10273 réponses à ce sujet

[KitsuneRommel]

Orkboy wrote...

There are differences between Mass Effect and Fallout though...

That doesn't change the fact that the fans of the series were rather divided in their opinions. In the end they did modernize and simplify it and make it more accessible because they wanted more $$$.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Terror_K wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Mass Effect 2 maintains the strengths that are not present in those action games you have mentioned. Trying to bring up the gameplay to those standards isn't problematic. Call of Duty is where it is at because it is a solid game mechanically. Uncharted 2 fixed the problems in a similar way as ME 2 and it is also praised.

They both kept the strengths of their games while altering each other in a way to make them more accessible.

For ME 2 this was combat as it was not its strength in the first game. At best ME 1 the combat was inconsequential and not at all a barrier. You can easily plow through the first Mass Effect without much consequence, but in the way it was presented it was a problem.

That would all be very well if combat was the only thing that changed about Mass Effect 2 from the original. However, almost everything changed, so... yeah.

Like what?  The interface is basically the same
The Conversation system is the same
The traveling is slightly different, more akin to Star Control 2
The Hub Worlds are now flat instead of layered to reduce loading screens
The Voice Actors are the same
The Controls are the Same
THe Inventory  system has been changed
The planetary exploration has been scrapped
The phsyics are the same
The character creation from an graphical standpoint is the same
The character creation from a gameplay standpoint has been altered

Aside from the gameplay mechanics of the actual combat, the inventory system and the removal of exploration I do not see much difference.  And no I don't think that the removal of mako exploration is a big deal because they were very minor parts in the original game. 

Mass Effect 2 is more like they took the end game of Virmire/Ilos and the Citadel and built on that.  They scrapped the disaster that was Peak 15/Port Hanshan and what we got with Feros {which feros was a well designed level). 

[Onyx Jaguar]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

Orkboy wrote...

There are differences between Mass Effect and Fallout though...

That doesn't change the fact that the fans of the series were rather divided in their opinions. In the end they did modernize and simplify it and make it more accessible because they wanted more $$$.

Nah they made it that way because that was their comfort zone, not for the $$$.  They went for the $$$ with Oblivion. 

[Tasker]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Orkboy wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Mass Effect 2 is a sequel not an expansion pack. As a sequel things are expected to be altered based on feedback.

Altered yes, not butchered.

I agree that sequels need to be improved, and there were loads of suggestions that were posted that would have maintained the integrity of Mass Effect 1 whilst improving Mass Effect 2 immensely. But instead Bioware took the - "If it needs a minor tweak, then ditch it." - easy way out approach.

What elements?  What has been removed was the Mako exploration, weapon customization and party loadout customization.,while the inventory system was altered. 

Well, you just partly answered your own question. 

But if you want a list of what I consider Bioware did wrong in making this a sequel...


Loot and Inventory system = Needed a tweak, it got removed.

In game weapon stats = How do I know that one gun does better than another?

Armour Types, ie, Light - Medium - Heavy = Why would someone that uses steath wear heavy clunky armour?

Armour and Weapon Mods = Instead of choosing what to use in a given situation, I now have cumulative upgrades that remove any sense of choice.

Armour for companions = High heels in combat and Bikini's in vacum, seriously?

Vehicle implementation = Mako just needed a forward boost, it got removed and replaced with the auto firing, no armoured wet tissue that is the Hammerhead.

Free roaming exploration = Turned into linear corridor shoot fests.

Level transitions, ie, Elevators - Airlocks = Removed along with all sense of flow and immersion, now it feels like a game of levels that we teleport between instead of an open free flowing universe.

Helmet toggle = They add the ability to drink at bars - even basing a mission on it, and then they go and get rid of the ability to remove our helemt so it doesn't look retarded when we drink out of the glass.

Crouch = What harm did having crouch do?

Liara's personality = Not even going there.

Audio mission breifings = Gone are Admiral Hacketts ( and other peoples ) conversations over the com relay, and instead they get replaced by bloody emails.

Weapon overheating = Introducing a retarded ammo system just because some people found a way to have uber weapons in ME1. IT'S A SINGLE PLAYER GAME!! Why the hell would whatever a few people do effect anyone else?  Just remover the last few levels of each mod so the maximum is level 6 and there you go, problem solved.

