Am I playing the first MassEffect wrong? There isn't much gameplay at all...

[infohippie]

This is a game that's all about dialogue and choices. There's some vehicle gameplay and some shooting gameplay and that's it. And there is no post credits gameplay after the final boss which is my personal RPG deadly sin. I wanted to do the rest of those quests. But just like when it cut to an ending with fallout 3, because of that, I have never picked up mass effect again. I played a mass effect 2 demo which was okay, but I truly do miss games like starflight which were just about finding new worlds and new civilizations and didn't have a story it wanted to tell. It just let you make your own. I like games like that.

Did you ever complete Starflight? As you get deeper into the game universe you gradually discover that it does indeed have a story to tell, which you piece together from things you learn from talking with other races, information found in ruins, and the increasing prevalence of ruins in certain parts of the galaxy. There was even an overall time limit on completing the game before your own home world was destroyed, though you don't even know about the time limit until you have uncovered a good three quarters of the storyline. I do agree, however, that space exploration games like Starflight are sorely lacking these days. I would dearly love a good modern remake of both Starflight and Starflight 2, even if they were identical to the originals apart from improved graphics, audio, and interface.

 

[Tuesday Night Fever]

I dunno, there were some things you could do in the first two that were just unnecessarily dickish. Pushing people out of windows who won't talk to you, assaulting reporters for expressing negative opinions of you, straight up shooting people before even attempting to defuse the situation. Playing full renegade sometimes makes Shepard look like an out-of-control sociopathic killing machine, all through the series. The asshole decisions just seem bigger in 3 because the stakes are higher throughout the game.

See, but I count those examples as being pragmatic. Dude that you shoved out of the window of a skyscraper? Enemy mercenary with orders to shoot you on sight. Why be honorable and give him the opportunity to fire first when you can just, y'know, kill him.

"Shooting people before attempting to defuse the situation" I assume is with regard to that group of Krogan that ambush you during the Genophage quest in ME2. The part where you get a Renegade interrupt to shoot at and rupture some type of pipe that sets a bunch of them on fire. Is that the one? Totally being pragmatic. You were ambushed from an elevated position by a group of hostile, well-armed, living tanks. Why be honorable and fight from a massive disadvantage when you can take advantage of your surroundings to level the playing field?

I see this as being completely different from a lot of the Renegade options in ME3 where you mostly just kill and betray people for the sake of killing and betraying people, and nothing more. There's no element of tactical planning involved whatsoever.

Oh, and that reporter totally had it coming.

 

[BreakfastMan]

Nah, that's pretty much it as far as gameplay goes.

Welcome to ME1. Welcome to being a soldier in particular.

The other classes offer a bit more variety, but not much. Biotic abilities basically just ragdoll enemies so you can shoot them without them shooting back. Pretty OP actually. A party of three biotics (say, Vanguard Shep, Liara and Wrex) can waltz through most of the game without a scratch. Tech abilities are pretty useless since nothing they do is as useful or effective as continuously ragdolling enemies into helplessness.

It's odd. I remember thinking it was alright when I first played it, but now ME1 mostly feels like a chore to be worked through.

ME2 improves things by making you significantly less durable (so you can't just stroll through enemy fire like you can at mid-high levels in ME1). They drastically trimmed the fat on abilities, getting rid of the ones that only give passive stat gains. (Stats are improved through purchased equipment upgrades instead.) They balanced biotics and made tech abilities actually useful. Removed grenades for... some reason. They reduced the weapon pool to about 3 of each class, allowing them to actually be different rather than all the same with imperceptible stat differences that are all rendered obsolete by the spectre weapons. The end result feel ends up being of a fairly standard third person cover shooter, but with some fun abilities. Playing as a soldier is still really boring though, especially compared to the other classes.

The series only really hit its stride in terms of combat with the third game. Sped everything up. Increased the ability pool and added an element of choice to levelling abilities. Added ability combinations. Brought back grenades and made them both awesome and distinct. Hugely increased size and variety of the weapon pool. Opened up weapon selection to all classes. Made melee actually fun and useful, with better (i.e. not shit) animations and a separate 'heavy melee' for each class. Playing as a soldier... yeah, actually, still kinda boring. Even more so than ever compared to other classes. I don't know why people do that to themselves.

I may just get that DLC thing that lets you make ME1 choices and plugs you right into two no problem, if ME2 is actually more fun to play.

I just don't like using the powers. I know theres technical bullshit reason for it, but they always felt too super-power-fantasy for me... But I am that guy that brings a gun to a magic fight, anyway.

ME2 is loads more fun than 1. I fucking hated 1 (my opinions are very similar to Zhukovs, but with lots more bile), but I loved the shit out of 2. So yeah, don't even bother with another run through the first game as it doesn't get much better, and just go straight to 2. You can thank me later.

