Mass Effect 1 may have the best combat in the series.

[Dansen]

Seriously, I can't get enough of it. It is the perfect blend of an RPG and third person shooter. You position yourself to take advantage of situations and use your abilities to change the tide of battle in your favor. Leveling mechanic ensures that you are constantly improving and your allies can provide decent support with their own abilities. Guns actually feel like they have weight to them, and the heating system is actually a good idea. Do I risk overheating my gun to increase my dps, or do I play it safe for more sustained damage? Armor, mods, amps and omni tools are also able to spice things up by improving your abilities. Which makes me rather sad that they essentially scrapped it in favor of a more shooter oriented approach. The gameplay was unrefined but it could have really gone somewhere interesting with a little more effort. AI was lackluster and there was only a handful of equipment to choose from, but it was still fun.

Mass Effect 2 was able to improve the flow of the game but at the sacrifice of any serious depth, the number of abilities was reduced to six for Shepherd and 4 for teammates. Less tools=less options. Most of the time you are spent cowering behind cover, while in ME 1 you can actually tank bullets quite a bit on hard difficulties if you play your cards right. The addition of rechargeable shields removes any serious long term tension while the absence of different armors prevents you from being able to change things up with play style. There were some upgrades that I appreciated, unique class abilities, mapping the previously used ability to the ability button, improving the cover system, research options, supper weapons, angling biotic attacks and ability combos were all great, but they would have stood out much more in Mass Effect's combat. Letting classes get access to other weapons midway through the game was kind of lame as the classes became a little less unique that way. I suppose it was necessary as weapon access seemed to be used as a way to balance classes. The cut down on abilities must have forced Bioware to carry this out to help the ability oriented classes compete. The armor, shield, barrier, health system was a bit annoying as well, because each gun had only two types. The one good at breaking shields, and the one good at breaking armor. If there had been a wider variety it might have been better, but I'm not sure.

I haven't really played three beyond the demo, so I can't say much, but from what I played it felt almost identical to the second one.

Mass Effect 2's gameplay isn't bad, but to me it doesn't feel nearly as unique an experience as Mass Effect 1. I really hope some studio expands on the work Bioware started with Mass Effect 1 as I believe it has the potential to really create an authentic and engaging RPG shooter.

 

[hazabaza1]

Ha. Hahaha. Hahahahahahahahhaha.
Ha.
You're funny.

No, Mass Effect had just really bad combat. Areas were more designed like they would have been in a "real" situation, which is good for plot, but not for slow paces gameplay.
It was also massively unbalanced. Biotics tore stuff up so there was little reason not to play one, but even if you didn't the curve was still 'start game-easy, mid game-easy to pretty difficult depending on difficulty setting, end game-easier than the start"
Guns had statistical recoil but no actual feedback. It made them all feel like nerf guns and none of the enemies reacted to being shot until they died.

The only thing I liked about ME1 combat was the non-universal cooldown. If it was more refined the larger focus on stats could have been something great but as it stands it was mediocre to bad as both a RPG combat system and a shooter combat system.

 

[Lilani]

The only thing I really appreciated about ME1's combat was the fact that the sniper rifle actually moved around when you were zoomed in. It does bother me a bit in games the way you can have a sniper rifle with the strongest scope in the game, and somehow in the middle of combat without any iron sighting you can hold that sucker perfectly still. In ME1 it felt like using the sniper rifle actually took some effort and finesse, rather than just feeling like a more accurate version of every other gun with a longer cooldown.

Everything else sucked, though. The upgrading system was totally convoluted and took way too long to mess with.

 

[Dansen]

Ha. Hahaha. Hahahahahahahahhaha.
Ha.
You're funny.