End of mission reports = Other than breaking immersion, what the hell purpose do thay serve? If they had to add them, then they should have been a tab on the email system that people could look at if they wanted.

Skill select screens = Ammo types as skills, WTF?  So even though they use the same clips and are loaded the same way in the same place on the same guns, I can't load ammo I don't have the skill for?  Fair enough, but why couldn't I just go - "Here, Jacob, stick me a clip of Thermal rounds in this will you."



The list goes on but hopefully  you get my point.

Edit, - Also one thing that really breaks immersion...

Now that we no longer carry all gun types, cut scenes where Shepard magically appears to be using weapons that she isn't carrying.

Modifié par Orkboy, 28 mai 2010 - 11:45 .

[Jebel Krong]

Terror_K wrote...

That would all be very well if combat was the only thing that changed about Mass Effect 2 from the original. However, almost everything changed, so... yeah.

so... you didn't want them to make the graphics even better? use the new lighting model (which makes a huge difference to the unique look of the universe) - particularly on places like illium? refine combat in almost every way? improve the conversation system to make the conversations even more natural and more dynamic? include the interrupts? improve the writing and, particularly the characters and characterisation? improve the cinematics? none of these changes you liked??
because for me they improved pretty much all of the important gameplay elements for the sequel. sure there were some things i didn't/don't like - planet scanning, arbitrary story decisions, removing some of the joy of UNC exploration, not enough weapons (spectre) etc. but in comparison with what was better, that is a drop in the ocean.

Modifié par Jebel Krong, 28 mai 2010 - 11:40 .

[KitsuneRommel]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

KitsuneRommel wrote...

Orkboy wrote...

There are differences between Mass Effect and Fallout though...

That doesn't change the fact that the fans of the series were rather divided in their opinions. In the end they did modernize and simplify it and make it more accessible because they wanted more $$$.

Nah they made it that way because that was their comfort zone, not for the $$$.  They went for the $$$ with Oblivion. 

There's a reason they released it for XBOX360 and PS3 too. But I didn't to imply that they are greedy bastards. Why would anyone choose to make a niche game (some do, I know)?

[Onyx Jaguar]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

KitsuneRommel wrote...

Orkboy wrote...

There are differences between Mass Effect and Fallout though...

That doesn't change the fact that the fans of the series were rather divided in their opinions. In the end they did modernize and simplify it and make it more accessible because they wanted more $$$.

Nah they made it that way because that was their comfort zone, not for the $$$.  They went for the $$$ with Oblivion. 

There's a reason they released it for XBOX360 and PS3 too. But I didn't to imply that they are greedy bastards. Why would anyone choose to make a niche game (some do, I know)?

Well at the time the Fallout games weren't really Niche as that was when RPGs on PC started gaining relevance again.  I think a proper sequel to Fallout would look more like Mass Effect with Vats rather than what we got.  

[CroGamer002]

Orkboy wrote...

Weapon overheating = Introducing a retarded ammo system just because some people found a way to have uber weapons in ME1. IT'S A SINGLE PLAYER GAME!! Why the hell would whatever a few people do effect anyone else?  Just remover the last few levels of each mod so the maximum is level 6 and there you go, problem solved.



The list goes on but hopefully  you get my point.

Not at this one.

Modifié par Mesina2, 28 mai 2010 - 11:46 .

[Tasker]

Mesina2 wrote...

Orkboy wrote...
Weapon overheating = Introducing a retarded ammo system just because some people found a way to have uber weapons in ME1. IT'S A SINGLE PLAYER GAME!! Why the hell would whatever a few people do effect anyone else?  Just remover the last few levels of each mod so the maximum is level 6 and there you go, problem solved.



The list goes on but hopefully  you get my point.

Not at this one.

Just so I know, why don't you get this point?

It was said that the main reason reason Bioware changed the overheat system, was because with certain mods you could have a gun that never overheated.  But why would that bother anyone when it's a single player game and you could only reach the nonoverheating gun, when you've practically finished the game.

Modifié par Orkboy, 28 mai 2010 - 11:48 .

[CroGamer002]

Orkboy wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

Orkboy wrote...
Weapon overheating = Introducing a retarded ammo system just because some people found a way to have uber weapons in ME1. IT'S A SINGLE PLAYER GAME!! Why the hell would whatever a few people do effect anyone else?  Just remover the last few levels of each mod so the maximum is level 6 and there you go, problem solved.



