10273 réponses à ce sujet

[Jaysonie]

Orkboy wrote...

Jaysonie wrote...


Whose we, because alot of the"we" actually like the changes.

And a lot of the 'We' didn't.  What's your point?

Im going by the fact that my poll shows 80% were not dissapointed, more people dont see the changes and removals as bad or they arent terribly botherd by the changes.

Modifié par Jaysonie, 05 mars 2010 - 09:00 .

[Tasker]

Polls mean nothing if people don't use them, all that your poll shows is the opinion of those people that could be bothered voting.

Say there are 3 million that hate it and 1 million that love it...
 
If only 10 that hate it vote and 100 that love it vote, what does the poll prove?

-EDIT- 

I'm not necesarily disagreeing with you, just trying to point out that polls are inherently flawed.

I have my opinion, you have yours, I respect that yours is different, but it doesn't make mine any less valid.

Modifié par Orkboy, 05 mars 2010 - 09:05 .

[Jaysonie]

Orkboy wrote...

Polls mean nothing if people don't use them, all that your poll shows is the opinion of those people that could be bothered voting.

1200 votes, that actually quite alot for a forum. And seeing how other large gaming communites and forums(ign, gamestop, gametrailers etc..) shower this game with praise 24 7, its pretty safe to assume that a majority like the changes or arent terribly botherd by them.

Modifié par Jaysonie, 05 mars 2010 - 09:08 .

[nelly21]

Orkboy wrote...

Polls mean nothing if people don't use them, all that your poll shows is the opinion of those people that could be bothered voting.

But over 2 million copies sold and Game of the Year nominations matter, and those facts disagree with you. At the end of the day, your opinions are in the overwhelming minority.

[Tasker]

How many of those 2 million copies were based on ME1 expectations though?

As for Game of the year... How many other games get nominated for that these days, every time I look around there's another game bragging that it ups for game of the year...

And whose game of the year are we talking about, mine? Yours? My friends pet Dogs?

Of course games are going to get accolades and high reviews in magazines and on gaming sites, why would you want to ****** of the people that pay for most of the advertising you host?

My main concern with ME2 is that as a sequel it's too different to ME1, I've never said it wasn't a good game, just that it's too different and dumbed down to be a true sequel to ME1.


I buy Bioware games because they are unique and make fantastic RPGs, not shooters.

If I wanted a shooter that was done properly, I buy one of the hundreds that were already out there.

Modifié par Orkboy, 05 mars 2010 - 09:17 .

[Master Smurf]

BioWare has probably put out one of their worst games (story and exploration) with a great combat interface - Media and mainstream love it - GOY, thats the nature of the business.



I still think they should have gone with a smaller crew size - this would've allowed them to make the game larger, deliver more dialogue options etc. I would have also loved the ability to skip recruiting squadmates, not a checklist of get this set, then get this next set - If I proceed on my mission and dont have certain specialist, too bad (even more replay value)



The problem with the story as many have said is there is no real punch, it isnt engaging. I too agree on the enemies - we are fighting against the collectors/reapers but it seems we are an Anti Organized Crime force - fighting in the lawless zone; in reality you would kill a few / pay them off and proceed about your business.



I really did love some of the characters and the improved combat system but the big letdown is that all you expected to return from ME (to produce a phenomenal experience) seemed missing so the game doesnt feel like if it built upon its predecessor - rather a new starting point with only the universe being similar - kind of like Stargate and SG1 or Pitch Black and Riddick - its not bad, it has appeal but some of the magic is lost.



On all the changes, I think they could have handled that better by going back and forth with the community - just because a certain section screams the loudest you dont throw out the baby with the bathwater eg. Elevators, Mako (though HH looks sweet but isnt in game), inventory.



I just hope that the changes made (hopefully many ME things return) for ME3 are handled better - greatest hope...... no loading screens!!!! use whatever method to hide them.

[Tasker]

Master Smurf wrote...

I really did love some of the characters and the improved combat system but the big letdown is that all you expected to return from ME (to produce a phenomenal experience) seemed missing so the game doesnt feel like if it built upon its predecessor - rather a new starting point with only the universe being similar - kind of like Stargate and SG1 or Pitch Black and Riddick - its not bad, it has appeal but some of the magic is lost.

That's the point I keep trying to get across, had this been ME1 instead of being ME2, then I wouldn't have the issues I do, it's a good game, I really enjoyed it, but as a follow up to ME1, for me it's just lacking in every way.

