97 réponses à ce sujet

[obie191970]

twaninator wrote...

OP can't be serious. Statements like "whack upgrade system" hold no water and are hardly credible. Try backing up your claims with logical explanations.

And If you constantly need to be told where to go next then Mass Effect definitely isn't for you. Don't mistake your misplaced expectations for a design flaw.

People who want Mass Effect to be something it is not are the reason ME3 will have "less depth than Halo" as someone on this board said.

If you can honestly say that ME1 didn't have a "whack upgrade system" then you, my friend, have zero credibility - Not the OP.  I love both games and have played through ME1 with every class and just finsihed up another playthrough on Sunday.  The upgrade and inventory system in ME1 is terribly flawed, bordering on tragically broken.  As much of a fanboy as I am, I can still look at the game objectively - Apparently, you cannot.

[DarthCaine]

I agree that ME1 seems clunky in comparison to ME2, but ME1 is still a good game

Your biggest mistake is playing ME2 first. I NEVER play sequels without playing the previous parts (if they're story connected)

Modifié par DarthCaine, 16 février 2010 - 05:13 .

[Twosday]

yoomazir wrote...

no wonder why people rise ME2 being the best, most of them never played the first one.
Sad day I tell you.

This doesn't even make any sense.

If they haven't played both and they're saying one is better than the other then their opinion on which is better doesn't even matter, if they are even claiming to have an opinion in the first place.

If they've played both then what difference does the order in which they played them matter?

[ReplicantZero]

Was fortunate enough to play ME1 when it was 1st released - loved it at the time and still feel that ME1's story and dialogue are superior to ME2's.



However don't relish the idea of going back to ME1 after playing ME2 simply because ME2's gameplay mechanics and graphics are so much slicker that ME1 would now feel horribly clunky and slow.



I know someone who's just been introduced to the Mass Effect series by playing ME2 - they really enjoyed ME2, but coming from a mainly FPS background, I'd hesitate to recommend that they now play ME1 after playing ME2. Shame as they now miss all the references/links to the original.

[Obadiah]

The messed up part about playing ME1 for the first time after ME2 is that you no longer hit what you're pointing at until you've upgraded your weapon skills about 1/4 of the way through. It is very counterintuitive.

Modifié par Obadiah, 16 février 2010 - 05:35 .

[spernus]

mossfoot wrote...

Well I'm actually replaying ME1 again even after finishing ME2, just to explore being a different background (Spacer, Sole Survivor, that sort of thing) and everything else.

Yes, ME2 is the superior game, but ME1 still remains perectly playable and enjoyable.

I will say again, though, that when ME3 is finished, they should do a special edition of ME1 to bring it in line with ME2/ME3 in terms of graphics and gameplay (from what I've heard ME3 will be largely unchanged in those regards from ME2). That would give a more consistent and enjoyable trilogy both for those who never played it before, and those who want to replay it (heck, could add some new options to ME1 to make it even more worth revisiting)

Mass effect 2 is definitively the superior game,but it's not perfect.No game is perfect anyway,but the gap between Mass effect 1 & 2 isn't quite as big as Uncharted 1 & 2.

Mass effect is still an enjoyable game and will be for years to come.The basic for the Mass effect universe is still there and you can skip the bad part like the uncharted worlds or ressource gathering.The game is somewhat bland and sterile looking compared to the sequel of course,but that doesn't kill it.I think it's more spectacular in some part storyline wise and there's more rpg "stats" to play with.

[Sylvius the Mad]

thegull wrote...

The lack of quest guidance (just tell me where to go already!)

Really?  I actually turned that off in DAO.  I thought ME gave too much quest guidance, rather than just letting me wander around and figure things out.

Obadiah wrote...

The messed up part about playing ME1 for the first time after ME2 is that you no longer hit what you're pointing at until you've upgraded your weapon skills about 1/4 of the way through. It is very counterintuitive.

