525 réponses à ce sujet

[Unwise Wisdom]

TornadoADV wrote...

Unwise Wisdom wrote...

TornadoADV wrote...

LoveAsThouWilt wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...

TornadoADV wrote...

I wouldn't call ME2 a huge dissapointment. But calling it an "RPG" is stretching it. ME1 was an RPG, ME2 is a TPS, it's more Uncharted 2 then KOTOR. Glad I held onto ME1 for when I want an RPG to play...and do crazy stunts in the Mako.

-The way the franchise is going, Mass Effect 3 will be a first person shoot or a plat former game. To bad BioWare decided to screw over the RPG fan base that loved the first game and cater to the third person squad based shooter ones instead. Changing genres in the middle of a series of games is never a good idea.

What are is the so called actions that screwed over the RPG fans? This game is still an RPG in more ways than most are in that you can tell your Shepards story how you want it told. Your actions in quests have reactions and consequences through the series. This is the BIGGEST leap in RPGs in a long time: having events carry through one game into another based on the players decisions.

I've never been a fan of shooters, not really. When I got my 360 last march my first game was Resident Evil 5 which really introduced me into shooters. It was fun, I enjoyed it, but I play games primarily for the story. Most action games are SHOOTERS in some way or form because, what other weapons should they use? The medieval style of gameplay is growing old (in a manner of speaking) so it is not surprise that most games the primary weapon are guns.

I enjoyed Baldurs Gate (the console games) but never cared to play them more than once.  It got old.

Mass Effect 1 and 2 have been the first games in a long time that I actually don't mind playing multiple times. That I even continue to play after gaining all achievements simply because the gameplay and the great story.

It makes no sense to me the comments that the RPG elements are gone. I don't understand that, because it seems more or less the same game with gamplay improvements.

Having a story does not an RPG make. Resident Evil 4 and 5 are more RPG then ME2 is and that's pretty damn scary for all the wrong reasons. We all know when we get the Hammerhead back, we'll finally be able to actually explore some planets for once instead of being inside a glorified corridor shooter.

You people complain too much lol.  Just the fact that you can choose what to say during conversations makes ME2 much more of a RPG than Resident Evil 4/5 could ever be.    

And exploring the planets in ME1 wasn't that interesting imo, there wasn't exactly much to see.  And since you couldn't explore every planet, it felt even more useless to be able to explore anything at all. At least that's what I thought.

What did I say about Story does not an RPG make? Also, I found the planet exploring very nice in ME1, perhaps if you looked up past the horizion sometime you'd see some pretty impressive vistas. And the planets you couldn't explore in ME1 were just flat out lethal, unlike ME2, where anything less then near Earth-like was avoided with a vengence.

I didn't say having a story makes the game an RPG, I was talking about being able to choose how to do certain things, how you want to react and things like that. Sure, ME1 was more RPG-like than ME2, but  imo ME2 has improved on a lot of things at the same time.

Oh and, about the planet exploring, I guess I just don't really care about driving around on planets looking at the view for absolutely no reason.  At least alot of the environments overall are much more interesting in ME2. 

[Temper_Graniteskul]

Mendelevosa wrote...

I don't understand why people are complaining about the ammo system. It's not hard at all to find ammo, and if you are constantly running out of ammo on a Normal difficulty playthrough, then you just suck at aiming. The ammo is there to give us more of a challenge in shooting. I think people are just mad that they can't spam endless bullets into their enemies, and that they actually have to touch their other wepaons, including the ....OMG....THE PISTOL!!! The horror.

Yeah, I do suck at aiming. I don't play shooters, FP or TP or otherwise, for this very reason. I liked the forgiving combat in ME1, as well as the overheat - my shots were still limited in a way, but if I needed to I could spend all darn day trying to pick off the enemies in a room. The last thing I (and apparently some others) wanted to see was a shift in gameplay from character skill to player skill a la shooters.

If it had been done for a completely new franchise I wouldn't have minded as much; I simply wouldn't pick up that title. However, this was done for the second game in a planned trilogy. I bought ME2 with the expectation that I would be able to play it much as I had ME1, which I don't think is unreasonable.

