225 réponses à ce sujet

[tzeraph1]

MajorTharmas wrote...

some nerd thinks his stupid review on gamefaqs has merit how cute
too bad hes not a professional just some chaffed asscheecks ruffling in the wind

Im sure it does. For him/her.

[MajorTharmas]

droid_orat wrote...

Carmarkcaine wrote...

They are spot on. Me1 I played 3 or times, this game I just dont feel like trying one more time. I dont wanna "mine" all that crap again. If I wanted to waste time with a in game-game I'd build fishing skill up in wow( and dont I might add)

Also there is no sense of freedom in the game and its way to short. Hardly any missions, besides getting the loyalti of you crew members, and it seems more like work than anything else.

It feels like it was made more for consols and that type of players and not the more mature PC players. Im sure not sure Im going to buy ME3, atleast I think Ill wait for a month or so until the hype is down and the more serious and mature players are through the game.

cant agree more - those are exactly my thoughts!!!

there is the same amount of freedom... both games are very linear.the quests where you are getting the loyalty of your crew members are fantastic and a lot more powerful than the paltry side quests in the first... quality over quantity. the first games quests were WAY more a chore with their repetetive nature which you cant deny because literally the locations were exactly the same with different box placements.

and how dare you think you are more mature because you play on a computer. what the hell is the difference?

[BaneN7]

Sweet! Another thread presenting an opinion as fact. Haven't seen one of those in about 10 minutes or so.

[kungfusam]

ME 1 was rubbish, it didn't know what it was, so it ended up as a muddle of genre, weak shooter elements and basic RPG bits



ME 2 is clear in its goals, its a epic action game, the combat is far more interesting, deep and rewarding and the RPG side flows nicely making less of a chore

[MajorTharmas]

tzeraph1 wrote...

MajorTharmas wrote...

some nerd thinks his stupid review on gamefaqs has merit how cute
too bad hes not a professional just some chaffed asscheecks ruffling in the wind

Im sure it does. For him/her.

yes?

[tzeraph1]

kungfusam wrote...

ME 1 was rubbish, it didn't know what it was, so it ended up as a muddle of genre, weak shooter elements and basic RPG bits

ME 2 is clear in its goals, its a epic action game, the combat is far more interesting, deep and rewarding and the RPG side flows nicely making less of a chore

Cant agree with you there : ) Liked the RPG better in ME1, but its my opinion.

[TuringPoint]

He never reviewed ME 1, or any other bioware games.

I agree that ME 1 was rubbish that didn't know what it was.

The premise of this thread is also rubbish.

Modifié par Alocormin, 09 février 2010 - 12:22 .

[AtreiyaN7]

Oh hey, one review trumps all other reviews - this is news to me! Oh wait, no it doesn't. *sarcasm* My opinion of this article and the original post is: so what? That reviewer whose article was linked didn't like it. He's entitled to his opinion, but he's just one guy and most reviews have been positive. Even four-star movies can get middling or poor reviews, and any review is based on subjective opinions and personal beliefs/views that a reviewer holds. So hey, congratulations on finding someone who didn't like the game much. The title of the thread alone clearly indicates that the OP didn't like the game and is attempting to make his/her little point (trolling likely too  ) *shrug*

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 09 février 2010 - 12:25 .

[TuringPoint]

"The Truth Hurts" - I wonder why the OP has never returned to this thread.

[Heliosas]

Every review is an opinion. The fact that most reviews for this game glow tells you something. Most people like it. No its not perfect but most games never come anywhere close to being as good as ME1 and ME2.



If you don't like them and think they are rubbish, then that's fine. But you are in a minority. Get over it.

[MassEffect762]

I'm having alot of fun reading replies from both sides, such passion.

The review is harsh but does have valid points.

I was alittle more forgiving despite my final impression of the game. 8/10

I can't WAIT for Bioware to let us know what they think. That is all.

[Kerilus]

To some of you perhaps the game is not supposed to be complete, but instead largely a "preparing characters+armies for the controntation with Reapers in ME3". However, it does not change the fact that the game indeed is quite lacking content in the main plot; detail wise, length wise or depth wise. The presence of the Collectors is just too vague throughout the whole game to be the major villain of a game(their role demand them to maintain a vague presence). The majority of the places we visit in the game simply has no sign of their influence or intervention, and thus players are less engaged in the main plot. To be honest, after destroying the Collector base, I was like "Is that it? That's all we gotta face in this game?"



That being said, again I think the purpose of the game is very clear: a build up for the ultimate finale of the series. And on that aacount, ME2 does a decent job by building a bond between characters and Shep, a more in depth revealation of the Reapers as well as the Geth, and providing the possibility of the gathering of armies.

[Tom Adama]

Soruyao wrote...

