163 réponses à ce sujet

[Lonely_Fat_Guy]

I see alot of negative review from players, mostly about the rpg element of the game.
i understand a few concerns or points of improvement, but some are just a matter of taste and perspective.

the so called RPG ellements, inventory, loot, xp per kill,... are these really a must in a game?
why do people keep using boxes to put things in?
so what that they axed a few things
the inventory whas messy, mako got tiresome afther a few hours, the combat was clunky. (serrious missing someone with a shotgun at point blank range is just wrong) for this game the whole % of hit ratio doesnt suit it.
do you really need those things back?

ofcourse there are improvements for ME2, scanning is dreadfull, shepard and especially the crew could use more and diverse skillsets.

i think ME2 is a improvement too ME1, gameplay wise (storys are too difrent, love them both) .
are the more RPG winged players more active on the forums and thats why there more negative posts here?
before some will say im a shooter fan, i love RPG's like fallout 1, BG2 etc.
it also bothers me that when some one is beeing postive about it he usually gets beaten down on his own thread by the negative posters. for some reason it just shows me how narrow/small minded people can be.

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

A lot of people werent impressed by ME2. That so hard to believe?



Bioware went overboard in many areas, and the game itself is above all else tailored towards shooter fans as an out and out shooter game.



Plus some people were less than impressed by the story and characters and oft touted "impressive carryover" that fell totally flat.



Just because it scored numerous biased and ridiculous 10/10 doesnt mean the game doesnt majorly suck in many respects. It just takes real gamers to pick up on it, not folks whose paychecks are riding on their views.

[Time Well Spent]

Differences of opinion will always pop up, can't really argue against it, just gotta figure out if you like it or not

[Prophet of Rage]

Content felt spread thin between the huge cast of characters. Would've preferred 6 squadmates with 4 missions each or something like that.


Game's still a 9/10 for me, though. Loved every second of it. To each his own, eh?

Modifié par Prophet of Rage, 22 mars 2010 - 10:24 .

[DarthCaine]

They're just a vocal minority. Here:

http://social.biowar...093/polls/1659/
http://social.biowar...596/polls/1670/

Modifié par DarthCaine, 24 mars 2010 - 12:32 .

[mortons4ck]

I too believe that ME2 was a marked improvement over ME1. But I think they pruned the "RPG" elements a little too much. I liked the inventory, but it was too much all at once and it seemed like every 5 minutes you had to optimize your load out or figure out what needed to be converted into omnigel (the 150 inventory cap was kind of a pain). If it weren't for the 150 cap, I don't think it would have been so bad. Also, gradual upgrades.



I liked the weapon system in ME2, but I think it would be better if you could have the same modability in ME1 for ME2 weapons (different scope, ammo block, etc)



I actually liked sniping better in ME1, it seemed a little more realistic. It felt a little too smooth and arcadey in ME2.



I also missed the really long main planet missions in ME1, where instead of gunning from point A to point B, you would find quiet zones and pockets of NPCs to help push the stories along. I mean, the recruitment/loyalty missions in ME2 were great, but the mandatory story missions seemed to suffer a little because of it.

[Badpie]

Lonely_Fat_Guy wrote...

I see alot of negative review from players, mostly about the rpg element of the game.
i understand a few concerns or points of improvement, but some are just a matter of taste and perspective.

the so called RPG ellements, inventory, loot, xp per kill,... are these really a must in a game?
why do people keep using boxes to put things in?
so what that they axed a few things
the inventory whas messy, mako got tiresome afther a few hours, the combat was clunky. (serrious missing someone with a shotgun at point blank range is just wrong) for this game the whole % of hit ratio doesnt suit it.
do you really need those things back?

ofcourse there are improvements for ME2, scanning is dreadfull, shepard and especially the crew could use more and diverse skillsets.

i think ME2 is a improvement too ME1, gameplay wise (storys are too difrent, love them both) .
are the more RPG winged players more active on the forums and thats why there more negative posts here?
before some will say im a shooter fan, i love RPG's like fallout 1, BG2 etc.
it also bothers me that when some one is beeing postive about it he usually gets beaten down on his own thread by the negative posters. for some reason it just shows me how narrow/small minded people can be.