[montpoupon]

 ME2's a wonderful game.  True, there are some parts that are disappointing - I really wish they had improved upon planet exploration than cut it out altogether.
But I do like that there are no "re-used" maps or buildings in ME2, even though I kinda did get used to the ME1 storming of the same pre-fabricated structure over and over again but with the crates in different arrangements.  I really miss the Mako.
The one part I thought was really awkward was when I came up to this planet, read the description:

Once a starship refueling station for the quarians, Charoum has expanded under geth rule. Thousands of orbital platforms surround the planet and its many moons, refining helium into helium-3. A vast geth fleet comes and goes between Charoum and Haestrom, preventing all but the most stealthy of spy drones from discovering any information about it. Current estimates place the geth fleet numbers between 5,000 and 10,000 ships, with unknown levels of armament.TRAVEL ADVISORY: Most intelligence estimates state that approaching Charoum is tantamount to suicide. All civilian traffic is prohibited.

Then went ahead and spent the next 15 minutes planet scanning the heck off of it.  <_<

[TornadoADV]

montpoupon wrote...

 ME2's a wonderful game.  True, there are some parts that are disappointing - I really wish they had improved upon planet exploration than cut it out altogether.
But I do like that there are no "re-used" maps or buildings in ME2, even though I kinda did get used to the ME1 storming of the same pre-fabricated structure over and over again but with the crates in different arrangements.  I really miss the Mako.
The one part I thought was really awkward was when I came up to this planet, read the description:

Once a starship refueling station for the quarians, Charoum has expanded under geth rule. Thousands of orbital platforms surround the planet and its many moons, refining helium into helium-3. A vast geth fleet comes and goes between Charoum and Haestrom, preventing all but the most stealthy of spy drones from discovering any information about it. Current estimates place the geth fleet numbers between 5,000 and 10,000 ships, with unknown levels of armament.TRAVEL ADVISORY: Most intelligence estimates state that approaching Charoum is tantamount to suicide. All civilian traffic is prohibited.

Then went ahead and spent the next 15 minutes planet scanning the heck off of it.  <_<

The explanation is simple, any planet with a "Travel Advisory" warning is a future Hammerhead Landing Site or future mission pack.

[Darth Drago]

LoveAsThouWilt wrote...

What are is the so called actions that screwed over the RPG fans? This game is still an RPG in more ways than most are in that you can tell your Shepards story how you want it told.

It makes no sense to me the comments that the RPG elements are gone. I don't understand that, because it seems more or less the same game with gamplay improvements.

-Mass Effect 2 lost a lot of RPG elements. Every mission has the same outcome, you go in and kill everything. Nothing more and nothing less. You can replay the same level 100 times and you will always get the same results because you have no options to do other wise. Hell, even the levels are set up in a similar fashion as a first/third person shooter player vs. player map. When in ME2 do you get to convince someone to not fight you that just walking away would be better for their health or even convince them they are wrong and should surrender? When 90% of the quests are set up this way, that’s not a RPG, that’s a shooter game.

-What BioWare could have fixed from ME1 to enhance ME2 was butchered with weak quick fixes or just dropping the problem completely. Everything that made ME1 good was dumbed down to make some quick sales by catering to the masses instead of the people who loved the first game.

ME2 is a shooter with a good story, not an role playing game set in a sci-fi universe.

[Ratsandchildren]

I won't say that Mass Effect 2 is a disappointment, I enjoyed it.
However it's not as amazing as Mass Effect 1, story isn't as amazing and bioware dumbed down lots of features for casuals.

[anyawow2]

ME1 is definitely the better game than ME2. Still, I greatly enjoyed ME2. I consider Dragon Age to be far superior to ME2, although I prefer ME2 style combat. I love the character conversations and development, but ME2 is very lacking in story arc. I wasn't in love with the constant required cover system or the effect of all the barricades in the environment. I felt they went to far in reducing armor and character abilities.

[yoomazir]

Darth Drago wrote...

ME2 is a shooter with a good story, not an role playing game set in a sci-fi universe.

this.

[MassEffect762]

Hey Bioware, I'f you by some long shot chance happen to be reading these type of threads you know you screwed up royally with ME2.



I can understand why you did what you did though.(it was just easier this way)

[finnithe]

They didn't screw up ME2, but it certainly could have been better. ME1 was certainly not better than ME2, simply due to how broken the gameplay was (frictionless materials, biotics, etc.). ME3 could be the best of the trilogy should Bioware add some depth to ME2. Achieving a middle ground between ME1 and ME2 in terms of depth should be good. Having several more weapons, for example, might help a lot. Maybe one of the SMG's can be especially strong against Shields, but weaker than another SMG against barriers. A more customizable upgrade system (with weapon attachments) might help, too. These are things that both the RPG crowd can adapt too, and the shooter crowd already knows.