I think you have that backward.  I find it counter-intuitive that Shepard, a trained marine, can somehow remain a lousy shot throughout ME2.  At least in ME she got better as she trained her skills.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 16 février 2010 - 06:28 .

[thegull]

Wow lots of responses in half a day. Thanks for the input, all. I will give ME1 a chance, and your views have given me a refreshed perspective. I think landing on a planet with a huge monster that killed me like 10 times was a turn-off to starting the game, but I just have to rinse ME2 out of me for a while and I think ME1 will be a nice experience. Thanks again, all. Great community here.

[thegull]

Post got repeated by accident.  Please delete this.

Modifié par thegull, 16 février 2010 - 06:40 .

[arkiva]

If you play the ME2 before to play ME1 you will lost a loooot of the ME esential story.

[thegull]

twaninator wrote...

OP can't be serious. Statements like "whack upgrade system" hold no water and are hardly credible. Try backing up your claims with logical explanations.

And If you constantly need to be told where to go next then Mass Effect definitely isn't for you. Don't mistake your misplaced expectations for a design flaw.

People who want Mass Effect to be something it is not are the reason ME3 will have "less depth than Halo" as someone on this board said.

Actually, I'm never THAT serious.  LOL.  I can appreciate ME1's gameplay, I just found it difficult going ffrom 2 to 1.  I don't think I ever said anything in ME1 was a design flaw, nor do I wish it was something it's not.  It seems you enjoy reading into people's words what YOU wish to hear.  Sounds like old arguments you were waiting to revive via my post.  Glad I could help.  Ciao to this thread!

[Leetabix]

I had completed ME1 when I bought it at launch many moons ago , and I have to agree with the OP , there is certan things I miss such as having more skills or finding items as well as the weapon mods. But bioware fixed so many problems with the combat system , in me 1 cover is practicaly useless becuse all enemys just rush suisidaly at you , the game felt like an mmorpg were you needed to tank useing immunity , and also spam crowed control.

[Darkmoone1]

When I went back to ME1 to change a couple of things(Having no LI for Tali :3). I found out that ME1's combat was Dramatically unbalenced. Basically if you were trained to use a shotgun thats the only gun in this game your gonna use. It is so overpowered I take out bosses in about 5-6 shots without overheation.



Mako was also VERY SLLLLOOOOWWWW. All the sequenes with it feel like fillers to the game.



One I WILL miss is the fact you can take out your gun in any part of ME1. I don't like in ME2 where you have to be in "Instanced" areas to fight.

[alpha54]

I also haven't been able to touch ME1 ever since I played through ME2. I wanted to do another complete ME1 playthrough to import another character into ME2 but gave up a couple of hours into it - the entire game just feels very clunky and unpolished in comparison.
Its an odd feeling, because playing ME1 for the first time was definitely a "greater" experience than playing ME2 for the first time, but I guess that's because I had never played anything like ME1 before, so it was a somewhat revolutionary experience. ME2 isn't as ground-breaking as the first one, its just a more polished experience with lots of incremental improvements.
I'm guessing that's why I'm finding it hard to go back to ME1, even though I loved it back when it was first released.

Modifié par alpha54, 16 février 2010 - 07:46 .

[Paperghost]

Darkmoone1 wrote...

One I WILL miss is the fact you can take out your gun in any part of ME1. I don't like in ME2 where you have to be in "Instanced" areas to fight.

i think that's a good idea, to be honest. nothing sillier than being able to fire charged up shotgun missiles at crowds of people just standing round ignoring you. having said that (and dancing around spoilers) i did like that certain enemies could be approached and talked to before a battle kicked off - OR you could just let rip immediately turning that area into a warzone. only happens a few times iirc, but a nice touch.

[Malanek]

I prefer ME2 by quite a bit. ME1 was good but the big problem for me was that there was only about 5-10 hours of quality game and the rest was tedious filler. ME2 is a much more streamlined and well paced game. I do occasionally miss some of the gameplay differences, in ME1 once you reached a certain point you could wander around out in the open quite a bit whereas in ME2 you have to keep your head down. I'm enjoying ME2 more than I have any game for years.