I agree that the inventory was messy,  I hated the Mako and the combat really needed the very well done upgrade.  But I don't consider those to be the necessary rpg elements. When I think rpg I think of character development, story.  And ME2, while I thought it was great as a whole really lacked some of the things that made ME1 great in my opinion.  It's not being negative to say you think some aspects didnt' get as much attention as they deserved.  I enjoyed the shooter aspect, but that's not why I play Mass Effect.

[DrunkenGoon]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...
Just because it scored numerous biased and ridiculous 10/10 doesnt mean the game doesnt majorly suck in many respects. It just takes real gamers to pick up on it, not folks whose paychecks are riding on their views.

Real gamers? I think anyone paid reviewer or not has different opinions on the game.. The fact is reviewers are use to playing all kinds of games.. So they know what makes a great game overall without being bias and saying it "sucks" because it has changed from being focused mainly on RPG elements to shooter elements..

I would say the "real gamers" you are reffering to are the ones who are biased, die hard RPG fans who can't appreciate a good game when it comes out. Now I'm not a super RPG fan or a super Shooter fan.. But ME2 is one of the best games I have ever played.. period. Simply my opinion.. and I'm sure you have yours.. and so will everyone else.

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

DrunkenGoon wrote...

Real gamers? I think anyone paid reviewer or not has different opinions on the game.. The fact is reviewers are use to playing all kinds of games.. So they know what makes a great game overall without being bias and saying it "sucks" because it has changed from being focused mainly on RPG elements to shooter elements..

I would say the "real gamers" you are reffering to are the ones who are biased, die hard RPG fans who can't appreciate a good game when it comes out. Now I'm not a super RPG fan or a super Shooter fan.. But ME2 is one of the best games I have ever played.. period. Simply my opinion.. and I'm sure you have yours.. and so will everyone else.

Real gamers pay out of their own pocket. Reviewers who pose as real gamers get money put into their pockets to give their opinions. Id trust someone who pays, not who is paid, to get views on a game any day of the week.

Thats all there is to it. I have absolutely no respect or interest in the opinion of reviewers. Its surprising how much is glorified marketing these days.

Modifié par Dinkamus_Littlelog, 22 mars 2010 - 10:34 .

[shinobi602]

Alot?



Most people love ME2.....I see a large majority of good reviews.

[DrunkenGoon]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

Real gamers pay out of their own pocket. Reviewers who pose as real gamers get money put into their pockets to give their opinions. Id trust someone who pays, not who is paid, to get views on a game any day of the week.

Thats all there is to it. I have absolutely no respect or interest in the opinion of reviewers. Its surprising how much is glorified marketing these days.

Well I review Movies for a living and let me tell you it doesn't work that way.. I may get free movies but in no way do I let that reflect the way I rate a movie.. But personally I don't trust reviewers for a more logical reason which is I don't know what there taste in games or movies is.. Once I get a grasp of what kind of movies or games a person likes I know I can trust their tastes..

Paid reviewers are just like anyone else.. We just see a TON more movies or play more games in their case..

[Badpie]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

DrunkenGoon wrote...

Real gamers? I think anyone paid reviewer or not has different opinions on the game.. The fact is reviewers are use to playing all kinds of games.. So they know what makes a great game overall without being bias and saying it "sucks" because it has changed from being focused mainly on RPG elements to shooter elements..

I would say the "real gamers" you are reffering to are the ones who are biased, die hard RPG fans who can't appreciate a good game when it comes out. Now I'm not a super RPG fan or a super Shooter fan.. But ME2 is one of the best games I have ever played.. period. Simply my opinion.. and I'm sure you have yours.. and so will everyone else.

Real gamers pay out of their own pocket. Reviewers who pose as real gamers get money put into their pockets to give their opinions. Id trust someone who pays, not who is paid, to get views on a game any day of the week.

Thats all there is to it. I have absolutely no respect or interest in the opinion of reviewers. Its surprising how much is glorified marketing these days.

I'm with you on this one, Dink.  Even if the reviewers are right and I agree with them (and I do on a lot of things for ME2) they're still getting paid.

[Lonely_Fat_Guy]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

A lot of people werent impressed by ME2. That so hard to believe?

Bioware went overboard in many areas, and the game itself is above all else tailored towards shooter fans as an out and out shooter game.

Plus some people were less than impressed by the story and characters and oft touted "impressive carryover" that fell totally flat.