Calling ME2 a failure is way to extreme. ME2 fixed many of ME1's flaws, but still is lacking in some categories. (It's like Bioware has some aversion to creating a perfect game, but they get closer with every attempt).

[Xpardox91X]

 I fully agree with the OP on this one...

After the atmosphere and overall feel and mood of the first Mass Effect, it was downright badass and an epic masterpiece.

I've recently started playing ME1 again, and am going. "They shoulda kept this..." constantly.

Although, that lies the problem... since the first was such a masterpiece, the sequel would be hard to capitalize, let alone match since that feeling has been opened. ME1 was a huge success in part because it was something completely new, which added much.

But enough defence of ME2 since it's not my cup of BioWare Tea.

ME1 is total BioWare classic... from armor limitation, to the deep stats system, along with the branching side-quests and over all storyline (although I admit KoTOR was the best so far), ME2 just seems too cliche.

The option to not edit your squads look (besides an ALTERATION called "Loyalty clothing") makes no sense. Where is their Kinetic Barrier battery? Their Armor? C'mon... for the sake of canon. It makes no sense to charge into a hostile battle wearing normal clothing, when Shepard is the only one wearing applicable armor and equipment.

Then there is the storyline, they said that your choices would affect ME2... not really I guess. The Council (doesn't matter they act the same anyway!) has no part AT ALL! And the only thing your choices in ME1 affect here are the stupid emails and random encounters. Which hardly "changes" anything.

Either BioWare dropped the ball, or they are trying to cover a wider range of demographic. BioWare doesn't need to recruit people who are playing "Modern Warfare 2" (which I admit the story in there is beast, but the multiplayer gets boring quickly). They need to cater to those who have played KoTOR, ME1, Jade Empire, and so on, because thats what put BioWare on the map in the first place.

Just like in ME2, you wont survive if your squad isn't loyal.
So if BioWare wants to "live", they need to bring some Loyalty to the table.
Give us our old Mass Effect RPG elements, and just keep it how it was.

Oh yeah thats right... the combat system from ME1 was better anyway!

If you want me to love ME2, gimme that and put in a cameo from Carth Onasi.

[finnithe]

Xpardox91X wrote...

Either BioWare dropped the ball, or they are trying to cover a wider range of demographic. BioWare doesn't need to recruit people who are playing "Modern Warfare 2" (which I admit the story in there is beast, but the multiplayer gets boring quickly). They need to cater to those who have played KoTOR, ME1, Jade Empire, and so on, because thats what put BioWare on the map in the first place.

Did you just call Modern Warfare 2's story beast? Really?

[Johndoex9112]

K0braTh0r wrote...

Hello there dear Mass Effect fans. I have played Mass Effect mainly because it was signed by BioWare and I loved SW KOTOR and Jade Empire so I was sure it was going to be a very good game. I was wrong. It got me stunned so hard, that I couldn't let it go until I finished it. I think Mass Effect is one of the greatest games EVER made.

Due to the amazing experience and storyline from Mass Effect, incredible gameplay and great RPG structure, I had huge expectations from ME2, expected to ****** my pants at first launch ... But instead a bitter-sour taste came into my mouth...

There are a lot of stupid and badly implemented stuff in the game, if I can
remember them all, I'll edit my post, of course if it isn't deleted for
making a bad image to the game. I have a lot of PC-games playing
experience and as a devoted fan to BioWare's RPGs, to avoid future mistakes, especially
on ME3 I would like to tell you my point of view, even if you'd take notice of it or not.

So I got totally shocked when I saw AMMO on my weapons ... I was like "WTF?!?" I thought it's only for the moment, maybe the pistol was damaged or something, but as I advanced in the game I saw it was made this way and with all due respect BioWare, this was the biggest and idiotic thing EVER to see in a production with your signature. This leads to the major problem, you decided to make this game more of an FPS-Action Game than an RPG-Action Game, but then I thought, heck even in FPSs' you have bigger ammo limit to carry than in this game, even with upgrades. So what was the point for this ? Just another great idea ?