[Space Shot]

thegull wrote...

I never played ME1 and I'm sure at the time, it was great fun.  However, after playing ME2, ME1 is terribly boring and lacks sooo much.

I was a fan of ME1 back in the day but playing it again....well...I can only agree with you because I very nearly couldn't do it.  The combat was sub-par, even for the day, AI behavior was just plain silly, the plot was incredibly derivative, the inventory system nearly broke the game and towards the end I very nearly spent as much time recycling as I did playing the game.  Furthermore the Mako was incredibly tedious, unrewarding, and ultimately something that I did not miss in ME2.  Plus the characterization wasn't nearly as good as it is now, so there really isn't a whole lot else I can really enjoy now after playing the in-comparison godly ME2.

For those that might disagree with this, I might suggest that you take off the rose colored glasses and actually spend some quality time with the first game.  I, like you, went in with some pretty high notions about the good old days, but reality is quick to shatter those flimsy dreams.

Modifié par Space Shot, 16 février 2010 - 08:08 .

[Obadiah]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

thegull wrote...

The lack of quest guidance (just tell me where to go already!)

Really?  I actually turned that off in DAO.  I thought ME gave too much quest guidance, rather than just letting me wander around and figure things out.

Obadiah wrote...

The messed up part about playing ME1 for the first time after ME2 is that you no longer hit what you're pointing at until you've upgraded your weapon skills about 1/4 of the way through. It is very counterintuitive.

I think you have that backward.  I find it counter-intuitive that Shepard, a trained marine, can somehow remain a lousy shot throughout ME2.  At least in ME she got better as she trained her skills.

Um... I was never a lousy shot in ME2.

[piemanz]

gmartin40 wrote...

And for someone else (they know who they are), their was nothing wrong with the plot of ME1. It was perfectly done and if it weren't for that plot there would be no number 2 and none of your would be here complaining. Ass holes.

Yea,people make me laugh when they rubbish ME1 but still bought ME2 lol

There are a lot of critisisms with ME1 that i can tolerate,Plot is not one of them.The plot in ME1 is miles ahead of ME2.

What you consider to be looking through rose tuinted glasses are the whole reason i bothered buying the second game,if i thought the first was bad why the hell would i buy the second?.

Modifié par piemanz, 16 février 2010 - 08:25 .

[piemanz]

Repost.

Modifié par piemanz, 16 février 2010 - 08:23 .

[Lopake]

Citadel isnt too big just use the rapid transit, and i laugh at the people that didnt play ME1 first.



Just because it makes the experiance so much better

[Lopake]

Citadel isnt too big just use the rapid transit, and i laugh at the people that didnt play ME1 first.



Just because it makes the experiance so much better

[twaninator]

obie191970 wrote...

twaninator wrote...

OP can't be serious. Statements like "whack upgrade system" hold no water and are hardly credible. Try backing up your claims with logical explanations.

And If you constantly need to be told where to go next then Mass Effect definitely isn't for you. Don't mistake your misplaced expectations for a design flaw.

People who want Mass Effect to be something it is not are the reason ME3 will have "less depth than Halo" as someone on this board said.

If you can honestly say that ME1 didn't have a "whack upgrade system" then you, my friend, have zero credibility - Not the OP.  I love both games and have played through ME1 with every class and just finsihed up another playthrough on Sunday.  The upgrade and inventory system in ME1 is terribly flawed, bordering on tragically broken.  As much of a fanboy as I am, I can still look at the game objectively - Apparently, you cannot.

Again, no reasons or explanations as to what makes it is bad. I can certainly say that the inventory system was time consuming and definately could have been cleaned up, but "bordering on tragically broken" is a vast overstatement. Simply saying that it is "whack" means nothing. Liking something that someone else doesn't like does not make someone less credible. Slamming something without being able to formulate an arguement to support your claim, on the other hand, is another story. Seriously, get over yourself.