Tom Adama wrote...

I think everyone needs to notice something, this game has disappointed alot of Mass effect fans. It's not like only 1 or 2 topics giving negative reviews were posted, ALOT of topics are of people voicing their "disenchantment" with the direction the franchise has taken.

If alot of people were disappointed, maybe the game wasn't as good as you think. Almost everyone agrees that ME1 was a superior game despite its shortcomings, so why argue the latter? It's not like trolls posted on the boards, these are legitimate Mass effect fans who have been following this franchise since 2007.

I am one of them. The game was not even as good as the first one. Yes it is an opinion, but I am a gamer who absorbed himself in the codex's, sidequests and 10 full replays of the first game.

I played Mass effect 2 once and I can't even pick the game up for another round. Mass effect 1 kept me occupied for just under 2 years before I grew bored.

I just think its childish that the "fanboys/girls" are resorting to name calling regarding a fans complaint. It's legitimate because us fans are the reason ME2 was even created, and we do have a say in what we do and dont like.

I especially get peeved when I read from posters that this game is better than ME1 when they havent even played the first game. Those people should keep their mouths shut or go out and buy and play the first one so you can have the right to contribute to these debates.

As you say there is a possibility that the number of angry ME1 fans could indicate that ME2 is a worse game, and the major reviewers simply don't understand what makes a good game.

But I propose a counter-possibility to you:  Is it possible at all that ME1 actually had a number of flaws, but that certain players came to love the flaws because they were so absorbed in the story and the lore?   To these people, any changes that make the game objectively better from a game design perspective would make them like the game worse.

Therefore, major reviewers of the game who are trained to look past their biases and look at a game objectively from a game design perspective will say that the game is better than the first one, but people who liked the first game enough to play it ten times would dislike any changes because they like the things in the first game that would be flaws for many other people.

Just a thought.

Hey, it is possible. But doesnt that indicate that the lore and story in ME2 failed to recapture what ME1 did?

What I am saying, is that this game is a failed Mass effect SEQUEL. I don't care about objective gameplay mechanics and technical enhancements, I care about the story and the universe. I thought things like that were more important?

Example: I absolutely loved Advent Rising for the xbox. That game was so fresh and enjoyable, with a spectacular story/characters/music/lore/artistic direction/combat gameplay etc. But, the game itself was terribly buggy, I couldnt even get passed one portion without going to the internet to figure out how to get around the bug. But that being said, I played the game many many times, even though it was a technical "failure".  But the game was so enamoring that I looked passed its flaws into its soul, because it was very entertaining especially the epilogue and cliff hanger ending.

That game got bad reviews and never saw the trilogy it promised to bring. Even though the game was fantastic in the other respects.

Now take a game like Gears of war. It was technically spectacular, had very few bugs and was pretty to look at. Story: non existant. Characters: Non existent. Lore: empty/confusing. It was a mindless action game that got critic acclaim and a sequel. I played that damn game barely ONCE, even though I knew it was a mindless gorefest shooter going in. That game was not something I would rave about with other people. It was mediocre at best, yet it won the ability to gain a sequel.

Critic reviews are anything but universal, their jobs are to review the game on an objective level; how functional it is. Anything else is purely subjective and I pay NO attention to it. I am the one playing the game, if it looks interesting Ill try it out. All of my favorite games got 6's, 7's or 8's (Indigo Prophecy, Advent Rising, Fable, GUN etc). This game got 9.7 on IGN and gametrailers while Mass effect got high 8's, yet I enjoyed the first one MUCH MUCH more. Why? Because the game was charming and fresh. I came to that conclusion by myself after playing it. Screw the "combat pacing" or graphical hitches, the game was so much more entertaining to me that I did overlook its shortcomings. 

Why is that something that is negative?

 

[SkywardDescent]

Akimb0 wrote...

Sibbwolf wrote...

"Fair"? Hardly. He's comparing it to what he likes, not what the game was designed to be.

The biggest problems against the game are people thinking "My character". Bioware pointed out it's not the player's character, the player merely controls it. Until reviewers realise this, these reviews are anything but fair.

Did you even read the review? It's more than fair. It's one of the few I've seen so far which actually mention the downsides to the game. I won't bother arguing with you, since you're just a fanboy, so you won't accept anything about the game being bad even when it's true.

Ignorance!
The short sighted's greatest defense!

[SithLordExarKun]

Ozymandias23 wrote...

ME2 is effectively a game made up of about 25 -30 hours of 1 hour side quests. There is enough main plot for approximately 4 hours of game play. The 'story' of Mass Effect 2 can not compare in any way, shape or form to the story of Mass Effect 1. It is inferior in every way.

I don't recall the story in ME1 being vastly superior to ME2 in every

Infact the true "story" kicked in towards the end of the game during virmire, the same happened for ME2 which just happens to be shorter.