Modifié par Orkboy, 05 mars 2010 - 09:24 .

[Rendar666]

yoda23 wrote...

Although I like ME2 very much on PC (Sli is a must IMO) I have a couple of humble gripes that I feel should be shared.
1. I fail to realize why Garrus and Tali would not be loyal right from the beginning of ME2. Especially if you used them heavily, as I did, in ME1.
2. News? From the daily Cerberus news posts in the main screen to the pointless news terminals all over the place. Do these ever actually do anything?
3. Conversations? I find many of the conversations are thoroughly pointless, meaning they don't provide any information that is related to Shepherd or any of the quests. What is the point of including conversations that don't actually lead me somewhere?
4. Planet Scanning? Just how, exactly, am I able to spin a planet on its axis from orbit with a Scanner? Is exploration dead to Mass Effect 2 and beyond?
5. Squad Configurations? Why am I not able to view my squad stats while I am on the Normandy? And, don't even bring up the lame status view. I know Garrus has concussive shot, it would be helpful if I could actually monitor their level points BEFORE I land in hostile territory.
6. Combat? In narrow spaces trying to get my squad to run to cover is exasperating. The enemies assemble and take cover precisely while I am left struggling to get Tali to stop floating in mid-air before she is KIA???
7. XBOX? Finally, I am soooo sick of Bioware being denied all its glory by the faux-gamer crowd. Come on EA, throw the folks who seriously invested in game hardware something more than the usefullness of the stupid XBOX controller. I mean seriously! I am running 285's in Sli and an i7 920 to give Bioware their due, but the lack of attention to the PC crowd is simply insulting. However, I should add that, this is the best looking game I have ever seen. So SAD for the XBOX crowd who can't enjoy this game with the graphics it deserves.

What is truly insulting, more to yourself than any other, are your stark, tasteless verbal insults that you fling around in an entirely failed attempt to either: get Xbox owners angry at you, or to make yourself feel better about the fact that the game most probably sells more on the Xbox 360 and so, as is to expected, it may get more support on the console version. If your definition of “gamer” applies only to annoying, elitist fools such as yourself than I would be genuinely honored to not be called a “real-gamer” and instead take up this new “faux-gamer” title. By the way, I hate labels, as I am sure others do as well. So, what I mean to say is, stop being, put as blunt as I can without getting in trouble, a jerk.
To reply to the OP:
Yes, in my opinion, Mass Effect 2 was not as good as Mass Effect 1.  My reasons:
Mass Effect 1, I felt, had a truly epic story line about betrayal and power and the will to do anything to save lives. It had amazing character progression and conversations that mattered. It felt like you were in a massive galaxy with real, breathing people. The Mako exploration, however flawed, certainly added to this feeling which I Mass Effect 2 completely lacked.
I also felt, though I didn’t before I played the game, that plain 3rd person combat would be fine over skill based combat. Every encounter, to me, seemed pointless because I never gained anything from it. It was one unnecessary fight after another and it grew wearisome.
The lack of inventory and weapons and even the ability to change squad armor, more than a simple pre-set change of clothing, was missed by me. The squad members, or at least half of them, didn’t feel as real as the people from the first game. They felt more like character than actual people. They rarely had anything interesting to say to you and once you’re half done with the game they won’t ever say anything new. The romances were so disappointing I didn’t even do another one after I completed Miranda’s, Tali’s, and Jack’s on one account. They felt so two dimensional to me. There was no emotion except for a few areas and nothing new transpired after the ending of the game between you and your lover. You could invite them to your room and sit there, looking all happy and blissful, but that didn’t do it for me. Miranda told me that when things were quiet she’d come by. Well, she said that 17 hours into the game and said that until before the final mission = 38 hours.
Mass Effect 1 had a lot of graphical frame rate issues but Mass Effect 2 ran very smoothly. The graphics were top notch. The voice acting was, if possible, even better than last time.
There’s a lot more to say but since I know most people won’t read this, there’s really no reason.

[yoomazir]

Jaysonie wrote...

Orkboy wrote...

Polls mean nothing if people don't use them, all that your poll shows is the opinion of those people that could be bothered voting.

1200 votes, that actually quite alot for a forum. And seeing how other large gaming communites and forums(ign, gamestop, gametrailers etc..) shower this game with praise 24 7, its pretty safe to assume that a majority like the changes or arent terribly botherd by them.

