How has Mass Effect 2 'dumbed down' the series?

[NinjaDeathSlap]

Let me just make this clear from the outset, THIS IS NOT MEANT TO START A FLAME WAR! I personally love Mass Effect 2 but I respect the right for people to hold their own opinions. I just want to better understand a gripe I've had about the argument opposing how the series has changed.

People use the phrase 'dumbed down' to describe how the gameplay has become more action centric with less RPG elements. At first that seems easy enough to understand, but on closer inspection I really don't think that means it has dumbed down. All the things that make RPG's the deep and 'smart' experiences that they are are still present in Mass Effect 2, for example:

- the epic story, and richly detailed mythology behind it are still present

- there is still a strong emphasis on characterisation

- the Galaxy Map still makes the world feel appropriately huge

- the environments are varied and richly detailed

- the vast dialogue trees are still their and (most) are relevant and interesting

- the side missions still have a non-linear focus and vary greatly in length and importance

- your abilities and equipment still progress as you progress further in the story

As far as I can see the only significant aspects that were dropped from Mass Effect 1 were the endless equipment micro managing, and the vehicle sections which mostly involved roving around palette-swapped terrain that was 99% full of nothing; and in my opinion these were not so much adding depth as wasting time.

TL;DR... When did 'faffing about' become synonymous with 'smart gameplay and story', and when did 'trimming the fat' become 'dumbing down'?

 

[TheAbominableDan]

They also removed skills. And removing the speech skills was a big annoyance of mine. Replacing it with Paragon and Renegade points was a shallow replacement. Apparently you can't use your convincing ways to be a jerk. Or intimidate someone without it being considered a bad guy thing.

 

[Lionsfan]

People didn't like how it emphasized chest high walls as a fighting mechanic, or the fact that instead of cleaning up the clutter with items they just took it all out. It really just seemed a lot more like a Gallery Shooter than an RPG game.

Edit: I forgot about skills too, rather than have a whole bunch of stuff so you could pick and choose what to specialize in to optimize you're combat/dealing's with people they made it like 4 fighting powers

 

[NinjaDeathSlap]

They also removed skills. And removing the speech skills was a big annoyance of mine. Replacing it with Paragon and Renegade points was a shallow replacement. Apparently you can't use your convincing ways to be a jerk. Or intimidate someone without it being considered a bad guy thing.

Surely in ME1 though you would sink all your points into Charm for a Paragon playthrough, and Intimidate for a Renegade playthrough? So did it really matter to have them as separate things?

 

[TheAbominableDan]

Surely in ME1 though you would sink all your points into Charm for a Paragon playthrough, and Intimidate for a Renegade playthrough? So did it really matter to have them as separate things?

Actually I sunk points into both. It's been a while since I played it but I'm pretty sure not every charm choice was a Paragon one.

 

[CleverNickname]

I believe people generally refer to the tiny tiny skilltrees, the completely non-existent inventory and the shooting mechanics unaltered by stats/skills.

Also, gaining XP in fixed amounts at the end of missions was an odd choice. ME1's level progression seemed fine (40-ish at the end of a 1st playthrough, almost 60 at the end of a NG+), and if people want to grind, more power to them.

ME2 is less an RPG and more a 3rd person shooter with a handful of skillable extra powers and tons of dialogue.

...
Though I'm only answering the question. I played ME2 three times as often as ME1. I hate stat/skill-based shooting (THAT SHOT DIDN'T MISS!). Still, some more skills would have been nice, or at least more progression in smaller increments (waiting half the game for 4 skillpoints is dumb).

 

[Zhukov]

[engage sarcasm mode]

- Mass Effect 1 allowed me to swap out my Heat Sink II for a Heat Sink III. It was so deep and complex and intelligent.
- Mass Effect 1 allowed me to drive around featureless mountain ranges and raid a series of identical bases. Deep, I tell you!
- Mass Effect 1 allowed me to change Wrex's shoes! Oh, the complexity.
- Mass Effect 1 allowed me to add 2% to my boomability skill. None o' those dumb action gamers could've figured that out!
- Mass Effect 1 allowed me to swap my weapons for identical ones with bigger numbers. I like big numbers.
- Mass Effect 1 had terrible AI, just like all real RPGs must.

[/sarcasm mode]

Mass Effect 2 trimmed that shit to hell and back, and resulted in a significantly better game. The only thing I missed from ME1 was having to exit the ship via the airlock.

Oh, and Wrex. More Wrex would have been nice.

