429 réponses à ce sujet

[Ulicus]

Overall? ME2.

[greghorvath]

I have posted in this thread earlier saying ME1 is probably the better game, and that I will probably not start a third playthrough in ME2.



Well, I am happy to say that I did start a third one and I have reached a surprising (at least for me) resolution. I am starting to love ME2.



It is different from the first game but think about this. You are Shepard and have been "disabled" for 2 years and come back to a galaxy that changed while you were away. You have no time to acclimatize and are put into live situations (involving a suicide mission, talk about pressure...) right away. The lack of polish, modest, linear storyline, all contibute to this feeling. At least they do for me. So I changed my perspective and I enjoy the game much more. I dont really care about the changes to the inventory system and other annoying stuff, I make do with what is given.



Summing up, I would say ME2 is a worthy sequel to one of the best games ever made. Way to go Bioware!

[The Questioning Motive]

Better than Mass Effect 1. My play through of Mass Effect was pretty painful, it just felt really, really weird, playing Mass Effect 1. I wanted to go back to Mass Effect 2. I got the controls confused on Mass Effect 1 too.

[Saurel]

Gameplay, Atmosphere, Pacing, Music ,Characters - ME2
Overall Story and (generally speaking) Dialog - ME1

[Thresher Maw]

I liked ME1's story more, and I like the way fights are set up in ME1 better. ME2 fights have too many encounters that have you sit behind cover as waves of enemies continuously spawn for several minutes. I much preferred ME1's formula wherein you'd just kill a kill a few enemies and keep moving forward constantly.



Other than the above, I prefer ME2 in every way.

[Pauravi]

Gotta go with ME2.

ME1 had the more epic plot (I mean, what could beat learning about the Reapers?), but in every other conceivable way -- gameplay, script, voice acting, character depth and development, class diversity, sidequest variety, combat mechanics, environment richness and immersion -- ME2 comes out ahead.  Don't get me wrong, ME1 was a fantastic game and an essential one, but they really went above and beyond for ME2.  It is just incredibly fantastic.  I've already played it more times than I ever played through ME1, and I'm not bored of it.

[Schneidend]

I love them both dearly, but ME2 takes the cake. Hands down.

[bruce302ford]

Playing through ME2 really makes me crave another playthrough... of ME1. ME2 is polished and has outstanding character development, but it makes me yearn for the story and continually progressing action of ME1. Oh, and the Citadel in ME1? No set piece inspires more awe in any game(that I have played). I think we can all agree on this one opinion though... The Mass Effect Universe rocks!

[dtruth]

For me ME1 overall is better. For me the first one felt more complete. I do enjoy the combat and graphics of ME2 though. The second had a lot more stuck spots. I'd run up something by accident and get stuck. I didn't encounter as many in the first one. Plus having the console access on the PC in the first one helped alleviate some of the headaches of getting in a non progression in the first one.

[slyguy07]

ME1 hands down for me.

[kmcd5722]

ME1 as far as story, immersion, and "rpg elements"

ME2 for combat and gameplay



i, for one, really actually miss the mako and the barren planets that were left to be explored. its not that i didnt like the variability and lusher environments in ME2, but i still feel as though not having the unexplored planets that could be explored via the mako just made the story feel so much "bigger" and immersed in a believable sci-fi movie.

[Lyrandori]

As some others have said...



I prefer ME1 for the story-telling and progression and the general "feel" of it.



I prefer ME2 for the action (combat system, mostly) and that's about it.



In the end I like both games but I do prefer ME1.

[ExtremeOne]

from what I played of ME 1 on my HD TV. and playing ME 2 on it. Mass Effect 2 is the better game game play and graphics and its not even a question

[DomerPyle]

Lyrandori wrote...

As some others have said...

I prefer ME1 for the story-telling and progression and the general "feel" of it.

I prefer ME2 for the action (combat system, mostly) and that's about it.

this. me2's combat was far superior, but everything else about me1, except the collection quests and recycled areas and boring-ness of the uncharted worlds (the ability to drive around on the planets, however, was cool), was superior.

Modifié par DomerPyle, 27 février 2010 - 07:29 .