 

[fix-the-spade]

Funny I really liked the more open nature of ME1 over 2/3.

I especially liked trucking around in the Mako look for stuff, or straight up running Geth walkers over, or circle strafing Threshers.

I liked the combat too, by the end you're a death spewing implaccable monster truly worthy of the legends that get built around the Shephard name. I also liked that a lot of stuff in the quests could be solved multiple ways or out of order, rather than ME2/3's totally linear one to the next to the next once you begin a scenario.

I also liked the much larger number of side quests compared to 2/3 and the extra conversations, the game reminded me a lot of Knights of the Old Republic but with more direct shooting and a really cool tank.

 

[TT Kairen]

No, you aren't wrong. Mass Effect 1's combat, leveling, and basically everything except the overarching plot are completely inferior to 2 and 3. Don't let any luddites tell you different.

Don't get me wrong, 2 and 3 have flaws as well, but there's a reason I enjoy them far more.

 

[BathorysGraveland2]

Well, you don't play Mass Effect for its combat systems, that's for damn sure. I did, however, get some enjoyment from playing the vanguard class, using some bio-powers and a very satisfying shotgun (the shotguns in the first game feel really, really good). I'd say it's more your fault for choosing the soldier class, which is the most boring of them, even in description. Play it as a vanguard or sentinel or anything other than a soldier really, and you might find it more interesting.

 

[Sahngar]

While I think the series is great, and I LOVE the first game, ME1 isnt game sold on its combat.

Its story, atmosphere, environment, characters... sure! Combat? Can be fun, but not the selling point.

 

[TheVampwizimp_v1legacy]

I dunno, there were some things you could do in the first two that were just unnecessarily dickish. Pushing people out of windows who won't talk to you, assaulting reporters for expressing negative opinions of you, straight up shooting people before even attempting to defuse the situation. Playing full renegade sometimes makes Shepard look like an out-of-control sociopathic killing machine, all through the series. The asshole decisions just seem bigger in 3 because the stakes are higher throughout the game.

See, but I count those examples as being pragmatic. Dude that you shoved out of the window of a skyscraper? Enemy mercenary with orders to shoot you on sight. Why be honorable and give him the opportunity to fire first when you can just, y'know, kill him.

"Shooting people before attempting to defuse the situation" I assume is with regard to that group of Krogan that ambush you during the Genophage quest in ME2. The part where you get a Renegade interrupt to shoot at and rupture some type of pipe that sets a bunch of them on fire. Is that the one? Totally being pragmatic. You were ambushed from an elevated position by a group of hostile, well-armed, living tanks. Why be honorable and fight from a massive disadvantage when you can take advantage of your surroundings to level the playing field?

I see this as being completely different from a lot of the Renegade options in ME3 where you mostly just kill and betray people for the sake of killing and betraying people, and nothing more. There's no element of tactical planning involved whatsoever.

Oh, and that reporter totally had it coming.

Fair enough about the mercenary. If you'd met him anywhere else in that building he would have been shooting at you.

When I mentioned shooting first and asking questions never I wasn't even really referring to one event. Your example fits, but there are many others. Not the least being the option to execute Wrex, a supposedly valued member of your crew, on Virmire. But also, you intentionally let the geth blow up the council so humanity can take charge, you punch a shell-shocked salarian instead of talking him down, you fire a bullet over the head of a traumatized quarian for no good reason, you convince Jack to coldly murder an (admittedly disturbing) crazy man, and you kill a Justicar, who had already sworn an unbreakable oath to follow you, in order to pick up her homicidal, predatory daughter. Just for a few examples. Where's the sense in all that?

Okay, now it sounds like I'm arguing that the whole series makes renegades into bloodthirsty villains. Which I don't mean to say; I'm just trying to point out that the renegade path has always had an edge of irrational violence and needless asshattery.

Besides, not all of ME3's renegade options are total dick moves. What if you truly do believe, as a player, that the krogan are a threat to the well-being of the galaxy? There's plenty of support for that position. Keeping the krogan neutered may be renegade to the extreme, but it's not being bad for the sake of nastiness; it's a calculated decision to keep the galaxy safe.

And yes, the reporter had it coming. But violence is never the answer, Shepard!

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I thought from some gameplay clips that it was mostly a third person shooter with some strategy thrown in? Sounds more boring than what I thought it would be.

 

[Risingblade]

Combat wise the first games sucks, thankfully 2 is better and 3 is great. Combat wise anyways.

 

[Zhukov]

I may just get that DLC thing that lets you make ME1 choices and plugs you right into two no problem, if ME2 is actually more fun to play.