The list goes on but hopefully  you get my point.

Not at this one.

Just so I know, why don't you get this point?

It was said that the main reason reason Bioware changed the overheat system, was because with certain mods you could have a gun that never overheated.  But why would that bother anyone when it's a single player game and you could only reach the nonoverheating gun, when you've practically finished the game.

Ahh...
That's retarded.
Where did you get that they remove overheat system because of that?

[chzr]

Ecael wrote...

A_y0ner_ wrote...

I think ME2 was just missing NPC citizens.
I feel like ME1 was more immersive because it had citizens approach you with their problems, have you fly out across the galaxy and eventually meet other NPCs and have you make a decision on their lives.
It felt like a real galaxy and it let the player actually meet citizens of this galaxy and impact their lives.
ME2 was totally lacking that. It felt like a huge universe with a population of 10 people.

Just one reason why I believe ME1 was more immersive than ME2

Since your avatar is Wrex - find me a krogan in ME1 other than Wrex with as much personality as these krogan:

Wrex - Smiles and is overjoyed to see Shepard
YouTube Link (should have hugged Shepard!)

Grunt - Acts like a 5 year old who is proud to have learned the alphabet
YouTube Link 1
YouTube Link 2 (his comment on holding the line)

Urdnot Darg, the krogan badass:
YouTube Link (RAAAAH!)

Charr, the krogan poet:
YouTube Link (includes Tuchanka scene)

Kargesh, as the happiest Krogan ever:
YouTube Link

Kargesh, as the saddest Krogan ever:
YouTube Link

The Patriarch, Aria's aging pet:
YouTube Link 1 (Paragon)
YouTube Link 2 (Renegade)

Mr. Thax's Bodyguard, the krogan gentleman:
YouTube Link

Tank-Grown Krogan:
YouTube Link (you are damaged?)

Urdnot Father, yearning to see his son (quite a sentimental moment):
YouTube Link - Part 1
YouTube Link - Part 2

Urdnot Fortack, after Wrex took away his toys:
YouTube Link

Urdnot Shaman, the epic stare, and the epic laugh:
YouTube Link

Urdnot Mechanic, his sunny disposition, Quarians, and Wrex:
YouTube Link 1
YouTube Link 2

Even a Varren is made adorable:
YouTube Link

[Terror_K]

[quote]Jebel Krong wrote...

@ Terror_K: i don't see where they changed the sequel so much that it felt like a different series to you. even taking into account your pet peeves (the inventory streamlining etc), the design, structure, universe & the majority of the actual gameplay (and loot/inventory is NOT that) is the same, or improved from the first game. the conversations are better, the interrupts are awesome, action, characters, cinematics and writing are all better and cohesive with the first (it's not like you could mistake a screenshot of mass effect 1 or 2 with, say, halo or gears of war, or fallout or whatever).[/quote]

It still feels like the Mass Effect universe, but it feels more like a spin-off game than a direct sequel. Almost every aspect has been changed, even if only slightly. Dialogue is the same, but almost everything else is foreign compared to Mass Effect 1. It doesn't help that the entire plot and focus seems so disconnected from the original game that it doesn't really flow well like a trilogy should, and feels more like a sequel with a few ties here and there.

Also, whenever you say "improved" or "better" that's a point of view.

[quote]
again i get the feeling you forget that mass effect 1 was designed as an action-shooter.[/quote]

Uh... no. The term "shooter" never came up officially until ME2 was being developed. ME1 was always referred to as an "action RPG" and that's what it is. In fact, this comes directly from a recent article at CVG:-

"In Mass Effect 1 we had a successful game," Norman - ME2's Lead Gameplay Designer - explained to us at the Games Developers Conference. "What do you generally expect in a sequel to a successful game? Usually, you'd expect polish and building on a lot of the features that were already there, but we did something radical with Mass Effect 2." Where Mass Effect was what Norman calls an 'action RPG', ME2 is an all-out shooter RPG.