Various gameplay, I believe you would like to call, "improvements", right ? just blew this game's chances of being the best game of 2010 and destroyed the hearts (I'm pretty sure I am not the only one severely dissapointed) of BioWare fans.

Some of these are :

- extremely simplified RPG component;

- extremely simplified market (buying items without the possibility to sell them?!?);

- extremely simplified and even badly modified inventory and squad equip screen (I can't dress up my team anymore?);

- simplified romantic scenes (after what everybody saw in ME 1 it is clear they expected the same in the 2nd part, although this is not a critical dissapointment);

- the storyline...hey I didn't expected to continue the game with the council saved and the galaxy too but at least the obvious choice for most gamers would have been Captain Anderson for councilor not Udina (again not a critical dissapointment);

- what happened to omnigel? why can't I choose decoding using omnigel? you added planetary scanning...to make the game longer by boring players to death? couldn't an omnigel scan been easier? again I guess another great idea to take Omnigel out;

- you added fuel and probes to buy via fuel depots, great, but why can't we sell the minerals to the depots to make some credits? and the Normandy uses fuel only when it travels in the Nebula but not when it travels inside a Solar System or when it uses a Mass Relay?

I currently haven't finished the game, but I'm sure I'll be back with something more to say...

In conclusion, I don't know what you tried to do BioWare if it was EA's fault or you just felt it to make some "tests" with one of the most epic games you ever made but to be honest you made this game the biggest dissapointment of the year, and when I mean you, I'm sure the devs know who's responsible, who called the shots...

Please excuse me if my report is too harsh, but I'm sick and tired of seeing games with huge potential and great storyline going to the trashcan...I feel right now like I felt after playing Gothic 1 and 2, when I started the 3rd one...the same taste...bitter-taste...of a huge dissapointment, at least Piranha's Bytes excuse was that they were rushed by the producers, they had to work at least one more year on the Gothic 3 project.

So...what is YOUR excuse BIOWARE ?!?

P.S.: The first Mass Effect felt like playing a game in which you invested not only time and hard work but PASSION too, it had such an unique and thrilling experience that never got you bored not even on planet explorations when Mass Effect 2 makes the impression of just another superficial EA game made without passion or dedication, only to make some more profit, it has very little of the experience that the first one offered, often becoming a little boring.

Shame on you BioWare...shame on you...you've let EA Games get the better of you...

1. Ammo:  The addition of ammo was a smart move on biowares part, in that the practically infinite ammo system employed in ME1 made the game easier and sort of detract from the fps element that Mass effect was always supposed to have. besides didn't bioware put a story related explanation on why ammo was added to ME2, in the codex screen?

2. Rpg element: you are simply exaggerating when you say the RPG element has been extremely simplified or removed, the rpg is there yes, although I admit in some gameplay aspects some elements did seem like they were removed in favor of some fps elements.

3. The inventory system in ME1 was sloppy and cluttered

4. how at all was romance simplified there was much more dialogue choices in ME2 and romance options

5. did you enjoy tapping X for 35 minutes to turn all of your items into omni-gel?

you say your criticizing ME2 but it only sounds like your bashing it, plus you haven't even finished the game yet.

[yoomazir]

Johndoex9112 wrote...



1. Ammo:  The addition of ammo was a smart move on biowares part, in that the practically infinite ammo system employed in ME1 made the game easier and sort of detract from the fps element that Mass effect was always supposed to have. besides didn't bioware put a story related explanation on why ammo was added to ME2, in the codex screen?

2. Rpg element: you are simply exaggerating when you say the RPG element has been extremely simplified or removed, the rpg is there yes, although I admit in some gameplay aspects some elements did seem like they were removed in favor of some fps elements.

3. The inventory system in ME1 was sloppy and cluttered

4. how at all was romance simplified there was much more dialogue choices in ME2 and romance options

5. did you enjoy tapping X for 35 minutes to turn all of your items into omni-gel?

you say your criticizing ME2 but it only sounds like your bashing it, plus you haven't even finished the game yet.

1) "infinite" ammo didn't make ME easier, in fact, the game was way harder on instanity than ME2 on insanity. Instead on worrying about seeking ammo in every corner you could spend your time on something else, like secondary quests and exporing worlds. In ME2 you have barely these, but now you have ammo, the new loot!

2)Yes, there's is rpg in ME2, as much has having water in a diesel engine. Paragon anwer or Renegade answer then shoot, there's your rpg part  in ME2.

