Please, no spoilers about the game. While I'm aware of the MS 3 Ending kerfluffle I don't know the series story at all.
So, here it is: I got Dragon Age: Inquisition and had to install EA's Origin to run it. Despite the horror stories I've heard about Origin I've not had any trouble (knock on wood) and am pleased to be the receiving of Mass Effect 2 for free.
So far, so good... (knock on wood)
Question: Do you need to play Mass Effect 1 to understand MS 2? I've enjoyed BioWare's RPG games (particularly the Dragon Age series) and I know many people worshipped MS 2 when it was hot, so I know it's a good game.
Question: Are there any lasting glitches I should be aware of?
while possible to play and enjoy ME2 without playing the previous one they are designed to be played together as a trilogy.
that said im sure you can catch up with a lets play that cuts out all the boring mako exploration missions or read a really in depth coverage of the plot and then visit http://www.masseffectsaves.com/ and pick what changes you want to include in ME2 from an existing save game someone has already included
You should play Mass Effect 1 first. It's an introduction to that universe and its main characters that you'll interact with in other two games. And you know that Bioware games are all about the characters. Even though it's possible to play and understand ME2 without ME1, there's a very strong sense of continuity and you'll definitely feel like you've missed out on a lot of important things. ME1 is $4 on Origin right now. And you should know that free version of Mass Effect 2 doesn't come with story DLC and that game has some really good DLC. Kasumi-Stolen Memory (adds another very cool squad mate), Arrival, Lair of the Shadow Broker and Overlord are all great DLC's. Especially Lair of the Shadow Broker.
Mass Effect 2 is a story on it's own. So story-wise you don't need to have played the first game to understand any of that. However the introduction of the universe, the important characters, and stuff like that all happens in 1. You'll likely not really get a lot of the references that mention stuff that happens in the first game. Or why certain people have a certain relationship as that started in ME1 as well.
Imo, get ME 1 as well. The shooting clearly wasn't it's focus, and the side missions are boring crap, so stick to the main story. But ME 1 is definitely worth playing for the story alone.
Question: Do you need to play Mass Effect 1 to understand MS 2? I've enjoyed BioWare's RPG games (particularly the Dragon Age series) and I know many people worshipped MS 2 when it was hot, so I know it's a good game.
You can skip the first game, if you wish. Some of the major events will be recapped in-game or in the codex, so you won't miss everything. There is also a DLC called Genesis that will recap the story of ME1 and allow you to make some of the major choices from that game and they'd be reflected in your . Unfortunately, it's paid. And there is the website with Mass Effect Saves that pookie101 posted that is somewhat of a free alternative - people who've played the game have uploaded their saves and you can search for one with the specific choices you wanted and just continue it.
However, with that said, ME2 doesn't cover everything from the first game, nor does the DLC that lets you generate choices for it. It's more of a broad overview and you won't find everything. Ultimately, the games were designed as a trilogy. You could check a wiki or maybe some other sites that go into more detailed explanation, of course. Or you can get the game. To be honest there are some annoying elements in it - inventory juggling becomes tedious and a lot of the Mako sections are boring. With that said, it's not really that bad. However, you will be able to see the story for yourself and also you will be able to see what the changes between the first and second game were gameplay and story-wise, which I think are an interesting thing to observe.
Basement Cat said:
Question: Are there any lasting glitches I should be aware of?
Bad glitches? No, nothing really. Something you can exploit? Well, there is a dialogue choice bug in one quest where you can keep charming or intimidating an NPC however many times you want and with whatever combination you want (you can do either one or both, if you want). Each time you do, you will get some amount of Paragon or Renegate points. You need those to be able to increase charm or intimidate. Here is a more detailed description how [http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Morality#Infinite_Paragon.2FRenegade_Points_Exploit].
That's really the only noteworthy glitch to speak of. The Mako can be annoying at times but it's partly due to how it works - it's basically a mechanised Skyrim horse and you have to drive up a lot of mountains, so you'll get to experience some frustration as it might not go up some slopes when it does on others that might be steeper.