[/quote]
it was never only an rpg, and it was only BW's first attempt at the blurring of genres, so everyone certainly forgave them the rough edges. they certainly learned quickly for me2, and i expect a similar jump for me3.[/quote]

Yes, you can forgive them for the rough edges for at least trying with ME1. ME2 was just them going for the easy "solutions" by replacing the problem areas with the simplest and easiest answers.

[quote]
how did they make it more generic, exactly? by making elements of the whole better?[/quote]

No... by making them barely any different than any other shooter out there. By stripping them of the aspects that made them proper RPG systems and replacing them with shooter systems that have been done to death. The combat and weapons systems are barely any deeper than Gears of War is. I expect better from a company known for making great RPGs.

[quote]
you can argue that things like inventory and mods are dumbed-down, but, frankly a more complex system would just be time-consuming and not at all fun. individually handling weapons/mods and equipment for 8-10 squaddies? - no thanks i'd rather be, y'know - playing the game.[/quote]

That's where we disagree, because I actually find all that stuff fun. It consider it part of playing the game, and I miss it not being there. Now "playing the game" is 80% just running between waist-high cover and shooting things ad nauseum. And as such, I don't find myself going back to ME2 anywhere near as much as ME1. It's generic and boring gameplay, and quite frankly if I wanted that I'd play Gears of War, which actually does it better. In the original game if I started a character I generally wouldn't play another game until I'd finished them (or at least got them to just before Ilos). In ME2 I even got bored halfway through playing my main Shepard and didn't pick it up again for about a month, and even that was because Kasumi got released.

[quote]
sure the system isn't perfect, but it's easier to add things back in from a solid base than try and tinker with something broken.[/quote]

So, because its easier, it's the better choice? It's better to just throw out the broken thing and replace it with the same generic part every other game uses than actually try and get a more fitting system to work or come up with a new, original one? Why be innovative when you can make just as much dosh copying the other successful systems from the world's other generic games out there, huh?

[Tasker]

Mesina2 wrote...

Orkboy wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

Orkboy wrote...
Weapon overheating = Introducing a retarded ammo system just because some people found a way to have uber weapons in ME1. IT'S A SINGLE PLAYER GAME!! Why the hell would whatever a few people do effect anyone else?  Just remover the last few levels of each mod so the maximum is level 6 and there you go, problem solved.



The list goes on but hopefully  you get my point.

Not at this one.

Just so I know, why don't you get this point?

It was said that the main reason reason Bioware changed the overheat system, was because with certain mods you could have a gun that never overheated.  But why would that bother anyone when it's a single player game and you could only reach the nonoverheating gun, when you've practically finished the game.

Ahh...
That's retarded.
Where did you get that they remove overheat system because of that?

It was in one of the early forum disscusions about the heatsinks just after the game was released. It's so far back that I can't remember the exact thread and the search function seems to be missing so I can't go and find it.

It wasn't the only reason for the change but from what I remember reading at the time, it was the main contributor.

[Ecael]

Terror_K wrote...

Sorry, I was a bit vague there. I when I said "failure" I didn't mean as a game overall, but as an RPG attempting to draw in the shooter fans. I mean, it initially succeeded at getting them in, but then we got complaints about the combat system having stats tied to it, etc. so BioWare ditched that for a pure shooter approach to combat, and that seems to have worked... at least as far as gaining this new fanbase they were trying to bring in. All I'm wondering is whether you thought it was their intent from the start of just when ME2 came into play? Because if its the former, it seems far more subtle in ME1 than it was with ME2. Because right now BioWare have got some work on their hands if they want to keep some of their old fans... assuming they actually care and aren't just focused on pandering to the masses for $$$'s now.

It was definitely their intent from the start - shooter and ground vehicle combat were very much evidence of that.

If Mass Effect 1 were entirely cutscenes, dialogue and menu screens, I'd say that BioWare wasn't trying to draw that crowd in from the start. However, that is not the case.

chzr wrote...

I'm here kinda off topic, so a trick question in the end: Do you think ME2 gained more popularity because it's more "shooter-like" gameplay, or because it's a sequel to rather original, almost epic rpg?

We have yet to see if it actually has more popularity - all we know right now is that it's sold more in the same time-frame than Mass Effect 1, but has not outsold Mass Effect 1 as a whole yet.

You could say that only Mass Effect 1 RPGs fans have bought the game so far, because the numbers would suggest that.