EDIT: Before I get quoted to death, I should make it clear that I really liked ME1. The good bits more than made up for the annoying stuff. However, I still think ME2 was a better designed game. Although it did suffer a bit plot-wise from being in the middle of the series.

 

[NinjaDeathSlap]

People didn't like how it emphasized chest high walls as a fighting mechanic, or the fact that instead of cleaning up the clutter with items they just took it all out. It really just seemed a lot more like a Gallery Shooter than an RPG game.

Edit: I forgot about skills too, rather than have a whole bunch of stuff so you could pick and choose what to specialize in to optimize you're combat/dealing's with people they made it like 4 fighting powers

OK, I'm kinda with you there. I would have preferred less emphasis on cover-based shooting (although in the games defense the controls for the cover mechanics were more intuitive than most that I've played with). However, with ME1 one of the most recurring criticisms was that the combat was a bit of a mess, so surely it's natural that Bioware decided to concentrate on finding ways to improve that, and did so by taking a leaf out of the books of the most popular shooters?

 

[Megalodon]

They also removed skills. And removing the speech skills was a big annoyance of mine. Replacing it with Paragon and Renegade points was a shallow replacement. Apparently you can't use your convincing ways to be a jerk. Or intimidate someone without it being considered a bad guy thing.

Surely in ME1 though you would sink all your points into Charm for a Paragon playthrough, and Intimidate for a Renegade playthrough? So did it really matter to have them as separate things?

While I did indeed do this, people appreciate the choice in these things, ME2 made it impossible to be renegade and still able to occasionaly charm someone you didn't really want to punch in the face/pull a gun on, or the opposite, be generally nice and diplomatic, but be able to strongarm someone who pissed you off.

 

[MetroidNut]

It was much more shooter than RPG, and that bothered some people. Personally, I adore Mass Effect 2 - the first game had a better overarching story (with a particularly great villain), but I greatly prefer the gameplay and dialogue of ME2, as well as the story for each individual quest.

I also prefer the second game's structure - Mass Effect 1 followed the structure of Knights of the Old Republic to the letter. You go to an introductory planet, which kicks off the story. You then go to the headquarters of an elite organization, which you are eventually allowed to join. Then you go to a series of planets, hunting down clues to help you stop the villain's plan. You finish off by going to a "point-of-no-return" forbidden planet, which leads you to the final area of the game, a space station being used to bring about the villain's evil plan. That description works for Mass Effect 1 just as well as it works for KotOR.

Mass Effect 2, on the other hand, has a more unusual structure - you spend most of the game preparing your squad for a single, ultimate battle. It's not necessarily a better structure than the one used in ME1, but it is much more original.

Well, the first paragraph was on-topic, at any rate.

 

[MetroidNut]

The only thing I missed from ME1 was having to exit the ship via the airlock.

Ah, the soothing voice of the Normandy VI. "The Commanding Officer is ashore. XO Pressly has the deck."

 

[RuralGamer]

I don't think Mass Effect 2 was 'dumbed down'; sure there were a few things that annoyed me in ME2 that weren't in the original (aka planet scanning or conversation options tied to paragon/renegade) and some elements were removed (i.e. the planets were shorter and the characters were slightly shallower), but there were a good deal of elements that were, in my own opinion, improved in the second; more fluidic combat, the fact no two weapons were basically identical except one has 1% better stats and is red, the use of interesting locales as well... To sumarise my thoughts; there were certain parts of both games I liked more and in the end, I think the first game wins a bit because of the plot which I preferred more as well as the much longer play time(even if most of it were irritating vehicle sections with instakill thresher maws!).

 

[RatRace123]

The only thing that really got to me was the fact that the story is nowhere near as good as the first game's one. The fact that most of it is spent collecting party members then gaining their loyalty is kinda meh for me.
I think it suffered from having too many party members, and there's issues with pacing that leaves several party members earned late in the game, meaning we don't get to use them as much.
It also lacked a proper antagonist like Saren.
The missions really just felt like shooting gallery levels rather than the expansive locales Bioware's had in the past. Like each story mission in Mass Effect 1 took about 2 hours to complete, and each story world felt big. I can blaze through most ME2 levels in 20 minutes. It's more of a matter of quality over quantity IMO.

I didn't have as much of an issue with the actual gameplay mechanics since the story is the biggest draw to Mass Effect for me. I was left feeling disappointed with the sequel in that respect.
That's not really a dumbing down thing though, that's just my own reasons for not liking 2 as much as 1.