One advice I'd give is to actually max out both Paragon and Renegade - this will involve either using the exploit or using cheats [http://www.gamefaqs.com/pc/944902-mass-effect/cheats]. The reason is that while Paragon/Renegade is a nice concept I don't think it works that well in practice. What it should do is represent your reputation as opposed to an arbitrary Good/Evil meter. In practice it sort if pays lip service to that concept and still retains some of the bad parts of an arbitrary Good/Evil system - you have two persuasion skills - Charm and Intimidate and they are both basically equally good, but one is the more diplomatic one the other is meaner. At any rate, you can't increase them unless you increase your reputation. Sometimes you have to persuade people to get more reputation points, too. So you have to (mostly) stick to one path if you want to have more dialogue choices. And sometimes you may have to choose the dialogue choice you don't want just for the sake of getting more reputation - say, you want to Intimidate an NPC but you need the Paragon points. Moreover, sometimes the Charm/Intimidate options don't even make sense to be disabled.
One example that I always remembers comes from ME2 - you're intimidating a guy and he goes "yeah, you're a nobody" - if you have enough Renegade reputation you reply with "I'm a Spectre" (basically super elite government agent. Like if you had an official title for a bunch of space James Bonds) and this will convince him to talk. Which is weird because it shouldn't require any (specific) reputation to be able to point this out.
There is a bunch of dialogue choices like this one. Sure, sometimes the reputation would make sense - if you've been acting violently, then a threat will have more weight to it. Bit it's not very well realised idea is what I'm trying to say.
I've played both games multiple times and I've tried it with and without maxing the reputations. I find it way more enjoyable to be able to have all conversation options available, as it means you can actually roleplay Shepard more.
It doesn't and it's something it's a decision I never rally understood from Bioware/EA. Of all the DLC they have for free, this one should have been there. And even if it wasn't in the beginning, it should have been by now. Heck, with the game going free, that's even more of a reason for it to be given out at no cost.
The only justification I can think of for why they'd not do it is if they want to encourage people to get ME1...which would make this very reasoning very bizarre.
Overall, I don't know what's going on in their heads.
I'd strongly suggest playing the first game, err... first.
The cross-game save import continuity thing is one of the best features of the series. (Y'know, assuming you end up liking the games at all.) It makes things feel more meaningful when you're reuniting with characters you're actually familiar with and seeing the results of choices you actually made.
That said, I could understand wanting to skip ME1. It's aged poorly and was pretty clunky to begin with. Then again, some crazy nutters out there regard it as the best in the series, maybe you'll be one of them.
Incidentally, strongly recommend the Lair of the Shadow Broker DLC for ME2. The Kasumi DLC, Stolen Memories I think it was called, and Overlord are both pretty good too. Arrival is garbage though.
Do you like the gameplay in RPG's? How much patience do you have? Because ME2's gameplay is a standardized third person shooter whereas ME1's gameplay is I would never have played ME1 if ME2 hadn't convinced me the series was worth my time. I know other people who were kind off turned off by ME1.
Mass effect 1 is bearable and quite good at points, and playing it first makes the second game better, but it is awfully clunky to play. If you do play it, I recommend setting it to easy and buying expensive gear asap. In terms of decisionmaking, some of the most interesting choices are in ME1 and making them in certain ways will sprinkle small bits of callbacks and content throughout the later games.
I know not everyone shares my impatience with ME1's clunky controlls and gameplay though.
I guess I'm one of them. I've not actually played the third game, so I am not exactly sure about that, but out of the first two games, I prefer ME1.
Zhukov said:
Incidentally, strongly recommend the Lair of the Shadow Broker DLC for ME2. The Kasumi DLC, Stolen Memories I think it was called, and Overlord are both pretty good too. Arrival is garbage though.
ME2 is actually the first ME game I played as well and it's definitely not necessary. It's more a collection of mini stories centered around the characters you meet(all of them interesting) with the overarching plot taking a backseat. ME3 went out of it's way explaining everything which kind of took away from the ambiguous magic of the previous game. I can definitely see why Bioware is praised for it's writing because ME2 has some stellar characterization.
As someone who doesn't particularly like Bioware games I thought ME2 was particularly good(espescially in isolation) so I can't recommend this game enough.
I'd say it was redundant. It's basically a 10 minute prologue to the third game. ME2 had a good ending though and Arrival didn't really add anything other than casting a shadow over the events in ME3.
I'd say go for it. Play all 3 games in one sitting and buy the relevent DLC for Mass Effect 2 and 3.