----
I have yet to be convinced that both ME1/ME2 aren't linear RPGs with lots of shooting, 'splosions and dialogue. Unless anyone can come up with a different answer these kinds of questions:

[Jebel Krong]

[quote]Orkboy wrote...

Well, you just partly answered your own question. 

But if you want a list of what I consider Bioware did wrong in making this a sequel...


Loot and Inventory system = Needed a tweak, it got removed.[/quote]
loot was pointless, and still is to an extent - especially if you are a spectre you should be armed to the tilt with all the best stuff, let alone cerberus' and your party's ability to obtain them...

[quote]Orkboy wrote...
In game weapon stats = How do I know that one gun does better than another?[/quote]
uh, i dunno: because the game tells you?

[quote]Orkboy wrote...
Armour Types, ie, Light - Medium - Heavy = Why would someone that uses steath wear heavy clunky armour?[/quote]
if it doesn't particularly impede movement - the more the better. but why were there arbitrary class armours in the first place - you are a special forces soldier - surely you are trained to wear armour and use all weapons? let alone when you become a spectre?

[quote]Orkboy wrote...
Armour and Weapon Mods = Instead of choosing what to use in a given situation, I now have cumulative upgrades that remove any sense of choice.[/quote]
because in actuality it made very little difference? better to have more differentiation between a fewer number of actual weapons instead - which is what we got, though not enough of.

[quote]Orkboy wrote...
Armour for companions = High heels in combat and Bikini's in vacum, seriously?[/quote]
because differentiation is better? making your squad more unique, not homogenous is superior? why would you need to be equipping your squad anyway, are they incapable? it's a character asset for the game, not necessarily a nod towards realism. i much prefer unique squad outfits.

[quote]Orkboy wrote...
Vehicle implementation = Mako just needed a forward boost, it got removed and replaced with the auto firing, no armoured wet tissue that is the Hammerhead.[/quote]
mako was crap, hammerhead is worse. i would have gone with a drop-ship and let you roam a not-too big and unique area on foot to satisfy my exploration craving.

[quote]Orkboy wrote...
Free roaming exploration = Turned into linear corridor shoot fests.[/quote]
yeah those 3 bunkers were awesome.
seriously all the major plot-worlds in both games are linear - it comes with tighter storytelling. and the LOD in me2 is vastly better, as is the lighting, graphics and combat.

[quote]Orkboy wrote...
Level transitions, ie, Elevators - Airlocks = Removed along with all sense of flow and immersion, now it feels like a game of levels that we teleport between instead of an open free flowing universe.[/quote]
the level end screen is arbitrary and crap yeah, but the airlock got annoying after a while. unfortunately the way UE3 works is that if you want huge levels: like the citadel, you will have mid-level pauses on console, at least. it's due to tech things like memory-streaming. until consoles catch up to modern pcs that's an issue. meanwhile we got a lot more detail in the actual levels which made them much more life-like in me2.

[quote]Orkboy wrote...
Helmet toggle = They add the ability to drink at bars - even basing a mission on it, and then they go and get rid of the ability to remove our helemt so it doesn't look retarded when we drink out of the glass.[/quote]
agreed.

[quote]Orkboy wrote...
Crouch = What harm did having crouch do?[/quote]
crouch simply doesn't work with cover-based combat. seriously, given the level design where would you even use it? that is a completely retarded thing to want.

[quote]Orkboy wrote...
Liara's personality = Not even going there.[/b][/quote]
agreed but then all previous squaddies got short-shrift here, tbh i don't miss any of them.

[quote]Orkboy wrote...
Audio mission breifings = Gone are Admiral Hacketts ( and other peoples ) conversations over the com relay, and instead they get replaced by bloody emails.[/quote]
you talk with TIM quite a bit, and you're not working for the alliance, so.....?

[quote]Orkboy wrote...
Weapon overheating = Introducing a retarded ammo system just because some people found a way to have uber weapons in ME1. IT'S A SINGLE PLAYER GAME!! Why the hell would whatever a few people do effect anyone else?  Just remover the last few levels of each mod so the maximum is level 6 and there you go, problem solved.[/quote]
ammo system is completely retarded, agreed.

[quote]Orkboy wrote...
End of mission reports = Other than breaking immersion, what the hell purpose do thay serve? If they had to add them, then they should have been a tab on the email system that people could look at if they wanted.[/quote]
as i said above, immersion-breaking and crap.