No, Mass Effect had just really bad combat. Areas were more designed like they would have been in a "real" situation, which is good for plot, but not for slow paces gameplay.
It was also massively unbalanced. Biotics tore stuff up so there was little reason not to play one, but even if you didn't the curve was still 'start game-easy, mid game-easy to pretty difficult depending on difficulty setting, end game-easier than the start"
Guns had statistical recoil but no actual feedback. It made them all feel like nerf guns and none of the enemies reacted to being shot until they died.

The only thing I liked about ME1 combat was the non-universal cooldown. If it was more refined the larger focus on stats could have been something great but as it stands it was mediocre to bad as both a RPG combat system and a shooter combat system.

It has its flaws but that still doesn't change the fact that it had some serious potential. Keep in mind its an old game, Bioware did learn some lessons. Unfortunately they decided to turn it into a pure shooter rather than fleshing out the RPG mechanics that made the game interesting. Im replaying it right now and Im having quite a bit of fun.

 

[Dryk]

I agree, I think they streamlined and mainstreamed it too much. It wasn't perfect but I really enjoyed it... apart from inventory management of course.

Also in Mass Effect 1 Paragon and Renegade were actually two different approaches, as opposed to blatant/passive-aggressive arsehole

 

[Dansen]

The only thing I really appreciated about ME1's combat was the fact that the sniper rifle actually moved around when you were zoomed in. It does bother me a bit in games the way you can have a sniper rifle with the strongest scope in the game, and somehow in the middle of combat without any iron sighting you can hold that sucker perfectly still. In ME1 it felt like using the sniper rifle actually took some effort and finesse, rather than just feeling like a more accurate version of every other gun with a longer cooldown.

Everything else sucked, though. The upgrading system was totally convoluted and took way too long to mess with.

Really? The upgrade system was fine, sure it could have been improved but it works. Hammerhead rounds with shotguns are amazing. Its the shitty inventory system that makes it annoying.

There are only three glaring problems that stick out to me.
-Crappy AI
-Convoluted inventory system, and this seems to be more of a problem with the items more than anything as there is a base pool of everything and just gradually better versions.
-Clunky movement

All these problems were addressed, but at the cost of the RPG elements. ME 2 feels like a different game in a lot of ways because of this.

 

[hazabaza1]

Ha. Hahaha. Hahahahahahahahhaha.
Ha.
You're funny.

No, Mass Effect had just really bad combat. Areas were more designed like they would have been in a "real" situation, which is good for plot, but not for slow paces gameplay.
It was also massively unbalanced. Biotics tore stuff up so there was little reason not to play one, but even if you didn't the curve was still 'start game-easy, mid game-easy to pretty difficult depending on difficulty setting, end game-easier than the start"
Guns had statistical recoil but no actual feedback. It made them all feel like nerf guns and none of the enemies reacted to being shot until they died.

The only thing I liked about ME1 combat was the non-universal cooldown. If it was more refined the larger focus on stats could have been something great but as it stands it was mediocre to bad as both a RPG combat system and a shooter combat system.

It has its flaws but that still doesn't change the fact that it had some serious potential. Keep in mind its an old game, Bioware did learn some lessons. Unfortunately they decided to turn it into a pure shooter rather than fleshing out the RPG mechanics that made the game interesting. Im replaying it right now and Im having quite a bit of fun.

I admit that it had potential, but sadly potential does not create a good game.
Most RPG/shooters have potential but I've yet to see one that really perfected the mixture. Probably the closest I can thing of it the Borderlands series, but even that's most loot based, not character based combat.

 

[Reven]

Ha. Hahaha. Hahahahahahahahhaha.
Ha.
You're funny.

No, Mass Effect had just really bad combat. Areas were more designed like they would have been in a "real" situation, which is good for plot, but not for slow paces gameplay.
It was also massively unbalanced. Biotics tore stuff up so there was little reason not to play one, but even if you didn't the curve was still 'start game-easy, mid game-easy to pretty difficult depending on difficulty setting, end game-easier than the start"
Guns had statistical recoil but no actual feedback. It made them all feel like nerf guns and none of the enemies reacted to being shot until they died.