Just because it scored numerous biased and ridiculous 10/10 doesnt mean the game doesnt majorly suck in many respects. It just takes real gamers to pick up on it, not folks whose paychecks are riding on their views.

see here we go again.
the self rpoclaimed "real gamer" sure buddy.
"real gamers" play ad&d rpg's? so rts people are nerds? fps/tps are airheads?
i liked that ME2 became a tactical shooter with the gameplay and still kept the story with npc interactions.
its not a shooter shooter game cause there too many people that you need to talk too. trust me my shooter shooter fans hate ME2 cause of all the crap you have to do beside of it.

its not hard to believe that the so called hardcore fans are disapointed.
its just a matter of taste, i like to believe that i have a verry broad vieuw on things, im a man who likes alot of difrent cup of tea's and not just stick to one genere like your "real gamers" .
do you have any idea how many crappy titels are out there with all scores higher then a 9? its redicilous so the mass media reviews i always look at those with a pinch of salt.

mortons4ck wrote...

I too believe that ME2 was a marked improvement over ME1. But I think they pruned the "RPG" elements a little too much. I liked the inventory, but it was too much all at once and it seemed like every 5 minutes you had to optimize your load out or figure out what needed to be converted into omnigel (the 150 inventory cap was kind of a pain). If it weren't for the 150 cap, I don't think it would have been so bad. Also, gradual upgrades.

I liked the weapon system in ME2, but I think it would be better if you could have the same modability in ME1 for ME2 weapons (different scope, ammo block, etc)

I actually liked sniping better in ME1, it seemed a little more realistic. It felt a little too smooth and arcadey in ME2.

I also missed the really long main planet missions in ME1, where instead of gunning from point A to point B, you would find quiet zones and pockets of NPCs to help push the stories along. I mean, the recruitment/loyalty missions in ME2 were great, but the mandatory story missions seemed to suffer a little because of it.

same here, sniping was too easy (eventough your a trained op and i hope by god that they improved snipers 500 years or so in the future)
scanning sucked, ME1 side missions were more diverse in its content, not its presentation but what it was about brought much more then some vorcha infested base where your done in 3min.
if they could smash ME1 and ME2 together it be almost perfect (ME3?)

the loss of an inventory really made me happy, it felt so much better (why would a spectre shuvvel trough garbage for some upgrades while he already has better ones) the down side was we lost abit customizing wich i liked so a more options in guns and skills would ahve been great.

all in all i love ME2 more then ME1 (im playing 1 and 2 simultaniously this last month cause i wanted to import a new character) then you get too see the difrences alot more and apriciate ME2 alot more.

[Daralii]

mortons4ck wrote...

I too believe that ME2 was a marked improvement over ME1. But I think they pruned the "RPG" elements a little too much. I liked the inventory, but it was too much all at once and it seemed like every 5 minutes you had to optimize your load out or figure out what needed to be converted into omnigel (the 150 inventory cap was kind of a pain). If it weren't for the 150 cap, I don't think it would have been so bad. Also, gradual upgrades.

I liked the weapon system in ME2, but I think it would be better if you could have the same modability in ME1 for ME2 weapons (different scope, ammo block, etc)

I actually liked sniping better in ME1, it seemed a little more realistic. It felt a little too smooth and arcadey in ME2.

I also missed the really long main planet missions in ME1, where instead of gunning from point A to point B, you would find quiet zones and pockets of NPCs to help push the stories along. I mean, the recruitment/loyalty missions in ME2 were great, but the mandatory story missions seemed to suffer a little because of it.

Agreed absolutely, there's a definite loss of immersion in the defined "levels" of ME2 versus ME1. In regards to the inventory, I think they could've just removed drops from enemies(or at least reduced the number of drops, a lot of the story missions were just hellish in that regard). 

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I actually miss the Mako; it definitely helped break up the shooting portions of ME1, and probably would've helped a lot in ME2. The problem with it wasn't really the vehicle itself(though the controls could've been made a little tighter, and the jets could have always stabilized instead of starting a series of cartwheels), just a lot of the planets with Mako missions(just about every UNC).