[quote]Orkboy wrote...
Skill select screens = Ammo types as skills, WTF?  So even though they use the same clips and are loaded the same way in the same place on the same guns, I can't load ammo I don't have the skill for?  Fair enough, but why couldn't I just go - "Here, Jacob, stick me a clip of Thermal rounds in this will you."[/quote]
done to give the more combat-oriented classes extra skills. doesn't really make much sense, agreed.

Modifié par Jebel Krong, 28 mai 2010 - 11:58 .

[SkullandBonesmember]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

If you want Dialogue options with multiple endings, I hate to bring back an old thread you made but really the only option you have are probably JRPGs like Persona.

Excuse me? Persona is the ONLY JRPG, not counting Phantasy something, which had the worst voice acting of ANY game, even for a JRPG, that offers dialogue OPTIONS, and games like Heavy Rain are definitely on the right track.

Heavy Rain is just a modern version of Dragon's Lair.  QTE's were cute in Resident Evil 4 and God of War but they are about as anti-interactive as you can get. 

Even both Mass Effect games and Heavy Rain do not have that drastic of endings depending on how you play them.

And no. Please get through your head. I don't if you're trolling me but if you aren't, PLEASE UNDERSTAND THE FOLLOWING. >I'm not looking for a visual novel. Visual novels are limited to JUST screens. No interactive enviroments, NO COMBAT, no nothing. Just a stagnant background with text. Poorly hand drawn I might add. I want Heavy Rain+Persona on steroids.< Can you please get that? PLEASE.  

Terror_K wrote...

Also, whenever you say "improved" or "better" that's a point of view.

THIS needs to be ingrained into EVERYBODY'S head.

JK, seriously, why did you use punctuation for your username but fail to do so for your posts?

Modifié par SkullandBonesmember, 28 mai 2010 - 12:03 .

[CroGamer002]

Am I only person who thinks that infinitive ammo guns are stupid?

[Onyx Jaguar]

And no. Please get through your head. I don't if you're trolling me but if you aren't, PLEASE UNDERSTAND THE FOLLOWING. >I'm not looking for a visual novel. Visual novels are limited to JUST screens. No interactive enviroments, NO COMBAT, no nothing. Just a stagnant background with text. Poorly hand drawn I might add. I want Heavy Rain+Persona on steroids.< Can you please get that? PLEASE. /images/forum/emoticons/wondering.png

...



Ok



In regards to Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2, how are they handled differently in this regard.

[Terror_K]

[quote]Onyx Jaguar wrote...

[quote]Terror_K wrote...
That would all be very well if combat was the only thing that changed about Mass Effect 2 from the original. However, almost everything changed, so... yeah.
[/quote]

Like what?  The interface is basically the same[/quote]

Which interface? Almost all of them are different in some manner (new main HUD is awful, tactical screen very different from the PC one I'm used to, and the main menu has everything reorganised in different places).

[quote]
The Conversation system is the same[/quote]

Yes. Except how Paragon/Renegade works now.

[quote]
The traveling is slightly different, more akin to Star Control 2[/quote]

Yes. And fuel and probes are a waste of time and resources that really add nothing and only serve to frustrate and get in the way.

[quote]
The Hub Worlds are now flat instead of layered to reduce loading screens
The Voice Actors are the same[/quote]

No big deal with the former. Thank God for the latter.

[quote]
The Controls are the Same[/quote]

Uh... no. I had to reconfigure my keyboard greatly to try and get them the same. Even then, not a complete success, thanks to the silly need to combine actions that were previously independent.

[quote]
THe Inventory  system has been changed
The planetary exploration has been scrapped[/quote]

Yes. These a big changes in my books.

[quote]
The phsyics are the same[/quote]

Uh... 'kay...

[quote]
The character creation from an graphical standpoint is the same
The character creation from a gameplay standpoint has been altered[/quote]

The character creator actually should have changed, because the original did such a bad job in the first place (no decent angles). It's even worse in ME2, if only for the 15 minute unskippable intro before each one.