I've got 2 friends that played ME1 & ME2, both of them loved the first ME, both re disapointed with ME2, both of them don't bother coming to the forums, they didn't even knew there was forums for these games.
So yeah, polls doesn't always state facts .

Modifié par yoomazir, 05 mars 2010 - 09:49 .

[Jaysonie]

yoomazir wrote...

Jaysonie wrote...

Orkboy wrote...

Polls mean nothing if people don't use them, all that your poll shows is the opinion of those people that could be bothered voting.

1200 votes, that actually quite alot for a forum. And seeing how other large gaming communites and forums(ign, gamestop, gametrailers etc..) shower this game with praise 24 7, its pretty safe to assume that a majority like the changes or arent terribly botherd by them.

I've got 2 friends that played ME1 & ME2, both of them loved the first ME, both re disapointed with ME2, both of them don't bother coming to the forums, they didn't even knew there was forums for these games.
So yeah, polls doesn't always state facts .

Ive got a circle of gamers myself, about 8 of us. All of them seem to love Mass Effect 2, 5 of them have never played ME1. They dont bother coming to the forums either. I see your point however forum polls are as close as you can get to player reaction.

[Vena_86]

I think the biggest issue with ME2 compared to ME1 is its lack of immersion and feeling of size.

With everything obviously instanced, loading screens, mission complete screens barely any choice where to move ME2 feels very constrained, which just doesnt seem right within the theme.



ME1 actually gave you some sense of a large universe which you could explore. Sure, sometimes it felt repetative, sometimes there could have been more to break up the rather dull landscapes but overall you felt like you were really going out there!

Standing on a planet with your team in protective suits, looking at a a red landscape with two suns in the gorgeous sky, while winds that would kill you instantly when unprotected limit the time you can spend outside the thick hull of your space proof vehicle. This and other things together make for an experience you dont forget so fast, rather than just another (good) game.



That is the thing which is hard to grasp and explain to someone. Single moments in ME2 might be stronger but the whole thing, all together just has so much less impact than ME1.

Someone already said it:



"ME2 is a great game, ME1 is a great experience."



Ofcourse, if you give a rats ass about SciFi, immersion and roleplaying and only care for action then ME2 is the better choice.

[Darth Drago]

jynthor wrote...

Haven't played ME2 yet, but am expecting alot.

-Please go play it (whenever you can if you don’t have it yet) and come back and give us you views of the game.

Jaysonie wrote...
Ive got a circle of gamers myself, about 8 of us. All of them seem to love Mass Effect 2, 5 of them have never played ME1. They dont bother coming to the forums either. I see your point however forum polls are as close as you can get to player reaction.

-It would be interesting to see what those 5 who haven’t played ME1 would say about the game.

Modifié par Darth Drago, 05 mars 2010 - 10:10 .

[Seraphael]

Orkboy wrote...

How many of those 2 million copies were based on ME1 expectations though?

Considering ME1 have probably sold over 3 million copies so far, a great deal I'd imagine. However, a significant majority seems to enjoy the changes and consider ME2 an improvement.

As for Game of the year... How many other games get nominated for that these days, every time I look around there's another game bragging that it ups for game of the year...

And whose game of the year are we talking about, mine? Yours? My friends pet Dogs?

Loads of awards. Mass Effect 2 is or will be a strong candidate in a great many of them no doubt. Quite deservedly I might add.

Of course games are going to get accolades and high reviews in magazines and on gaming sites, why would you want to ****** of the people that pay for most of the advertising you host?

Riiiight! They're ALL corrupt corporate cronies! Of course! Even reviewers based in countries EA or Bioware hardly, if ever, advertise (or have heard of I'd imagine, you ignorant americans ). In my home country Norway, Mass Effect 2 scored top marks in all reviews I've seen. A considerable amount I can tell you. From local small town newspapers, to the nations largest newspapers and games magazines. Everyone I've discussed the game with, consider it a classic ranking among the very best they've ever played. Opinions may vary, but to attempt to discredit such overwhelming positive reviews is nothing short of pathetic. 

My main concern with ME2 is that as a sequel it's too different to ME1, I've never said it wasn't a good game, just that it's too different and dumbed down to be a true sequel to ME1.

I buy Bioware games because they are unique and make fantastic RPGs, not shooters.