[MassAffected]

I also don't understand the huge influx of negativity that I'm seeing. Then again, I'm left to assume that those that like the game are still playing it like me. I only come here every one in a while to see if any news on DLC has come up. The people that are super upset by this game have nothing better to do than come here to trash it playing off their own opinions as gospel for everyone else to follow. Eh, back to ME2.

[Daralii]

MassAffected wrote...

I also don't understand the huge influx of negativity that I'm seeing. Then again, I'm left to assume that those that like the game are still playing it like me. I only come here every one in a while to see if any news on DLC has come up. The people that are super upset by this game have nothing better to do than come here to trash it playing off their own opinions as gospel for everyone else to follow. Eh, back to ME2.

After initial awe, it makes sense that people would start picking apart the more negative aspects, either because they have nothing else to do or because they actually want to be productive and give feedback to BW.

[Lonely_Fat_Guy]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

DrunkenGoon wrote...

Real gamers? I think anyone paid reviewer or not has different opinions on the game.. The fact is reviewers are use to playing all kinds of games.. So they know what makes a great game overall without being bias and saying it "sucks" because it has changed from being focused mainly on RPG elements to shooter elements..

I would say the "real gamers" you are reffering to are the ones who are biased, die hard RPG fans who can't appreciate a good game when it comes out. Now I'm not a super RPG fan or a super Shooter fan.. But ME2 is one of the best games I have ever played.. period. Simply my opinion.. and I'm sure you have yours.. and so will everyone else.

Real gamers pay out of their own pocket. Reviewers who pose as real gamers get money put into their pockets to give their opinions. Id trust someone who pays, not who is paid, to get views on a game any day of the week.

Thats all there is to it. I have absolutely no respect or interest in the opinion of reviewers. Its surprising how much is glorified marketing these days.

ah ok so this is what you ment with real gamers. i get it now.
i agrea with you abit.

reviews on big sites are just a gideline, the expereince of friends who played it or on the forums are helpfull.
the problem is some people are for some reason way tooooo bitter to write an objective review.
so it also has it flaws.

[Tlazolteotl]

Well, I play a lot of action games as well as rpgs, and I think ME2 feels a lot more like an action shooter.

If asked "how good is ME2 compared to ME1?" I'd say ME2 is a better game. 'cos you play a game like this and there's a lot of combat .. and combat in ME1 was janky.

If asked "how good is ME2 vs ME1 as an rpg?" I'd say ME1 is a better rpg, for having a stronger story. The citadel was also awesome rather than 3 levels of a hotel lobby.

By and large, I like most of the changes, but when equipment is concerned it was taken a bit too far. Fiddling around with socketed upgrades, and seeing how squadmates looked in various suits of armour was nice. Yes, the inventory system in ME1 was terrible, but to get rid of it altogether was a bit of a cop-out.

Bottom line is, though .. as good as ME2 is, the problem with making such big changes to a sequel messes with continuity. I mean as awesome as miranda's outfit is, not wearing armour in combat just doesn't feel like mass effect.

[Lonely_Fat_Guy]

Daralii wrote...

MassAffected wrote...

I also don't understand the huge influx of negativity that I'm seeing. Then again, I'm left to assume that those that like the game are still playing it like me. I only come here every one in a while to see if any news on DLC has come up. The people that are super upset by this game have nothing better to do than come here to trash it playing off their own opinions as gospel for everyone else to follow. Eh, back to ME2.

After initial awe, it makes sense that people would start picking apart the more negative aspects, either because they have nothing else to do or because they actually want to be productive and give feedback to BW.

its the way they some people bring it.

like there opinion is the truth. most of the times its not really constructive critism just complaining.

[MassAffected]

Daralii wrote...

MassAffected wrote...

I also don't understand the huge influx of negativity that I'm seeing. Then again, I'm left to assume that those that like the game are still playing it like me. I only come here every one in a while to see if any news on DLC has come up. The people that are super upset by this game have nothing better to do than come here to trash it playing off their own opinions as gospel for everyone else to follow. Eh, back to ME2.

After initial awe, it makes sense that people would start picking apart the more negative aspects, either because they have nothing else to do or because they actually want to be productive and give feedback to BW.