 

[NinjaDeathSlap]

[engage sarcasm mode]

- Mass Effect 1 allowed me to swap out my Heat Sink II for a Heat Sink III. It was so deep and complex and intelligent.
- Mass Effect 1 allowed me to drive around featureless mountain ranges and raid a series of identical bases. Deep, I tell you!
- Mass Effect 1 allowed me to change Wrex's shoes! Oh, the complexity.
- Mass Effect 1 allowed me to add 2% to my boomability skill. None o' those dumb action gamers could've figured that out!
- Mass Effect 1 allowed me to swap my weapons for identical ones with bigger numbers. I like big numbers.
- Mass Effect 1 had terrible AI, just like all real RPGs must.

[/sarcasm mode]

Mass Effect 2 trimmed that shit to hell and back, and resulted in a significantly better game. The only thing I missed from ME1 was having to exit the ship via the airlock.

Oh, and Wrex. More Wrex would have been nice.

I like this . Although I don't want to sound like I'm hating on ME1. It's still definitely in my Top 10 best games I've played, it's just that ME2 is definitely in my Top 5.

 

[TheAbominableDan]

They also removed skills. And removing the speech skills was a big annoyance of mine. Replacing it with Paragon and Renegade points was a shallow replacement. Apparently you can't use your convincing ways to be a jerk. Or intimidate someone without it being considered a bad guy thing.

Surely in ME1 though you would sink all your points into Charm for a Paragon playthrough, and Intimidate for a Renegade playthrough? So did it really matter to have them as separate things?

While I did indeed do this, people appreciate the choice in these things, ME2 made it impossible to be renegade and still able to occasionaly charm someone you didn't really want to punch in the face/pull a gun on, or the opposite, be generally nice and diplomatic, but be able to strongarm someone who pissed you off.

This guy! I like this guy. He said the words I was having trouble articulating when I'd been awake for all of eleven minutes.

 

[Zhukov]

They also removed skills. And removing the speech skills was a big annoyance of mine. Replacing it with Paragon and Renegade points was a shallow replacement. Apparently you can't use your convincing ways to be a jerk. Or intimidate someone without it being considered a bad guy thing.

You realise that in ME1 you had to unlock the charm and intimidate skills by earning paragon and renegade points anyway, right? You couldn't be a jerk with charm or intimidate someone nicely.

The only change in ME2 was that you didn't have to spend skill points before the good dialogue options became available.

 

[GrizzlerBorno]

They also removed skills. And removing the speech skills was a big annoyance of mine. Replacing it with Paragon and Renegade points was a shallow replacement. Apparently you can't use your convincing ways to be a jerk. Or intimidate someone without it being considered a bad guy thing.

Surely in ME1 though you would sink all your points into Charm for a Paragon playthrough, and Intimidate for a Renegade playthrough? So did it really matter to have them as separate things?

Yes it did. In Mass Effect 1 you didn't HAVE to have a "Paragon playthrough" and a "Renegade Playthrough". I tried to do the latter in ME1 and by the end my Femshep STILL had a quarter Paragon bar and 80% Renegade, because she refused to be a ***** to her teammates. But since Intimidate was a unique skill, she was threatening strangers left right and center, even though, on the Normandy she was a pretty nice commander...

Don't get me wrong. Mass Effect 2 was AWESOME. But it had quite a few faults. The important thing to remember is every game has a faults.

That being said. THIS is fucking hilarious:

[engage sarcasm mode]

- Mass Effect 1 allowed me to swap out my Heat Sink II for a Heat Sink III. It was so deep and complex and intelligent.
- Mass Effect 1 allowed me to drive around featureless mountain ranges and raid a series of identical bases. Deep, I tell you!
- Mass Effect 1 allowed me to change Wrex's shoes! Oh, the complexity.
- Mass Effect 1 allowed me to add 2% to my boomability skill. None o' those dumb action gamers could've figured that out!
- Mass Effect 1 allowed me to swap my weapons for identical ones with bigger numbers. I like big numbers.
- Mass Effect 1 had terrible AI, just like all real RPGs must.

[/sarcasm mode]

Mass Effect 2 trimmed that shit to hell and back, and resulted in a significantly better game. The only thing I missed from ME1 was having to exit the ship via the airlock.

Oh, and Wrex. More Wrex would have been nice.

Awesome sarcasm is awesome.

Also, it confuses me, how all the Hate for Mass Effect 2 being "dumbed down" started AFTER the news about ME3 started leaking in. What is up with that?

