 were not loyal
I find it to be fairly easy. Have Mordin escort the crew back to the Nomandy and then take two lightweights to fight the reaper leaving the stronger squadmates to hold the line. I've done it several times and a few of those 8 were not loyal
If you know the mechanics of the mission yes, it is easy. But I'd argue someone playing the mission for the first time will not get it right with only 8 squadmates, it will probably take a few attempts.
Also, I'd say squadmates are much more than "tools" to get the suicide mission done. Each one is a character with a story of his own and involve some great missions, dialogues and moments. Take any squadmate out and I'd say ME2 become a lesser experience.
If you know the mechanics of the mission yes, it is easy. But I'd argue someone playing the mission for the first time will not get it right with only 8 squadmates, it will probably take a few attempts.
That's true. My first playthrough was crash and burn even though Shepard survived
Also, I'd say squadmates are much more than "tools" to get the suicide mission done. Each one is a character with a story of his own and involve some great missions, dialogues and moments. Take any squadmate out and I'd say ME2 become a lesser experience.
It may be a lesser experience, but if I have enough to complete the mission, I won't waste my time recruiting others when I don't have to.
Me2 got the worst RPG elements. I like the way upgrading them but it is simple.
Regardless the 3rd got the best powers/techs/weapons and gameplay mechanics this is the worst game in the Trilogy, because the story of ME1+2 greatly surpass the 3rd games story. Rannoch is an exception. Imo ME3's pinnacle is on Rannoch.The Reapers lost their main puppets. ME1 got the most RPG style gameplay with the worst glitches and bugs.
The finance wiz have something they call the Time Value of [Everything]. So comparing ME1 @ 2008, ME2 @ 2010, and ME3 @ 2012 there is no doubt that ME1 stands head and shoulders well above ME3.
Mass Effect 1 brought me what no other game had brought me before it. The galaxy, the stars, the planets to explore, well that's just still pixels on my screen -- I'm not falling for that 'scale' hype. The true worth of Mass Effect is in the interactions and relations with well fleshed out squadmates and secondary characters.
Just like I make sure to buy the best weapons for my squadmates in ME3, I felt the connection with them better when in ME1 I actually had to set aside money to buy them the best armour as well.
ME2, game mechanics-wise, gameplay-wise, selling-more-copies-wise, ok, it's mostly something that stands on its own and serves to get us to wait for ME1 to continue.
It wasn't quite the sequel I expected story-wise.
I played 2 and 3 first as I was on PS3 so I was excited when ME1 became available for PS. The story was great but the gameplay mechanics prevented me from really enjoying it as they were so bad. It really wasn't until near the end when I finally got it under control. Plus don't get me started about the Mako. I'm glad that they are fixing THAT problem. The journal in 3 was annoying and I also missed the times when you would be scanning planets and find an actual mission and could land down on the planet. 2 was my favorite overall.
From a gaming standpoint, 3 was the best if you forget about the last 5 minutes of the campaign. From a fun standpoint 2 was the best. From a story standpoint 1 was the best.
Wait a minute. Having more squadmates doesn't help with the SM in the first place. The game checks the average defense values in the HTL segment, not the total. If you're under the threshold, adding more squadmates just gets more people killed.If you know the mechanics of the mission yes, it is easy. But I'd argue someone playing the mission for the first time will not get it right with only 8 squadmates, it will probably take a few attempts.
Wait a minute. Having more squadmates doesn't help with the SM in the first place. The game checks the average defense values in the HTL segment, not the total. If you're under the threshold, adding more squadmates just gets more people killed.
Recruiting Zaeed and Grunt helps, recruiting Tali and Kasumi hurts. Thane, Samara, and Legion are neutral if loyal, and hurt if not.
I really don't want to drag this off topic, but that's not what the wiki says. Can you provide any source for it being about the average value?
Edit: Nevermind, I checked the guide.
Wait a minute. Having more squadmates doesn't help with the SM in the first place. The game checks the average defense values in the HTL segment, not the total. If you're under the threshold, adding more squadmates just gets more people killed.
Recruiting Zaeed and Grunt helps, recruiting Tali and Kasumi hurts. Thane, Samara, and Legion are neutral if loyal, and hurt if not.
Well I don't know the mechanics. But I never had any problems having 12 loyal squadmates... so I figured it helped.
the first was an RPG that looked like a shooter
the sequels were shooters with limited RPG elements
as an RPG-fan (and I'm not really a shooter fan) I prefer the original
the third I liked the least due to it's linearity and the weakness of everything but the shooting missions (and the fact thar there was very little other than the shooting missions) which (with few exceptions) felt too samey
First one had the best atmosphere and presented us this universe with all iconic characters (and i like combat in it to be honest). Second one had really amazing crew and some of the best moments in series. Third one was kinda underdeveloped at the beggining but with all the patches, DLC's and stuff it transform into actually really amazing experience. Actually I like to come back to third one the most.
Jeez. I'd go fix the wiki, but it's amazingly difficult to get a change approved.I really don't want to drag this off topic, but that's not what the wiki says. Can you provide any source for it being about the average value?
Edit: Nevermind, I checked the guide.
Even with everyone loyal, it depends on who you have holding the line. Scores are 4(if loyal) and 3(not) for Zaeed, Garrus, and Grunt, 1 and 0 for Jack, Mordin, Tali, and Kasumi, and 2 and 1 for everyone else. You need an average of 2 or better to get everyone through alive; as you can see, it's fairly easy to get an average below 2.Well I don't know the mechanics. But I never had any problems having 12 loyal squadmates... so I figured it helped.
ME2 is the best in the series.
I think that 2 is better than 1, but 1 is better than 3.
2 > 1 >>>>>>> 3
Jeez. I'd go fix the wiki, but it's amazingly difficult to get a change approved.
I can see why people think numbers would help -- that would have been a more sensible mechanic. Especially since some of the HTL scores are flat-out irrational.
Even with everyone loyal, it depends on who you have holding the line. Scores are 4(if loyal) and 3(not) for Zaeed, Garrus, and Grunt, 1 and 0 for Jack, Mordin, Tali, and Kasumi, and 2 and 1 for everyone else. You need an average of 2 or better to get everyone through alive; as you can see, it's fairly easy to get an average below 2.
A typical problem people have is thinking they need to take their "tanks" or "weapons" people to the boss fight. Thus, they end up losing Mordin or Tali. (Christopher Odd lost Tali in his Let's Play because of this mentality.) If BW had made it clear that NPCs only do 50% of the weapon damage that Shepard does with the same weapon, maybe people wouldn't have made that mistake. (And it might have changed their perception of the game being just another a shooter.)
Renegade was awesome in ME1/2. Renegade in ME3 is a bi-polar wierdo. The only thing better in ME3 is the gameplay.
A typical problem people have is thinking they need to take their "tanks" or "weapons" people to the boss fight. Thus, they end up losing Mordin or Tali. (Christopher Odd lost Tali in his Let's Play because of this mentality.) If BW had made it clear that NPCs only do 50% of the weapon damage that Shepard does with the same weapon, maybe people wouldn't have made that mistake. (And it might have changed their perception of the game being just another a shooter.)
I thought everything after the Eden Prime beacon was all in Shep's head?
The finance wiz have something they call the Time Value of [Everything]. So comparing ME1 @ 2008, ME2 @ 2010, and ME3 @ 2012 there is no doubt that ME1 stands head and shoulders well above ME3.
Retour en haut