There are very few threads that seem to be constructive with their negative feedback. A lot of them just say that the game is trash and BioWare has "kicked them in the face" with this joke of a sequel. I also see a lot of potential for improvement with the third and final installment of Shepard's story, my problem is the extreme its taken to on these boards. You have the haters that trash anything and everything in this game and pass off their opinion as everyone else's and then you have the zealots that tend to turn every thread into a flame war trying to scream louder than the other group. I'm all for constructive feedback, but its such a rarity on these boards that it almost seems non-existant.

Modifié par MassAffected, 22 mars 2010 - 10:52 .

[Lonely_Fat_Guy]

Tlazolteotl wrote...

Well, I play a lot of action games as well as rpgs, and I think ME2 feels a lot more like an action shooter.
If asked "how good is ME2 compared to ME1?" I'd say ME2 is a better game. 'cos you play a game like this and there's a lot of combat .. and combat in ME1 was janky.
If asked "how good is ME2 vs ME1 as an rpg?" I'd say ME1 is a better rpg, for having a stronger story. The citadel was also awesome rather than 3 levels of a hotel lobby.
By and large, I like most of the changes, but when equipment is concerned it was taken a bit too far. Fiddling around with socketed upgrades, and seeing how squadmates looked in various suits of armour was nice. Yes, the inventory system in ME1 was terrible, but to get rid of it altogether was a bit of a cop-out.
Bottom line is, though .. as good as ME2 is, the problem with making such big changes to a sequel messes with continuity. I mean as awesome as miranda's outfit is, not wearing armour in combat just doesn't feel like mass effect.

i woundt go as far as saying the continuity is gone. but i agrea with you on the most parts.

in order too finish it on time, it feels abit unpolished in area's, the whole vastness of ME1 is gone, everything in ME2 feels like a frikking small cave.
the armors were great in me1 if they added that you could customize there armors like shepards armor in me2 i think most people would have sacrificed there first born out of joy.

running around half naked with out a battlesuit just doesnt look realistic, and me1 made the whole galaxy they made up feel so real. thats whats bugs me the most about me2
but i can let it go and enjoy the good and great things me2 has too offer. some peopel can not do this and then they just hate everything about it. in stead of beeing objective they are emotional with there "feedback"

[Lonely_Fat_Guy]

MassAffected wrote...

There are very few threads that seem to be constructive with their negative feedback. A lot of them just say that the game is trash and BioWare has "kicked them in the face" with this joke of a sequel. I also see a lot of potential for improvement with the third and final installment of Shepard's story, my problem is the extreme its taken to on these boards. You have the haters that trash anything and everything in this game and pass off their opinion as everyone else's and then you have the zealots that tend to turn every thread into a flame war trying to scream louder than the other group. I'm all for constructive feedback, but its such a rarity on these boards that it almost seems non-existant.

thats excactly how i feel.

[Lonely_Fat_Guy]

Daralii wrote...
Agreed absolutely, there's a definite loss of immersion in the defined "levels" of ME2 versus ME1. In regards to the inventory, I think they could've just removed drops from enemies(or at least reduced the number of drops, a lot of the story missions were just hellish in that regard). 

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I actually miss the Mako; it definitely helped break up the shooting portions of ME1, and probably would've helped a lot in ME2. The problem with it wasn't really the vehicle itself(though the controls could've been made a little tighter, and the jets could have always stabilized instead of starting a series of cartwheels), just a lot of the planets with Mako missions(just about every UNC).

your not alone the fifth fleet missions were a blast i loved each and everyone of them, i missed it in me2 alot, admiral hacket

[JeanLuc761]

MassAffected wrote...

There are very few threads that seem to be constructive with their negative feedback. A lot of them just say that the game is trash and BioWare has "kicked them in the face" with this joke of a sequel. I also see a lot of potential for improvement with the third and final installment of Shepard's story, my problem is the extreme its taken to on these boards. You have the haters that trash anything and everything in this game and pass off their opinion as everyone else's and then you have the zealots that tend to turn every thread into a flame war trying to scream louder than the other group. I'm all for constructive feedback, but its such a rarity on these boards that it almost seems non-existant.

That bothers me a lot as well.  I have no problem with people who disliked parts of the game (or the entire game) but there is a LOT of overzealous hatred on these boards.

To answer the OP's question though, opinion is opinion.  I personally think ME2 is an improvement in almost every single way (the main story took a hit but that was made up for with the loyalty missions) while there are others for whom the game didn't live up to their expectations.