[vader44]

Though Wrex is possibly my favorite game character of all time i would still say 2

[NeonMeat]

ME1 is better to my taste. I thought the writing in ME2 was quite poor for the most part, but i have to admit the combat mechanics were improved. There were a few really good missions in ME2, but the rest are largely forgettable, and the main questline was very lazy i thought. ME1 wasn't exactly a masterpiece in Sci-Fi, but ME2 has become too cliched and the universe doesn't seem as interesting to me anymore.

I expect ME3 will follow the design path of ME2 since it's been so wildly popular, and i will most likely buy it since i might as well finish the trilogy, but i'm not so excited as i was in the lead up for ME2. The game was obviously split up into a thousand little fragments to appeal to a wider audience who can pick it up and play it for an hour at a time and still get somewhere (nothing wrong with that, they are a business) but it all feels too disjointed when looked at as a whole.

ME2 is still a decent enough game, but not amazing.

Modifié par NeonMeat, 27 février 2010 - 07:30 .

[Tarisln]

The overall story was better in 1, but it wasn't paced right - something 2 fixed with the mandatory milestone missions (yay for alliteration!). Overall, I'd say 2 was the better game in terms of gameplay, pacing, and character development, but somewhat lacked the epic feel of 1.



Also, I much prefer working for the Council rather than Cerberus.

[TheGreatD17]

Playing them back-to-back, the improvements they made in the second game are staggering. The world just seems more alive in the second one and the graphics, cinematic moments and gameplay are all much better.

[Illum.se]

ME1 was best, without a doubt.

ME1 was a better RPG with better dialog, better story and a bigger sense of freedom and discovery. It also had a more varied combat system with more loot, different armors/weapons and upgrades for everyone.

ME2 has better "polish", but is inferior in the above mentioned areas and ultimately it feels rushed somehow. They cut too much and should have kept going for a bit longer. It's like they created a good framework, where the collcectors are a cool and mysterious race, but when the whole game is really only about rounding up a squad, it feels linear and limited.

Also, ME2 is a bit unbalanced combat-wise where a solider makes the game too easy and any other class feels harder solely due to the silly-low ammo constraints for the other weapons like shotgun and pistol.

Modifié par Illum.se, 27 février 2010 - 07:45 .

[asaiasai]

They both were good games and if they took some of the stuff from both and combined them it would have been a bit better i think.



Combat in ME was better not just because lack of the annoying ammo system, but that you could develop a squad. You could determine the character's combat role in ME by how you equipped them and assign thier talent points. You could for example hand Garrus an assault rifle to provide medium range fire power, hand Wrex a shotgun, with the regen, charge and damage taking of the krogan use Wrex like a "tank" to draw fire so that i could pop out with a sniper utalizing my skill to lay down the long range fire power if necessary. In ME it was possible to design a team around your class which i think is the primary reason people think it was to easy as opposed to the gimped squad setup you forced to deal with in ME2. Then adding in that you were forced to change roles in combat because of ammo constraints, never really allowed the squad mechanic to function. You were always forced to choose between being bait drawing fire while hiding behind cover, relying on squad AI to do the work which they never seemed to deliver on. Or you were forced to be overly aggressive almost suicidal, rush a room to cross some invisible line which would stop the enemy from spawning, trying to deal with what did spawn with overly weak weapons regardless of upgrades that sometimes felt like they would be more effective if they were thrown at the enemy instead of fired. There was NO way for the player with skill to conserve ammo even if the player waited for the enemy to expose the most vulnerable area (head) because most enemies were able to take several shots to the face with a sniper rifle and still survive. There seemed to be no balance overly weak weapons, a small ammo load out in ME2, where as in ME a head shot was a definate kill, the player was rewarded for patience and skill.



I prefer planet scanning to the mako, i know i am probably one of the few, but after spending hours trying to drive over, around terrain features just drop me on top and lets do it.



I preffered the inventory system in ME because i could if i shopped around find armor sets that all matched. I like the Scorpion series with the camo pattern. I also liked the ability to Omni gel my way past locked items, as opposed to always having to stop the action to do a mini game. Speaking of the mini games hacks and bypasses they were better in ME2, seemed more original but because i always had to do them because money was limited, and quite possibly hiding an upgrade which was really the only way to customize your combat load outs they felt more forced.