Important DLC for Mass Effect 2:
Kasumi - Stolen Memory
Zaeed - The Price of Revenge (This one comes free aswell as another one that I can't mention because Spoilers)
Overlord
Lair of the Shadow Broker
Arrival
Firewalker Pack (Optional because well it does not furthur the story but it gives you extra mission to do so it might have some importance like getting extra XP for levels)
Important DLC for Mass Effect 3:
From Ashes
Leviathan
Omega
Citadel
Extended Ending Cut (Comes free with the game)
The other DLCs are just new Weapons and Outfits that in the end add nothing to the game and sometimes the weapons and outfits can be increadibly OP and unbalanced.
The two games are actually quite different, it's the overarching plot and character that connect them. Mechanics are different as is how the story of each game is presented and progresses. So...yeah - liking one game isn't as meaningful as you make it.
And it's very easy to know whether the games would appeal to you - have you played an BioWare RPG? This is a BioWare RPG. Granted, the second game deviates from the usual formula but it's still undeniably BioWare. There you go.
If you've never played a BioWare RPG, then I suppose you could be more indecisive, though.
I'd say it was redundant. It's basically a 10 minute prologue to the third game. ME2 had a good ending though and Arrival didn't really add anything other than casting a shadow over the events in ME3.
I just think it's bad. Like, bad bad. Double plus bad. It feels like it was made by the interns. Not even being snarky, I'm pretty sure their B-Team squeezed Arrival out in their spare time while working on ME3.
The whole thing reeks of cut corners. They don't let you take team members along because they wanted to save on voice acting. (Even though LotSB managed to get away with it.)
There are glaring plot holes. Not even ones that you think of several hours after playing, but ones that are immediately apparent. (Granted, the series as a whole is no stranger to plot holes, but these ones are especially egregious.)
The attempts at "badass" Shepard moments either make no sense or come across as goofy, and not in a good way.
The Big Bioware Choice is hilariously token.
I like Bioware, I still have a soft spot for them despite everything, but I regard Arrival the way people who rabidly despise Bioware regard their games. It's like a little showcase of all their worst habits.
- I would say you need to have some familiarity with the story, but at this point it has been covered so much you don't really need to play it. There are some decent playthroughs and video summaries out there that can help you get up to speed, not to mention the wikipedia article. That should be enough since, while ME2 continues on the story of 1 and there are references, the main conflict takes a backseat to focus on a different threat. I ended up on a similar situation because on PS3, ME 2 was available before ME 1.
- I don't know of any game breaking bug in that version.
I'd say it was redundant. It's basically a 10 minute prologue to the third game. ME2 had a good ending though and Arrival didn't really add anything other than casting a shadow over the events in ME3.
I just think it's bad. Like, bad bad. Double plus bad. It feels like it was made by the interns. Not even being snarky, I'm pretty sure their B-Team squeezed Arrival out in their spare time while working on ME3.
The whole thing reeks of cut corners. They don't let you take team members along because they wanted to save on voice acting. (Even though LotSB managed to get away with it.)
There are glaring plot holes. Not even ones that you think of several hours after playing, but ones that are immediately apparent. (Granted, the series as a whole is no stranger to plot holes, but these ones are especially egregious.)
The attempts at "badass" Shepard moments either make no sense or come across as goofy, and not in a good way.
The Big Bioware Choice is hilariously token.
I like Bioware, I still have a soft spot for them despite everything, but I regard Arrival the way people who rabidly despise Bioware regard their games. It's like a little showcase of all their worst habits.
Sure, it is far from its best work (even considering other DLC), but it (and Shadow Broker) is one of the few that actually gets referenced in the main game of the sequels as important story elements. I would say if you are planning to play 3 after that, those can't be missed (regardless of quality)
I like Bioware, I still have a soft spot for them despite everything, but I regard Arrival the way people who rabidly despise Bioware regard their games. It's like a little showcase of all their worst habits.
Yeah, but I think that problem extended to most of the DLC for any game in that time period. That they managed to push out some good DLC which probably sold well most likely made them fall in the trap of trying to squeeze out every last penny(no doubt ordered by EA). Not saying DLC of current releases is necessarily good but back then it was most often a particularly obvious cash grab. Fortunately some games raised the bar a bit.
Aside from combat/controls, the same applies to Dragon Age: Origins, Knights of the Old Republic and Neverwinter Nights, though. BioWare games are all pretty similar in a lot of what they do.
Ezekiel said:
I think they're both very average as action games.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