3) Indeed it had defaults, they were complains about it, but removing it is better? hell no, these guys were probably lazy about it and didn't want to work too much to correct it, hell,they couldn't even get  inspired from other games who posses well made inventories. That 's a FAIL, not an improvment.

4) You do girl/boy  loyatly quest, then you choose 2-3 times the "Nice Answer" and then you get laid.  Doesn't felt very romantic to me. ME and DA:O got the romances well done, not ME2.

5) it sure beats tapping LT 50 times for every planet, at least I could use the omni gel.

Modifié par yoomazir, 20 février 2010 - 01:59 .

[Johndoex9112]

yoomazir wrote...

Johndoex9112 wrote...



1. Ammo:  The addition of ammo was a smart move on biowares part, in that the practically infinite ammo system employed in ME1 made the game easier and sort of detract from the fps element that Mass effect was always supposed to have. besides didn't bioware put a story related explanation on why ammo was added to ME2, in the codex screen?

2. Rpg element: you are simply exaggerating when you say the RPG element has been extremely simplified or removed, the rpg is there yes, although I admit in some gameplay aspects some elements did seem like they were removed in favor of some fps elements.

3. The inventory system in ME1 was sloppy and cluttered

4. how at all was romance simplified there was much more dialogue choices in ME2 and romance options

5. did you enjoy tapping X for 35 minutes to turn all of your items into omni-gel?

you say your criticizing ME2 but it only sounds like your bashing it, plus you haven't even finished the game yet.

1) "infinite" ammo didn't make ME easier, in fact, the game was harder on instanity than ME2 on insanity. Instead on worrying about seeking ammo in every corner you could spend your time on something else, like secondary quests and exporing worlds. In ME2 you have barely these, but now you have ammo, the new loot!

2)Yes, there's is rpg in ME2, as much has having water in a diesel engine. Paragon anwer or Renegade answer, there's your rpg inME2.

3) Indeed it had defaults, there were complains about it, but removing it is better? hell no, these uys were probably lazy about it and didn't want to work too much to correct it, hell,they couldn't even inspire for other games who posses well made inventories. that 's a FAIL, not an improvment.

4) You do girl/boy  loyatly quest, then you choose 2-3 times the "Nice Answer" and then you get laid.  Doesn't felt very romantic to me. ME and DA:O got the romances well done, not ME2.

5) it sure beats tapping LT 50 times for every planet, at least I could use the omni gel.

1. in my case yes the "infinite ammo" did make ME1 easier even on insanity, I got the Koyalov IX put two frictionless materials in it and ran through the entire game on insanity without so much as one dying once

2. And I do believe I stated that ME2 did have its rpg element dumbed down a bit in favor of Fps gameplay, but how exactly did ME1 have so much more "rpg" in it compared to ME2

3. I had issues with the inventory system in ME1 so bioware tried something new so what if they remove the old system in favor of something else

4. romance worked the exact same way in ME1 gain loyalty choose "nice answer" 2-3 time get laid.

5. touche good sir, but omni-gel always seemed like a cheap way to bypass the minigame to open lockers in ME1, the only thing omni-gel seemed good for was to repair the mako

[Unwise Wisdom]

Johndoex9112 wrote...

1. in my case yes the "infinite ammo" did make ME1 easier even on insanity, I got the Koyalov IX put two frictionless materials in it and ran through the entire game on insanity without so much as one dying once

2. And I do believe I stated that ME2 did have its rpg element dumbed down a bit in favor of Fps gameplay, but how exactly did ME1 have so much more "rpg" in it compared to ME2

3. I had issues with the inventory system in ME1 so bioware tried something new so what if they remove the old system in favor of something else

4. romance worked the exact same way in ME1 gain loyalty choose "nice answer" 2-3 time get laid.

5. touche good sir, but omni-gel always seemed like a cheap way to bypass the minigame to open lockers in ME1, the only thing omni-gel seemed good for was to repair the mako

I agree with all of the above, especially 2.  I just don't see the difference in the RPG-aspect of the two games.  

And I don't see why anyone would complain about the romance in  ME2.

In ME1 it was like '' So, tell me about yourself.''
''MY DAD IS DEAD LOL''   Not to mention being limited to two options.


In ME2 you get more involved with your crew members background, and in some cases you get to visit their homeworlds.      With all of this complaining I'm worried that ME3 will be more like ME1.