If I wanted a shooter that was done properly,I buy one of the hundreds that were already out there.

Mass Effect was always about breaking barriers. It was about parting ways with severely subpar action simply because RPG-developers weren't capable of better (who doesn't remember the prevalent sentiment of yesteryear; graphics didn't matter as long as there was a good story and meaningful interaction). It was about attempting to integrate the best from RPGs and shooters alike. Fortunately, in ME2 it also became about valuing gameplay over tired and confining RPG-genre standards. Guess what? Massive amounts of loot and loads of unnecessary micromanagement isn't fun. Nor is it really needed in a single player game played for a finite period of time. Unlike what is the case of MMORPGs where such is needed to attract customers long term, as well as to serve as a distraction for the lack of a proper story and meaningful roleplaying.

The combat in ME2 requires quick thinking and tactical awareness now, as opposed to the prequel where hitting the same couple of I-Win buttons would end every fight. The inventory is gone and most of the inane amounts of loot too. More realistic, better gameplay, better roleplaying. Smart game design right there. So calling it "dumbed down" is about the dumbest comments I hear being made about ME2. Sure, most would probably have preferred slightly more customization where it's sensible to do so (more balanced weapons for instance), but I feel Bioware is close to making the perfect RPG I've longed for ever since their excellent BG-series. Expect the series to develop and improve further with ME3. Like it or not, this is likely the future of cRPGs.

Modifié par Seraphael, 05 mars 2010 - 10:29 .

[Deflagratio]

The minority is vocal because the majority is complacent. It's okay to be disappointed with Mass Effect 2, it's a completely different experience than Mass Effect 1. It's okay to plain up not like it. But by no stretch of the imagination is Mass Effect 2 a bad game. It's the pinnacle of genre blending games and how to evolve the art further.



Games are art, and imperfection is part of the artistic process. It's impossible to please 100% of the audience. Unforunately, Gaming is, as the Dr.'s at Bioware say, a "Commercial Art" which means it's at the mercy of economics much like films. Cult hits may be amazing, but tend to sink companies.

[Jaysonie]

Darth Drago wrote...

jynthor wrote...

Haven't played ME2 yet, but am expecting alot.

-Please go play it (whenever you can if you don’t have it yet) and come back and give us you views of the game.

Jaysonie wrote...
Ive got a circle of gamers myself, about 8 of us. All of them seem to love Mass Effect 2, 5 of them have never played ME1. They dont bother coming to the forums either. I see your point however forum polls are as close as you can get to player reaction.

-It would be interesting to see what those 5 who haven’t played ME1 would say about the game.

The 5 of them only decided to pick up Me2 when they saw the reviews. Im going to try and convince them to play the first one at somepoint.

[Poison_Berrie]

Jaysonie wrote...

Orkboy wrote...

Polls mean nothing if people don't use them, all that your poll shows is the opinion of those people that could be bothered voting.

1200 votes, that actually quite alot for a forum. And seeing how other large gaming communites and forums(ign, gamestop, gametrailers etc..) shower this game with praise 24 7, its pretty safe to assume that a majority like the changes or arent terribly botherd by them.

1200 is a sizable population for polling and more than capable enough of making a fair assumption. 
Unless some of you nay-sayers can come up with a statistical analysis that show that people that like ME2 are more present and participating than those that dislike I say her poll is statistically significant.

[slyguy07]

Poison_Berrie wrote...

Jaysonie wrote...

Orkboy wrote...

Polls mean nothing if people don't use them, all that your poll shows is the opinion of those people that could be bothered voting.

1200 votes, that actually quite alot for a forum. And seeing how other large gaming communites and forums(ign, gamestop, gametrailers etc..) shower this game with praise 24 7, its pretty safe to assume that a majority like the changes or arent terribly botherd by them.

1200 is a sizable population for polling and more than capable enough of making a fair assumption. 
Unless some of you nay-sayers can come up with a statistical analysis that show that people that like ME2 are more present and participating than those that dislike I say her poll is statistically significant.

