15 réponses à ce sujet

[Sorwen]

The game isn't bad, but this is more what I would have expected from a first game.  It makes a lot of mistakes that you would expect a first game to make not the second in a series.  First, there is less.  There is less range of customization in armor, weapons, and abilities.  While some are better than before there is less than what ME1 had.  On weapons where before I could switch out damage types at a drop of the hat or modify my gun for more accuracy, more damage, less recoil.  Heck I was able to mod the sniper rifle so that my adept (which this time doesn't even have one in his inventory) could use it and unlock the achievement.  Armor I could increase armor, shields, health, regen, etc.  As an adept (or any class) I had more power options.  I could use singularity to hold creatures to a position (can still do) or pull them out of cover (can't seem to do), I could use lift to stop creatures (with nemesis even the larger armatures), warp for damage (the new warp is better), hold creatures in stasis, throw people back or over ledges, I could give myself kinetic barriers, I could quickly regen my shields, I could boost my hand guns power, etc.


The other thing was I had a more vicarial feel of becoming powerful.  The constant reward of my character improving.  Becoming that much stronger that much more versatile.  It didn't matter that the increments were some times small, heck it helped the overall feel of becoming a force to recon with.  Also because it was spread out I wasn't limping between the levels in a power rather than having to hold back to dump a bunch of points at once I could keep getting improved benefit the whole time.


Combat itself is a big problem as well.  From what I've heard I should be able to point my gun and if my redial is over the target I should hit.  I would really like to know why my gun keeps missing then.  Maybe it is just the gun I'm using now, but 1 in 3 shots actually hit the target.  Cover, I have to say the cover system is really bad now.  For starters before  I could crouch down and take advantage of cover sooner.  I could freely move behind cover while crouched down.  If I slightly move back from cover I didn't popup to get shot in the head.  If I was facing a box I could take cover behind it and not suddenly have my guy decide to take cover on the side of the box where he could get shot.  While they npcs try to take better advantage of cover it doesn't quite work out.  Either they are running back and forth between cover like a duck in a shooting gallery or they are trying to take cover behind a guard rail and getting shot to death.


I've already brought up how I felt about the UI so I'll not say more here.  The only thing I can't fault this game on is graphics and story.  Both live up to what was in ME and surpass it in many ways.  It is the little touches that have made it stand out more than before and on that I thank you BioWare.  Over all this game is what I would have expected from a first effort.  Rather than improve on a lot of what was in ME it was instead scrapped for this more like a shooter game.  Where I could say ME was an RPG that played a little like a shooter, ME2 is more like a shooter that plays like an RPG.  Will ME3 just be a shooter?  I'll play it because I want to see the story and because I paid good money for it, but over all I'm very disappointed by ME2.  Any time a game makes me stop just to say my piece to the developers then there are problems.

Modifié par Sorwen, 20 février 2010 - 04:13 .

[Frotality]

your preaching to the chior.....the very easily annoyed by the slightest bit of disapointment in ME2 chior.

[Andorfiend]

Sorwen wrote...

I should be able to point my gun and if my redial is over the target I should hit.  I would really like to know why my gun keeps missing then.  Maybe it is just the gun I'm using now, but 1 in 3 shots actually hit the target. 

I think you mean reticle, not redial. I thought that was just me.  I've seen quite a few times lately where a nice clean headshot from my sniper rifle did no damage at all. I suppose it wouldn't be a big deal if the new ammo system didn't mean that that miss represented 10% of my total ammo capacity.  But it does and it is.

[CatatonicMan]

Frotality wrote...

your preaching to the chior.....the very easily annoyed by the slightest bit of disapointment in ME2 chior.

I think it is more on the line of expecting a dog, but getting a cat. Both are pets, but they are nowhere near the same thing in practice.

I expected ME2 to be like ME1 - but bigger, faster, stronger, and more polished. I was disappointed when I found out that ME2 was more like Gears of War with a decent story. 

Modifié par CatatonicMan, 20 février 2010 - 04:31 .

[Sorwen]

Andorfiend wrote...

Sorwen wrote...

I should be able to point my gun and if my redial is over the target I should hit.  I would really like to know why my gun keeps missing then.  Maybe it is just the gun I'm using now, but 1 in 3 shots actually hit the target. 

I think you mean reticle, not redial. I thought that was just me.  I've seen quite a few times lately where a nice clean headshot from my sniper rifle did no damage at all. I suppose it wouldn't be a big deal if the new ammo system didn't mean that that miss represented 10% of my total ammo capacity.  But it does and it is.