[GodWood]

[quote]Darth Drago wrote...
ME2 is a shooter with a good story, not an role playing game set in a sci-fi universe. [/quote]
[/quote]So was ME1.

[hex23]

I was just thinking we need another thread like this, and here it is.

"ME1" isn't really a good game at all. "ME2" trumps it in pretty much every category.

[hex23]

Darth Drago wrote...
Changing genres in the middle of a series of games is never a good idea.

ME2's sales figures and critical acclaim definitely disagree with you.

[yoomazir]

hex23 wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...
Changing genres in the middle of a series of games is never a good idea.

ME2's sales figures and critical acclaim definitely disagree with you.

no, people bought ME2 because they thought they would get a ME game with  corrected defaults and didn't expect to receive a straight foward shooter in exchange.
And for the critics, well most of them loved Gears of War and Uncharted so obviously ME2 got good reviews but not necessarely for what defines Bioware.

Unwise Wisdom wrote...
    With all of this complaining I'm worried that ME3 will be more like ME1.

GOD, LET IT HAPPEN! as long as Bioware don't screw it like they did for ME2.  Next time half the game would end in scanning planets and the other half  just running foward shooting eveything with only one weapon & no armor for the entire game.

Modifié par yoomazir, 20 février 2010 - 03:13 .

[RPGlover732]

Good job OP, good job.



IDC what you think about this game OP but really? saying people who disagree with you are not true bioware fans?



Thats like saying if i dont agree with your veiws on health care reform im not american ( i understand op might not be from the united states, just and example)

[Andy_Haugh]

The removal of a real inventory system is a huge step backward, no question about that. Coupled with the small selection of weapons/armor/mods (compared with ME1), the game feels like it is missing something vital... probably because it is.

Can anyone honestly say that having far fewer items to choose from is better? No, of course not. More choices & options are always a good thing in a game, especially one which we can all agree is at least partially an "RPG".

With that said, ME2 is still a great game, but it's a different type of game... and it is very understandable why ME1 veterans would be disappointed. The ability to customize your gear to a high degree & explore planets was removed, and instead we have silly things like fuel for the Normandy and monotonous resource scanning. Explorable worlds with a new Mako vehicle would have been far superior.

Don't get me wrong, I love them both, but ME2 just doesn't have quite the same depth or replay value as ME1 does. I was a bit disappointed at the over-simplication of many aspects of the game, but at least the great new cast of characters make up for it.

In the end, once you learn to think of it as a "shooter with a few RPG elements", instead of a "true" RPG, it works just fine. Many of us were understandably a bit thrown off by the vast changes to the core of the game, but ME2 still gets a 9 out of 10 from me. (And for the record, I would give ME1 an 11 out of 10, if it was possible )

Modifié par Andy_Haugh, 20 février 2010 - 03:15 .

[Jimbe2693]

^ ME1 had 2 models for each weapon, and the rest were reskins.

[SithLordExarKun]

MassEffect762 wrote...

Hey Bioware, I'f you by some long shot chance happen to be reading these type of threads you know you screwed up royally with ME2.

Right because a vocal minority is whining/complaining non stop about how ME2 sucked it therefore means they royally screwed up.

[Andy_Haugh]

hex23 wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...
Changing genres in the middle of a series of games is never a good idea.

ME2's sales figures and critical acclaim definitely disagree with you.

Sorry, it really isn't so simple... "Critical acclaim" doesn't mean everything, and sometimes it means very little. Over the last 15 years I've seen countless games get fantastic reviews when in reality the game has serious issues. For example, Empire: Total War got fantastic reviews last year, but even the developers themselves have admitted the AI is so broken that it will never function remotely close to as well as it was supposed to. (One quote said something about the game engine being as powerful as a "V12 from a supercar", yet it was only capable of firing on two or three cylinders at once)

Also, note that many people would be unaware of the massive changes to core aspects of ME's gameplay until after they bought ME2 and played it. Anyway, it was a given that ME2 would be a hit... it is a great sequel to one of the best PC games of all time.

Clearly these changes have left a lot of people upset, disappointed, or even outraged (That's why threads like this exist). Darth Drago is of course correct in saying that changing genres in the middle of a series is not a good idea. That is really quite obvious... people expect certain things from sequels. Fortunately for us, BioWare executed those changes about as well as it could possibly be done.