 
Yeah the only problem is that out of all the people who bought both ME1 and ME2 how much does 1200 make? Another problem is not many people know about that poll or bother digging this far into a topic to find the link. I would say the "minority" would be closer to 35-50% if you have gone through the forums as much as I have.  People need to realize that a fair portion of ME players are not happy with the TPS/action being heavily implemented and the modern RPG elements getting the shaft. Namely a few of the changes people don't like are:

1. No loot.
2. Next to no customization.(see above for lack of armor and weapons which which also had upgrades in ME1)
3. The stupid thermal clip system.(yes ME1 didn't have a good ammo system either, but this wasn't a good answer.)
4.  The missions don't seem as vast or large in the main story as they did in ME1. There were a few that did, but not many.
5. The story was good, but nowhere near as well done as ME1.
6. Dumbing down powers to only 4 for squadmates made some of them useless.

Sorry, but BW needs to do some of the changes being discussed on these forums. The last thing the hardcore people who loved ME1 see is ME3 be without the customizing and leveling portions that made ME1 so fun, You had to do multiple playthroughs to actually get to the highest level in ME1 and that gave a sense of accomplishment.

[Darth Drago]

I have links to both polls; Disappointed with Mass Effect 2 Poll? and Mako vs. Planet Scanning Poll. on the first posting in this thread.

I had the Mass Effect 2 poll aready listed when I made this thread and when I saw the Mako one I added that in as well. I added a link to Scarecrow’s Compendium of Proposals to BioWare for Mass Effect Gameplay Improvements just the other day.

Just a reason to take a look at the first posting here every now and then since I may add some more stuff to the original post.

[Absurdest Derivative]

I sympathize with many of the criticisms of ME2, but their importance appears to me exaggerated. My major points of sympathy:

1) I'd have liked more dialogue from squadmates. I would also like it if they traded banter more often during missions. This was a great opportunity which I feel was underutilized, especially with regard to side missions. I understand the difficulty in writing for 10+ characters, but the absence is felt all the same.

2) I miss being able to roam around a planet, take in the landscape, and maybe find mysterious things here and there. (I didn't have any significant problem with the Mako, either.) Oh, and it was my hobby to snipe entire encampments to death from far, far away.

3) Planet scanning: I'd rather not. If the scanning reticle moved much faster, and/or everything cost much less, it wouldn't be so much of a pain.

4) A lot of equipment options are rather slim. I’d like to have many more N7 parts and a useful heavy pistol. Both heavy pistols and SMGs are a little underrepresented, but at least there’s one excellent specimen of a SMG. For comparison’s sake, ME didn’t have a huge number of armor styles, and most weapons, armor, and upgrades were only fit for selling or converting to omni-gel. Several manufacturers had entire lines of inferior products.

I understand where people are coming from with regard to things like not walking through the airlock into the Normandy, or not having elevator conversation. These were neat things in ME, but I don’t feel their absence is horribly disappointing. Other things:

5) I can understand the sentiment that ME2's story feels less epic than ME's. I suspect that this is necessary, though. ME2 is like a lull before the storm. That's spoiler territory, but the meaning should be obvious.

6) I'm not inclined to accuse ME2 of being overly linear, at least, no more linear than ME. Keep in mind that in both games there are X missions you must do to complete the game. In both games you can tackle those X missions in any order you please, with a minor restriction. Both games have side choices which may be significant in later entries (Esp. in ME3, one assumes). The series has from the first been about choices and the illusion of consequence moreso than branching paths and such. Also ... consider the logistics of taking two games’ worth of choices and giving the player more than an e-mail’s worth of consequence for each in ME3.

7) I would very much like more sidequests, but BioWare has stated the intention to release quite a bit, so I am not ready to gripe. Hopefully more than a couple significant things will be released at no additional cost via
the Cerberus Network.

In the end, I think ME suits my tastes a little better than ME2, but ME2 is nevertheless a solid addition to the series. It’s fun, it gives us some story to chew, and it sets up for ME3.

This ran longer than originally intended; please pardon me.

fast edit:  ha ha, be careful about pasting from Word.
edit2:  fixed formatting (even if no one reads this, it annoyed me as was.)

Modifié par Absurdest Derivative, 07 mars 2010 - 07:54 .

[The Unfallen]

I liked it...



...other than the fact I totally saw the Collectors being another Indoctrinated species being controlled by the Reapers from a mile away...



...still best damn game I've ever played... bar none



[SUCK IT DOWN HALO!]

[Tazzmission]

i just got done playing my 4th playthrough about a few hours ago as much as i love this game i think the eliment situation is rediculous. also the one very small minor thing was the landing on anomoly planets they felt way to short and easy. other than those 2 complaints everything else was top notch

[Seraphael]

slyguy07 wrote...