Yes, reticle.  Spell check changed to the wrong one.   Yeah, that was another thing going from unlimited ammo to this.  I can under stand on the heavy weapon as it is more like the grenades, but on the other weapons I hate it.

CatatonicMan wrote...

Frotality wrote...

your preaching to the chior.....the very easily annoyed by the slightest bit of disapointment in ME2 chior.

I think it is more on the line of expecting a dog, but getting a cat. Both are pets, but they are nowhere near the same thing in practice.

I expected ME2 to be like ME1 - but bigger, faster, stronger, and more polished. I was disappointed when I found out that ME2 was more like Gears of War with a decent story. 

That says it well too.

[Bob5312]

I suspect that I'm in the minority on this, but I actually thought most of the changes in ME2 were for the best. I suppose you could fault BioWare (and many have) for removing elements that didn't work in the first game rather than trying to improve them, but I thought the game came out much stronger for it in the end. I appreciated the removal of the inventory and the Mako exploration sections in particular. A bit more customization would have been nice in my lowly opinion, but on the whole I thought the changes worked, with the (oft-mentioned) exception of having to gather resources to fund research.

[Deiser]

CatatonicMan wrote...

I think it is more on the line of expecting a dog, but getting a cat. Both are pets, but they are nowhere near the same thing in practice.

What if you get a cat who thinks she's a dog, like my cat does? I pretty much treat her like a dog outside of taking her for walks >_>

[Brass_Buckles]

Having played both games, I felt that ME2 had more dialogue and story, which was good. I would have liked more RPG-style stat points and skills, a higher level cap, some better means of making money, etc. I thought that overall the gameplay and characterization were better than ME1, but you guys are right in that it seems a little less RPG-like. For instance I can't speak to my party members while I'm out on a mission anymore. I also wanted to wander around more at the Citadel, but didn't get to. Alas.

[addiction21]

Having to aim is a problem but not having your bullets trajectory determined by a roll of the dice is not?

I always found that to be a pain in the ass even when you maxed your skill with a weapon like the pistol of sniper rifle to see your bullet veer of to the left or right the moment it left the barrel. Like they forgot how to machine a straight barrel.

Just saying thats my two cents.

[Nautica773]

Bob5312 wrote...

I suspect that I'm in the minority on this, but I actually thought most of the changes in ME2 were for the best. I suppose you could fault BioWare (and many have) for removing elements that didn't work in the first game rather than trying to improve them, but I thought the game came out much stronger for it in the end. I appreciated the removal of the inventory and the Mako exploration sections in particular. A bit more customization would have been nice in my lowly opinion, but on the whole I thought the changes worked, with the (oft-mentioned) exception of having to gather resources to fund research.

You're not in the minority. It seems a lot of people aren't even willing to consider that there may be something possibly wrong with ME2.

Honestly, I think ME2 was trying a lot of new things which (inevitably) not all will work. If they wanted to soothe some players, they could have gradually phased the changes in, but they didn't. Oh well, not all the changes are bad but not all of them are good either.

[Sorwen]

Bob5312 wrote...

I suspect that I'm in the minority on this, but I actually thought most of the changes in ME2 were for the best. I suppose you could fault BioWare (and many have) for removing elements that didn't work in the first game rather than trying to improve them, but I thought the game came out much stronger for it in the end. I appreciated the removal of the inventory and the Mako exploration sections in particular. A bit more customization would have been nice in my lowly opinion, but on the whole I thought the changes worked, with the (oft-mentioned) exception of having to gather resources to fund research.

I'll agree with the Mako part at least.  It wasn't really much of an exploration as an aggravation.

[CatatonicMan]

Bob5312 wrote...

I suspect that I'm in the minority on this, but I actually thought most of the changes in ME2 were for the best. I suppose you could fault BioWare (and many have) for removing elements that didn't work in the first game rather than trying to improve them, but I thought the game came out much stronger for it in the end. I appreciated the removal of the inventory and the Mako exploration sections in particular. A bit more customization would have been nice in my lowly opinion, but on the whole I thought the changes worked, with the (oft-mentioned) exception of having to gather resources to fund research.

The game probably did come out stronger (at least if you use sales as a measure of strength), but it really wasn't the same game; they changed too much, and (in my opinion) lost whatever combination of things that made ME1 good. Not saying that ME2 is bad, mind; it's just that it doesn't grab me like the original did. 

One of the things I really dislike, especially on games that are direct sequels of successful products, is when they go out of the way to remake the game from the ground up instead of just improving/expanding/polishing/testing what they already have.