If you've reached the confrontation with Wrex then you're like 85% done. You might as well soldier on (EDIT: Hurr hurr) unless you're really hating it.

The first game has a pretty damn cool climax and I really cannot overstate how much a proper imported save improves the experience of the sequels. (Well, it does for me anyway. The changes aren't that drastic but they add up to a feeling of player-specific continuity between games that I absolutely loved.) Even lots of minot decisions and events get referenced. The ME1 summary DLC just isn't the same as it only covers the more major decisions.

 

[Littaly]

Maybe you're just looking at the wrong things. The gameplay is OK if you ask me, nothing broken but nothing really interesting either. The real appeal for me was the atmosphere, the worldbuilding the characters and the story, which despite some flaws here and there I thought it did better than most games. At least good enough to keep me more than engaged throughout the entire game, which isn't exactly short ^^

 

[Tuesday Night Fever]

snip

With regard to Wrex, I read the situation as Shepard figuring that if Wrex wasn't taken out pronto, Wrex was going to be the one killing people. He pretty much even openly states it. Shepard was forced to make a hasty judgment call. I view Wrex in ME1 as kinda like being Jayne Cobb from Firefly in that he was more an ally of convenience than anything else. When given the opportunity to achieve some kind of significant personal gain he was willing to betray Shepard's trust (Virmire being to Wrex what Ariel is to Jayne). Shepard, like Mal, was forced into the position of having to deal with that potential threat. Mal took the Paragon route, but could have easily taken Renegade like Shepard in this situation and spaced Jayne.

As for letting the Council be destroyed, that's not the way the situation is framed in the game, if I remember correctly. In the game it's not so much "CHOOSE A FOR HUMANITY RULES! CHOOSE B FOR COUNCIL RULES!" It's more keep the fleet together to protect the Citadel, or split up the fleet (potentially risking the entire fleet since you'll be spreading them more thinly and the Citadel as a whole) for the sake of saving a handful of people. Beyond that, at multiple points in the game it builds up the Destiny Ascension (the Asari Dreadnaught that the Council is on) as being the most badass ship ever manufactured. It's not unreasonable for a first-time player going into the game blind to assume that the Destiny Ascension, with all of its build-up, would be capable of standing its ground. Again, tactical decision. Choosing to sacrifice the Council to protect everyone else may be cold, but it's the logical choice.

The shell-shocked Salarian was being uncooperative in an active combat zone. Every moment Shepard spent dealing with him was a moment that Shepard and company's guard was down. Only makes sense to hasten the situation, both for the safety of Shepard's team and for the safety of the Salarian. Remember, Renegade Shep is about getting the job done efficiently, not putting his/her people at risk for the sake of sparing a person's feelings.

With regard to the Quarian, again, efficiency. Renegade Shepard's about getting the job done, whatever the cost. It's not like he/she shot the Quarian. It was just the quickest way of getting the guy's attention since they were sitting in a location that may or may not even be secure.

You get Jack to eliminate a threat. Paragon Shepard might have taken the kinder, gentler route - but it's also the route that has far more innate risk to it. Renegade Shepard can assess the situation, see that this psychopath has been a threat and is likely going to continue to be a threat to him/her and his/her team, and made the most efficient judgment to reduce said risk. Whatever the cost.

...A Justicar that, going by her own set up rules, was possibly going to be a threat to Shepard the moment the mission was over. A Justicar that, at least from what the game tries to present to you story-wise, isn't as biotically powerful when you're about to embark on a mission that requires the most powerful individuals you can find.

 

[Eddie the head]

No, you aren't wrong. Mass Effect 1's combat, leveling, and basically everything except the overarching plot are completely inferior to 2 and 3. Don't let any luddites tell you different.

Don't get me wrong, 2 and 3 have flaws as well, but there's a reason I enjoy them far more.

I am going to ahead and agree with this. I hear a lot of people say the characters where good as well, but I disagree. It's got the same problem Star Trek:TOS did. Everyone was a god damn stereotype. Now that's fine for building a universe, but it makes everyone kind of boring. I mean I guess Liara kinda brakes the mold a little bit, but still.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

This is a game that's all about dialogue and choices. There's some vehicle gameplay and some shooting gameplay and that's it. And there is no post credits gameplay after the final boss which is my personal RPG deadly sin. I wanted to do the rest of those quests. But just like when it cut to an ending with fallout 3, because of that, I have never picked up mass effect again. I played a mass effect 2 demo which was okay, but I truly do miss games like starflight which were just about finding new worlds and new civilizations and didn't have a story it wanted to tell. It just let you make your own. I like games like that.

Is this Starflight very Star Trek like?

It's like star trek except you can create your own crew from scratch and one of the races you can choose from is a tree man. It's got the diplomacy, it's got the exploration. I don't know why this game hasn't gotten remade, frankly.