The galactic travel was ok more detailed but the fuel situation really was a drag i kind of felt like Clark Griswold in a space version of National Lampoons (insert name here) Vacation with out the comic relief from the inbred inlaws.



I felt the character development was a bit more detailed in ME, and because of that, you could play two completely different class builds while playing the same class, and they would work different depending on your talent point choices. Those choices MADE a difference in how you approached combat, and allowed the player to assign and fill a specific roles on the squad.



Missions hands down belongs to ME2, in ME they all seemed to be the same. The missions in ME were almost always drop in deal with the annoying Mako, blow up a bunch of stuff and fly out. In ME2 the variation required the player to concentrate on what had to be done. In Samara's loyalty mission for example, you had to interact with the crowd, use the knowledge gained from Neria's (i think that is right) diary in order to draw Morinth out. Thane's mission was interesting in that you never fired a single round. This variation of missions makes ME2 the supreme winner in this category.



The maps in ME especially the Citadel were larger than necessary as i understand it to provide a depth of scale for the player. Running from one end of the Citadel to another gave the player an understanding of size, but there was alot of wasted areas that were it seems cosmetic. In ME2 the developers seemed to tone down the scale making the maps more concise, but sacrificing the scale for economy in what i can only think was an attempt to move the game through development faster. The maps in ME2 could have been a bit larger, provided a few more options for the player in places for commerce or interaction.



As for commerce the idea of decoration for the captain's cabin was a nice touch especially considering no such thing was avaliable for ME.



The movement controls were better in ME crouch and jump being the most important movements, which were removed in ME2 and we were saddled with a "cover" system that lacked fluidity. The very idea that a player had to first seek cover behind an object before being able to jump the item under fire or not, was annoying. ME was not perfect in this regard as in if the player got to close to an object they seemed to be mysteriously drawn into some sort of invisible gravity well where you were sucked flush to the item, forced to use that item for cover, even if you wanted to just slide by it.



Sorry this is quite a list i kind of got started and when i proof read before posting it was only then that i realized how long it was, but you asked so here is my opinion.



Asai

[BatarianBob]

1 did some things better. 2 did other things better.



They average out about the same.

[ikkedenechte]

asaiasai wrote...

They both were good games and if they took some of the stuff from both and combined them it would have been a bit better i think.

Combat in ME was better not just because lack of the annoying ammo system, but that you could develop a squad. You could determine the character's combat role in ME by how you equipped them and assign thier talent points. ...

I prefer planet scanning to the mako, i know i am probably one of the few, but after spending hours trying to drive over, around terrain features just drop me on top and lets do it.

I preffered the inventory system in ME  ...


I felt the character development was a bit more detailed in ME, and because of that, you could play two completely different class builds while playing the same class, an...

Missions hands down belongs to ME2...


The movement controls were better in ME crouch and jump being the most important movements...

Asai

exept for the fact that they're not just good but great I could not agree more

please bring back the ME1 armors an weapons ,please pretty please.

[Knightfly]

ME1 for the characters more (not a huge fan of many of the new ME2 characters) and story (overall) but ME2 for the gameplay, equal for me really.

[mcvxiii]

Both games have their faults but as far as entertainment factor goes I would give it to ME1. I would play ME1 for hours at a time, losing track of time. ME2 I basically played in 30-45 minute segments and then found something else to do. ME2 just didn't grip me like ME1 did. I found the combat system in 2 to be great when I first started playing it but after awhile the faults became really apparent. The enemies were smarter but not by much, your squad are still idiots who cannot follow commands with any reliability, and then there is the "cover vacuum".

[bobito64]

Delta426 wrote...

ME2 for gameplay, ME1 for story

I'd go along with this. Although ME2 had some great characters, whose side quests were superb, the central story was a little muddled to say the least. Worst of all, many of Shepard's actions in the game made no sense, which undermined the character. It's all very well being given choices A, B or C but when the answer is none of the above, an RPG is running into difficulties.