Building on what came before allows for more effort to be focused on the meat of the game, and helps to avoid inserting a large number of new bugs/issues.

Modifié par CatatonicMan, 20 février 2010 - 05:01 .

[LoweGear]

Bob5312 wrote...

I suspect that I'm in the minority on this, but I actually thought most of the changes in ME2 were for the best. I suppose you could fault BioWare (and many have) for removing elements that didn't work in the first game rather than trying to improve them, but I thought the game came out much stronger for it in the end. I appreciated the removal of the inventory and the Mako exploration sections in particular. A bit more customization would have been nice in my lowly opinion, but on the whole I thought the changes worked, with the (oft-mentioned) exception of having to gather resources to fund research.

I would be presumptous to quote numbers and such, but I do know that you're not in the minority, if the number of people I've talked to that like the game is any indication, and also objective sources like sales figures. I also like the changes to the core gameplay, and while there is still fault in several departments, in terms of the stuff that matters - story presentation, dialogue, and combat - ME2 delivers nicely, and in some ways better than its predecessor IMHO.

There are many valid complaints here in the forums, and there are many - the UI for example (lack of weapon keybinding, lack of quick squad, codex and journal keys etc...), along with the scanning minigame and some bugs in the system. However, I suspect that most of the complaints stem from feelings of not wanting change at all, rather than any actual fault of the new mechanics and systems (ex. the thermal clip aka ammo system).

[Sorwen]

LoweGear wrote...

Bob5312 wrote...

I suspect that I'm in the minority on this, but I actually thought most of the changes in ME2 were for the best. I suppose you could fault BioWare (and many have) for removing elements that didn't work in the first game rather than trying to improve them, but I thought the game came out much stronger for it in the end. I appreciated the removal of the inventory and the Mako exploration sections in particular. A bit more customization would have been nice in my lowly opinion, but on the whole I thought the changes worked, with the (oft-mentioned) exception of having to gather resources to fund research.

I would be presumptous to quote numbers and such, but I do know that you're not in the minority, if the number of people I've talked to that like the game is any indication, and also objective sources like sales figures. I also like the changes to the core gameplay, and while there is still fault in several departments, in terms of the stuff that matters - story presentation, dialogue, and combat - ME2 delivers nicely, and in some ways better than its predecessor IMHO.

There are many valid complaints here in the forums, and there are many - the UI for example (lack of weapon keybinding, lack of quick squad, codex and journal keys etc...), along with the scanning minigame and some bugs in the system. However, I suspect that most of the complaints stem from feelings of not wanting change at all, rather than any actual fault of the new mechanics and systems (ex. the thermal clip aka ammo system).

The thing that sales figures can't account for is the number of people that bought the game but still preferred the first or bought the game because of the first and the hype.

My personal opinion may have pointed to what I like about the first over the second, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't have liked changes to the game (others may very well feel that way).  I simply for the most part didn't like the changes they did over what worked in the first to those that almost or don't work in the second.

Modifié par Sorwen, 20 février 2010 - 05:28 .

[EternalWolfe]

Bob5312 wrote...

I suspect that I'm in the minority on this, but I actually thought most of the changes in ME2 were for the best. I suppose you could fault BioWare (and many have) for removing elements that didn't work in the first game rather than trying to improve them, but I thought the game came out much stronger for it in the end. I appreciated the removal of the inventory and the Mako exploration sections in particular. A bit more customization would have been nice in my lowly opinion, but on the whole I thought the changes worked, with the (oft-mentioned) exception of having to gather resources to fund research.

I don't like the use of words like minority when trying to label groups of players from a game - its really hard to tell since the ones on the forums don't represent anywhere near 100% of the total player base.  I know you're not alone.  The game did come out stronger for some of the changes, but I think in trying to cut away the problems they cut a little too deep and shaved off some fun as well.  I don't want to go back all the way to ME1, but I do think swinging back towards the middle of two would end with the best resaults.

[Darth Drago]

Totally agree. I’ve said it before and probably will say it again in another thread, this game feels more like a rebooting of the franchise more than a sequel. Its as if another company made this one. Button set ups are messed up on a few actions along with the mission computer screen when compared to ME1. You should be able to go into a sequel game with out relearning the button layouts. Even the manual is sub par compared to ME1, guess they couldn’t afford color ink? Not to mention mine at least is messed up. I don’t see anything mentioned about Deck 4 at all. All the other decks are mentioned well mostly Deck 3 got a whole sentence.



There’s a ton more I could go into but I’m to tired to list anymore right now, just go to my signature link. Maybe you’ll agree on some of them or not but its my list of issues.