 

[Legion]

- the epic story, and richly detailed mythology behind it are still present

Yes, but in ME1 you had choice, in Mass Effect 2 you are forced to side with Cerberus even if you played a character that hated/s them, there is no option to leave until the end and even then it is implied not to be because Shepared dislikes Cerberus but because Shepard doesn't think he needs them any more.

- there is still a strong emphasis on characterisation

True, especially with the squad members, this is much better than ME1.

- the Galaxy Map still makes the world feel appropriately huge

Yes, but now every single planet worth looking at comes up on a check-list to explore, so it no longer feels like you are the one steering the adventure.

- the environments are varied and richly detailed

Indeed, although I don't believe any are as good as the Citadel in ME1.

- the vast dialogue trees are still their and (most) are relevant and interesting

I wouldn't say they are noticeably different from ME1 except when it comes to Cerberus and Horizon, both of those were poorly done.

- the side missions still have a non-linear focus and vary greatly in length and importance

Hmmm, yes but they feel like check-lists in the way that you magically teleport back to the ship once you have completed the objective.

- your abilities and equipment still progress as you progress further in the story

True, but they are no longer stat based in the same way. In ME1 a character with a low pistol skill would not be accurate with a pistol. In ME2 the skill trees merely give you new abilities, you are still completely effective in all areas of combat regardless (shield and health is the same, as is regeneration and so on).

As far as I can see the only significant aspects that were dropped from Mass Effect 1 were the endless equipment micro managing, and the vehicle sections which mostly involved roving around palette-swapped terrain that was 99% full of nothing; and in my opinion these were not so much adding depth as wasting time.

I agree they got rid of a lot of clutter, but the biggest problem is that, they didn't fine-tune the clutter to make it worthwhile they just cut out everything completely instead. This makes the game simplistic rather than uncomplicated.

My responses are in bold. I would like to point out that I think Mass Effect 2 is superb, regardless of how my criticisms may suggest otherwise.

Also, it confuses me, how all the Hate for Mass Effect 2 being "dumbed down" started AFTER the news about ME3 started leaking in. What is up with that?

It happened earlier but ME3 brought it back into every-bodies memories.

[engage sarcasm mode]

- Mass Effect 1 allowed me to swap out my Heat Sink II for a Heat Sink III. It was so deep and complex and intelligent.
- Mass Effect 1 allowed me to drive around featureless mountain ranges and raid a series of identical bases. Deep, I tell you!
- Mass Effect 1 allowed me to change Wrex's shoes! Oh, the complexity.
- Mass Effect 1 allowed me to add 2% to my boomability skill. None o' those dumb action gamers could've figured that out!
- Mass Effect 1 allowed me to swap my weapons for identical ones with bigger numbers. I like big numbers.
- Mass Effect 1 had terrible AI, just like all real RPGs must.

[/sarcasm mode]

Mass Effect 2 trimmed that shit to hell and back, and resulted in a significantly better game. The only thing I missed from ME1 was having to exit the ship via the airlock.

Oh, and Wrex. More Wrex would have been nice.

EDIT: Before I get quoted to death, I should make it clear that I really liked ME1. The good bits more than made up for the annoying stuff. However, I still think ME2 was a better designed game. Although it did suffer a bit plot-wise from being in the middle of the series.

All fair points, although my only disagreement lies with the changing team members armour. The reason I disagree is that the fact that half the team wear spandex or leather into battle now is just plain insanity. In ME1 everyone wore armour except Tali who wore her environmental suit (which are armoured to a degree).

 

[Limecake]

I liked Mass Effect 2, I played Mass Effect 1 Way more but I'll probably revisit ME2 within a couple months.

I didn't like how many skills they trimmed, or how it did feel more like a Shooter than an RPG. The story was alright, it just felt like I was filling time until Mass Effect 3 but I wasn't expecting them to conclude any huge stories in the second installment.

I am one of the freaks who prefers the Planet scanning mechanic though.

 

[suitepee7]

TL;DR... When did 'faffing about' become synonymous with 'smart gameplay and story', and when did 'trimming the fat' become 'dumbing down'?

lack of inventory and ammo selection. i'll admit, the inventory needed refining in the first one, but not removed completely.

the removal of skills, so choosing whether to put points into speech to talk your way out of situations, or put them in combat.

the removal of health, and replacing it with regen health. the shields were the point of regen, if you're gonna make health like that why not make the health bar even bigger? medi gel is now pointless because your teammates are ok at best, but you can still solo nearly everything, and they come back to life after combat is finished anyway.

they were the main differences i saw which i would say made the game dumbed down, but thats about it.