[quote]
Aside from the gameplay mechanics of the actual combat, the inventory system and the removal of exploration I do not see much difference.  And no I don't think that the removal of mako exploration is a big deal because they were very minor parts in the original game.[/quote]

So... aside from two major mechanics that both make up a great deal of the game and both have several dozen sub-factors within them and exploration, no... not much has changed. <_<

[quote]
Mass Effect 2 is more like they took the end game of Virmire/Ilos and the Citadel and built on that.  They scrapped the disaster that was Peak 15/Port Hanshan and what we got with Feros {which feros was a well designed level). 
[/quote]

What do you mean by "disaster" regarding Noveria? It was one of the most open, non-linear parts of the game, with several methods of completing it. If anything, ME2 needed more of this.

[SkullandBonesmember]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...


..

Ok

In regards to Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2, how are they handled differently in this regard.

Still not too sure if you're trolling me. You've kept up with this thread for like 2 months at least. You're seriously saying you don't remember me addressing this multiple times?

[Ecael]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...


..

Ok

In regards to Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2, how are they handled differently in this regard.

Still not too sure if you're trolling me. You've kept up with this thread for like 2 months at least. You're seriously saying you don't remember me addressing this multiple times?

I think a lot of us still remain unconvinced that Mass Effect 1 and 2 are actually all that different.

Almost all of your complaints can be applied to both games.

[Onyx Jaguar]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...


..

Ok

In regards to Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2, how are they handled differently in this regard.

Still not too sure if you're trolling me. You've kept up with this thread for like 2 months at least. You're seriously saying you don't remember me addressing this multiple times?

You have addressed this but everytime someone gets you to explain this point you latch on to someone else who's called you out on it in a different way. 

Between the two games, combat mechanics aside what is handled differently in Storyline presentation.

[Ecael]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...


..

Ok

In regards to Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2, how are they handled differently in this regard.

Still not too sure if you're trolling me. You've kept up with this thread for like 2 months at least. You're seriously saying you don't remember me addressing this multiple times?

You have addressed this but everytime someone gets you to explain this point you latch on to someone else who's called you out on it in a different way. 

Between the two games, combat mechanics aside what is handled differently in Storyline presentation.

The combat mechanics aren't even different either.

On-foot combat:
Take Cover
Shoot

Ground vehicle combat:
Move left and right to keep Mako from getting hit
Move up and down to keep Hammerhead from getting hit
'Splosions

That's combat.

[Cell1e]

I loved Mass Effect 1 more than Mass Effect 2 but am replaying Mass Effect 2 more because I can mess with character looks using Gibbeds and the facecodes. Otherwise I would be back with ME1.

[Tasker]

Jebel Krong, i'm not going to quote your quotes as that would just get bogged down and fill the screen with pointless text. 

But I would like to clarify a few things...


Looting - In ME1, as a special forces operative looting should be a bit redundant I agree, but if I were to be pedantic about it, the same could be said about ME2s upgrading and research, TIM spends billions on resurecting Shepard and building the Normandy, but he can't be arsed giving me fuel money, decent equipment or ship upgrades. Instead I have to get them from mercs and vagabonds?
 
But the Mass Effect games are RPGs, Looting is a staple of the genre and most people that play RPGs like doing it.  Imagine an MMORPG where you didn't loot stuff, how well would that do?  Looting gives people a secondary goal in game.


Weaon Stats - The game is very confusing when it comes to explaining what weapons can do, A simple bar graph with Power, Ammo, Rate of Fire would be adequate. ( Similar to the system used in Red Dead Redemption. )


Armour types and companions armour - Again differing armour types and the ability to change companions stuff are a staple of the genre, just look at all the Black Isle games, at KotOR and Neverwinter.  Also, if someone stealthy could get away with wearing large clunky armour, why is Kasumi wearing a body suit? Why can't my Shepard wear a similar outfit? Differentation is fine, but practicality should also play a part.


Mako - The Mako was only crap because people couldn't get it up the hills, a forward booster would have more than covered that problem. - I loved the Mako though so i'm biased.

Audio breifings - TIMs briefings are voiced, but everything else comes via the email system and to me that just seems like a cheap cop out. ME1's briefings wether it was Hackett of the shadow broker or whoever else, added to the immersion and feeling of a rich univeres. ME2 just feels like i'm reading a blog.

Your other points i'm not going to go into detail on, I can understand your points of view, but I still stand by my own.

We'll have to agree to disagree.