Ozymandias23 wrote...
As for the uncharted planets, no they weren't great, but Bioware's response - remove them and and mako and a lot of the RPG elements and instead give us a linear, limited, smaller game with pretty graphics and cliched squad mates. They've effectively created a game for young teenagers that isn't suitable for young teenagers.

Yeah because people would rather play 50 repetitive quests than 15 great ones. Quality > quantity.

But hey if you think going through the same exact bunker 50 times rather than play 15 smaller better quality quests, suit yourself.

Look at fallout 3, the story is pathetic yet the gameplay and quests were so great. Story isn't everything, you want a good story go read a book or play a cliche JRPG.

[jpetrey123]

IT IS A GAMEFAQS REVIEW!! REALLLY?!!? WHO READS THESE?!?! /facepalm

[Psython]

I like how some people say quality over quantity and ignore the fact that all the main story missions are linear and have almost no plot exposition at all. ME2 is not a perfect game, I would personally give it an 8/10. While the review was clearly biased to the negative, the points that were brought up are legit. ME1 had a better and more interesting main story that carried the game above its faults. ME2's main story is based around entering areas and then killing about 100 enemies that are essentially zombies then leaving and doing more recruitment. The last mission was fun but too short and none of the character backstory that was focused on so much came up in the final mission. That and the lame "reveal" if you can call it that and the subsequent lame decision made the story weak. Fallout 3 was easy and boring by the way in my opinion.

[rumination888]

Its real easy to spot someone critiquing out of nostalgia rather than objectively.

ME1 was the EXACT same story as KOTOR.
So if anyone praises ME1's story in any way, its obvious they haven't played enough games to be objective about it.

[HipHop402]

Everything he said in that review is true. Everything he said in that review is false. Its all opinion. Everyone that plays Mass Effect 1 or 2 takes away a different experience from the game. So for him i imagine it was all true and maybe for many others as well. And for so many others maybe even more so than not the game was amazing, i know it was for me. Very intense and it sucked me in. I dont know about you guys and gals but during ME2 i realized i was more afraid to make a wrong decision than i was during the first game. Back on topic ask for his review its about as relevant as the Mac Vs PC argument Neither Is Better To All, Its A Matter of Oppinion. Nuff said.

[Wolfehunter]

I really though bioware would add and not remove great content. Still ME2 is a good game. I prefer some of ME 1 features better. I like the newer ship. I like the newer dialog. but the combat is annoying. I understand his frustration when you run and get stuck behind and object. And you can't turn while running. Only run in one direction till your exhausted or hit a barrier that wasn't your plan.



But I'll play ME2 because there is some good stuff in it. I like those new stuff. I just wish bioware wouldn't cannibalize it too much. ME3 I'm a little worried what they might do to it.



Article is good but one sided. He should have pointed out some positive things about ME2.

[JigPig]

rumination888 wrote...

Its real easy to spot someone critiquing out of nostalgia rather than objectively.

ME1 was the EXACT same story as KOTOR.
So if anyone praises ME1's story in any way, its obvious they haven't played enough games to be objective about it.

I must be daft but I do not see any parallels besides being in space.

[Tom Adama]

rumination888 wrote...

Its real easy to spot someone critiquing out of nostalgia rather than objectively.

ME1 was the EXACT same story as KOTOR.
So if anyone praises ME1's story in any way, its obvious they haven't played enough games to be objective about it.

What???

KOTOR was nothing like Mass effect in any way! I have both games!

[Tom Adama]

I figured out why I liked Mass effect, because it reminds me of Advent Rising almost exactly.



Sigh. I want to see that game get its trilogy finished... it definetly deserves it.

[spernus]

Akimb0 wrote...

Biowares concept, development and implementation of characters (their "idea") is irrelevant if the reviewer still found them boring, contrived, stereotyped and lacking in character. It just shows that in his opinion, Biowares "idea" was wrong or poorly implemented.

It's meaningless and quite frankly,you shouldn't care.

So what if it's a Bioware game or that he bashed the game? Go look at some Dragon age reviews which rip it to shred or Uncharted 2 or name any game you want.

Every game has it's flaws or things that someone will think are flaws.There is a thin line between obvious technical flaws and decision taken by the creator which doesn't mesh with your philosophy of life or how an rpg or whatever genre should be like.

You can definitively find these kind of reviews for every masterpiece ever made.If someone tell you that Citizen Kane is the best movie ever made,does that mean that it's gotta be your favorite? I'm sure I could find user reviews of Citizen Kane which rip it to shred.Not only that,I know they would bash the story when it's not even the point of the movie or why it's a masterpiece.

Modifié par spernus, 09 février 2010 - 05:20 .