Poison_Berrie wrote...

Jaysonie wrote...

Orkboy wrote...

Polls mean nothing if people don't use them, all that your poll shows is the opinion of those people that could be bothered voting.

1200 votes, that actually quite alot for a forum. And seeing how other large gaming communites and forums(ign, gamestop, gametrailers etc..) shower this game with praise 24 7, its pretty safe to assume that a majority like the changes or arent terribly botherd by them.

1200 is a sizable population for polling and more than capable enough of making a fair assumption. 
Unless some of you nay-sayers can come up with a statistical analysis that show that people that like ME2 are more present and participating than those that dislike I say her poll is statistically significant.

 
Yeah the only problem is that out of all the people who bought both ME1 and ME2 how much does 1200 make? Another problem is not many people know about that poll or bother digging this far into a topic to find the link. I would say the "minority" would be closer to 35-50% if you have gone through the forums as much as I have.

Well, if those 1200 were representative of the customers, then it really wouldn't matter how large a fraction of the total player base they constituted. 1200 is a considerable amount for a statistical analysis.

However, Bioware forumites are, in general, probably not an accurate representation of the player base at large. A majority no doubt register because they are somewhat hardened RPG-fans. Many of which, become Bioware fans as well. Where as this poll is concerned, that likely hit both ways; some are nearly uncritical of anything Bioware does (fanboys if you will). A majority is more concerned with the RPG-genre. Some of this group have very conservative and specific ideas of what makes an RPG, others hate shooters outright, others again are both and wind up hating and lambasting the game.

Also, in general people are more likely to voice opposition than support. It's human nature. We love to complain, but are less keen to show appreciation.

It stands to reason then, that many of the people that are opposed to the changes implemented in ME2 are conservative RPG-fans and likely registered on these forums. Making this group overrepresented on the boards. So I contend the fact is closer to the opposite of what you're implying.

People need to realize that a fair portion of ME players are not happy with the TPS/action being heavily implemented and the modern RPG elements getting the shaft. Namely a few of the changes people don't like are:

1. No loot.
2. Next to no customization.(see above for lack of armor and weapons which which also had upgrades in ME1)
3. The stupid thermal clip system.(yes ME1 didn't have a good ammo system either, but this wasn't a good answer.)
4.  The missions don't seem as vast or large in the main story as they did in ME1. There were a few that did, but not many.
5. The story was good, but nowhere near as well done as ME1.
6. Dumbing down powers to only 4 for squadmates made some of them useless.

A vocal, but insignificant amount of ME players likely. Though no company likes upsetting a significant minority (about 20% according to this poll) of their core community, certainly. As for the RPG elements getting shafted being modern; far from it. The RPG elements that have been cut are the oldest and most tiresome (in my opinion).

1. I'm very much thankful for the reduced loot setting. Picking up loots in barrels or containers every few meters is far from realistic and is rather anti-true roleplaying. It was also micromanagement hell in ME1. It ruined the economy in ME1.

2. A sensible amount of customization. Especially considering ammo powers substituting some of the customization. I would like to see slightly more in ME3 though. As long as they shy away from making items ultra weak and ultra powerful. Silly MMORPG mechanic and anti-true roleplaying.

3. What was stupid was turning the combat in ME1 into a turkey shoot. The change made combat more intensive and unpredictable. Which is fun and a departure with the rather stale combat in ME1.

4. At this point, I'm tempted to say: O-M-G! The missions as a whole are much improved. Outside the main story line the missions in ME1 were exceedingly generic. They were all the same in a tiny variation of scenery. The main story missions felt more compelling and huge. Compare the grand finale of the two; we've gone from easily whooping Saren's cybernetic behind to fighting your way with a large team against seemingly terrible odds to battle a giant sized reaper.

5. Personal preferrences I guess. I felt the story was just as good. However it felt slightly anti-climactic in comparison with ME1 since the final in ME1 was about saving the galaxy where as the final in ME2 was more about saving parts of humanity.

6. Smartening up the powers I'd say. Less complex isn't the same as dumber, especially not when the streamlined changes make a lot of sense. Squad members were as a whole, much more useful and balanced in ME2. Especially considering powers are less overpowered now. Personally I used the whole squad as almost every member played differently and have a distinct flavour. Piecing together a squad for a mission felt like pieces of a puzzle. In ME1, biotic squad mates were much more useful and powerful making me prefer these over everyone else.