They did remake it, they just changed the name to Mass Effect.

In all seriousness, Mass Effect was heavily inspired by Starflight, it's where stuff like the Mako and the solar system map used for surveying came from. They're also both published (and since they bought out Bioware, owned outright) by EA.

Edit: Oh, hey, check it out: some fans made an open source remake. I had no idea this was a thing:

https://sites.google.com/site/starflighttlc/home

 

[Saint of M]

Its basicly the story and the charecters you get drawn into. While the vehical parts can be fun, it takes a while to get used to them, and the combat as well.

Soldier is basic warrior class, a master of arms, with some of the other classess a mix of them.


If you arn't feeling it now the game may not be your cup of tea, which is ok.

I liked it, but it wasn't nessisarily for the gameplay.

 

[votemarvel]

I won't say wrong because everyone is different. Instead I'll post on why the combat in the first is my favourite of the trilogy.

I like that stats are as important to the gunplay as the ability to place a cross-hair. Yes it would have been nice for them to take into account where you were hitting the enemy but it wasn't a deal breaker for me. I thought it was great that shooting from cover and in the crouch have a noticeable accuracy bonus.

I like that speciality ammo is not a 'power' and available to all classes.

I like that grenades can be placed exactly where you want, detonated when you want, and for a variety of effects. They can also be used as traps, detonated when an enemy runs toward you.

The cover system for me is far better. Lightly push toward something to enter cover, lightly pull away to exit. Not once in playing the 360, PC, or PS3 versions have I ever entered cover when I didn't want to. I like that you can take advantage of low cover without the need to be pressed against it.

I like that biotic powers and tech abilities are not tied to a global cool-down. This give far more options in combat and reduces the time needed to sit behind chest high walls.

Perhaps the big thing this all offers me is a sense of progression. I feel that both Shepard and I are improving as the game goes on. Sure you can level a gun up to fire infinitely if you want, but its not an option you have to take.

So yes, I far prefer the combat in Mass Effect 1 to its two sequels.

 

[TheVampwizimp_v1legacy]

snip

With regard to Wrex...

As for letting the Council be destroyed...

The shell-shocked Salarian...

With regard to the Quarian...

You get Jack to eliminate a threat...

...A Justicar that...

Woah, spoilers for Firefly! Kidding, I've seen it a million times.

I see that some of these options, and the difference between choosing paragon or renegade, can certainly be defended both ways. I guess someone who wasn't as much a fan of Wrex as I am might think he's scary when he's mad and not take the chance of him becoming violent. Jack's crazy biotic friend sure does seem dangerous, so it might be best to just put him down, if you're the kind of Shepard who isn't out to save everyone you meet.

But come on. Clobbering that salarian was unnecessary. Even if he did fire his weapon, it wasn't a rocket launcher or anything, a military-grade kinetic barrier would shrug it off easily. Then you could be forgiven for punching him out.

As I recall it, there were three options regarding the Destiny Ascension. Paragon = Send in the fleet to save it and the Council. Neutral = Hold the fleet back to focus on Sovereign, this being an all-or-nothing battle for every life in the galaxy (honestly, that's the only decision that makes sense; Sovereign HAD to be stopped at all costs). But the renegade option was basically "Let the geth blow up the Ascension, I don't care." After which, in the final scene before the credits, Anderson and Udina ask your advice on how to deal with the power void left by the Council's demise, and again, the renegade dialogue choice is "Make a human council to command the other races." That's a pretty blatant coup d'etat, wouldn't you say? (Of course, that full-renegade option doesn't actually carry over to ME2, I imagine because it would require the Council to be more cooperative and less douchey.)

Firing your gun at Veetor is just a stupid move. He's traumatized, he's delusional, he's just tried to kill you all with mechs, and you fire a warning shot? Realistically, that should have made him freak out and either try to flee in terror, or try to tear you apart to defend himself. Using a gun to get the attention of this person is literally the worst way to go about it.

And really, you're defending Morinth? Morinth is just bad news. Choosing to take her along instead of Samara is nuts. Samara may not be as powerful, and she may be a threat after the mission is over, but Morinth is a threat now. She literally just tried to murder you. She, like renegade Shepard, is a survivor at all costs. She would say anything to get you to save her from an enraged justicar. And besides, even assuming Morinth learned her lesson and wouldn't try seducing Shepard again, she's still a liability to the mission. She's a compulsive killer; everyone else on the ship would be in danger, as well as random citizens on the Citadel, Illium, and any place the Normandy stopped over for a while.

The only reason she's an option is because it's fun to be needlessly cruel and vicious in video games. She's a neat character, but not at all a reasonable choice for an ally.