Sorry, but BW needs to do some of the changes being discussed on these forums. The last thing the hardcore people who loved ME1 see is ME3 be without the customizing and leveling portions that made ME1 so fun, You had to do multiple playthroughs to actually get to the highest level in ME1 and that gave a sense of accomplishment.

Sorry, but you clearly have an exagerated opinion of your own importance. You need to realize that the hardcore people are a tiny minority. You need to realize a great deal of us also loved ME1 despite it's many flaws and don't consider it the pinnacle of RPG-evolution. The genre is changing or at the very least diversifying. From the heavily loot driven genre the success of Blizzard's Diablo-series is partially to blame for. To Bethesda's Elder Scrolls-series (whose games I have a love/hate relationship to). Towards Bioware's Mass Effect-series. I really enjoy my RPGs and I've been a fan of Bioware ever since BG1,  and ME2 is my kind of game *stamp of approval*.

Modifié par Seraphael, 06 mars 2010 - 07:13 .

[Andaius20]

1. I'm very much thankful for the reduced loot setting. Picking up loots
in barrels or containers every few meters is far from realistic and is
rather anti-true roleplaying. It was also micromanagement hell in ME1.
It ruined the economy in ME1.

Say what? So finding cedits in everyones boxes all over the place is Better? All the loot system in ME 1 needed was re optimization. Drop the I-X versions and rebalance the companies to have pro's and con's.

2. A sensible amount of
customization. Especially considering ammo powers substituting some of
the customization. I would like to see slightly more in ME3 though. As
long as they shy away from making items ultra weak and ultra powerful.
Silly MMORPG mechanic and anti-true roleplaying.

Customization was good for N7 armor only! no squad customization, not weapon customization. Also without the DLC's you ONLY HAVE THE N7!

3. What was
stupid was turning the combat in ME1 into a turkey shoot. The change
made combat more intensive and unpredictable. Which is fun and a
departure with the rather stale combat in ME1.

Hail no! Combat in ME 2 is glue your self to cover, use automatics and play wack a mole with enemies accross the way.  You can't even crounch no to tak advantage of cover while moving between cover. Plus adding stupid ammo powers instead of keeping the awesoem combat powers like carnage, marksmen, and overkill.  (Assassin is pretty much in with the tact cloak.)

4. At this point,
I'm tempted to say: O-M-G! The missions as a whole are much improved.
Outside the main story line the missions in ME1 were exceedingly
generic. They were all the same in a tiny variation of scenery. The main
story missions felt more compelling and huge. Compare the grand finale
of the two; we've gone from easily whooping Saren's cybernetic behind to
fighting your way with a large team against seemingly terrible odds to
battle a giant sized reaper.

I'll give yo uthat each map is different but damn! they might as well all be long coriddors with boxes in the middle! It's pretty much zero improvement from ME 1! Combat areas are totally obvious and predictable.   I would have loved to see multiple ways to attack and get around and see improviesed cover. like yo usee enemies flip over tables and shelves to make cover. Also Shepard being able to do this too.

5. Personal preferrences I guess. I
felt the story was just as good. However it felt slightly anti-climactic
in comparison with ME1 since the final in ME1 was about saving the
galaxy where as the final in ME2 was more about saving parts of
humanity.

Just three missions against the collectors Just three! They're built up as such bad asses but you walk over them everytime. Atleast you had to fight seren's geth pretty much the whole game!

6. Smartening up the powers I'd say. Less complex isn't
the same as dumber, especially not when the streamlined changes make a
lot of sense. Squad members were as a whole, much more useful and
balanced in ME2. Especially considering powers are less overpowered now.
Personally I used the whole squad as almost every member played
differently and have a distinct flavour. Piecing together a squad for a
mission felt like pieces of a puzzle. In ME1, biotic squad mates were
much more useful and powerful making me prefer these over everyone else.

Also boo! giving squad mates even less powers doesn't make them "more useful" I would have love to see them keep the "proper" classes for the squad mates along with a full listing of the classes powers! Again all that was needed was rebalancing not scrapping!

Modifié par Andaius20, 06 mars 2010 - 07:46 .

[Vena_86]

Many of ME2s "improvements" only look good on the surface, as some annoyances from ME1 are removed. It takes time and experience to see past the "yay no more XYZ" and realize how other less obvious things where removed along the way that make the experience less engaging and less lasting as a whole.