The only thing I liked about ME1 combat was the non-universal cooldown. If it was more refined the larger focus on stats could have been something great but as it stands it was mediocre to bad as both a RPG combat system and a shooter combat system.

It has its flaws but that still doesn't change the fact that it had some serious potential. Keep in mind its an old game, Bioware did learn some lessons. Unfortunately they decided to turn it into a pure shooter rather than fleshing out the RPG mechanics that made the game interesting. Im replaying it right now and Im having quite a bit of fun.

I agree, and I also liked the fact that if you didn't train in the weapon you couldn't hit jack shit (you know, like it should be when you don't learn a weapon) while instead by mass effect 3, the only reason i would pick one gun over another is if that particular gun gave me bonus damage as a particular class, and even then i could use any gun i wanted only slightly less effectively.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

I enjoyed that there was a legitimate use for the Sniper in the game, since you could actually pull off distance combat. You weren't trapped in a tight corridor all the time like the next two games.

 

[Dansen]

Ha. Hahaha. Hahahahahahahahhaha.
Ha.
You're funny.

No, Mass Effect had just really bad combat. Areas were more designed like they would have been in a "real" situation, which is good for plot, but not for slow paces gameplay.
It was also massively unbalanced. Biotics tore stuff up so there was little reason not to play one, but even if you didn't the curve was still 'start game-easy, mid game-easy to pretty difficult depending on difficulty setting, end game-easier than the start"
Guns had statistical recoil but no actual feedback. It made them all feel like nerf guns and none of the enemies reacted to being shot until they died.

The only thing I liked about ME1 combat was the non-universal cooldown. If it was more refined the larger focus on stats could have been something great but as it stands it was mediocre to bad as both a RPG combat system and a shooter combat system.

It has its flaws but that still doesn't change the fact that it had some serious potential. Keep in mind its an old game, Bioware did learn some lessons. Unfortunately they decided to turn it into a pure shooter rather than fleshing out the RPG mechanics that made the game interesting. Im replaying it right now and Im having quite a bit of fun.

I admit that it had potential, but sadly potential does not create a good game.
Most RPG/shooters have potential but I've yet to see one that really perfected the mixture. Probably the closest I can thing of it the Borderlands series, but even that's most loot based, not character based combat.

Its true, potential doesn't make it a good game. But I can forgive it in spite of that because it is doing something different that hasn't really been tried. Its really refreshing to play a shooter on my console that actually has some strategy. If a dev could pick up the formula and improve it Im sure that it could be big, and the thing is it really wouldn't be that hard.

 

[thatonedude11]

In my opinion, the combat in Mass Effect 1 was absolutely terrible. It may have the most tactical options, but it just plain is not fun. The guns are pea shooters, movement is awkward, the lack of point specific damage (eg, headshots) makes aiming really easy, the a.i. is crap, and the levels have really basic design. Also, the upgrade system is dull, with most upgrades just being improve x ability by y percent.

Mass Effect 2 improves on this, making the guns really punchy and satisfying, improved level design, smarter and more varied enemies, and an overall faster and more fun pace.

For me though, Mass Effect 3 has the best combat in the series hands down. The movement is very slick, enemies are pretty damn smart, some really well designed levels, and the heavy melee makes close quarters combat much more interesting. In addition, the upgrade system is very satisfying, with your upgrade choices significantly altering the feel of combat.

 

[AD-Stu]

ME1 is still my favourite game in the series, but it's NOT because of the combat which managed to be clunky, broken AND exploitable. It's not such an old game that any of that can be excused by its age.

There was no variety in the weapons, and sniper rifles were basically pointless. Stripping out the weapon upgrades and customisation for ME2 was a step too far, I agree, but they brought it back in an even better form for ME3 (all of the benefits, none of the irritating inventory management). Movement, cover and squad commands were clunky. Level design was often lacking with respect to combat. With the exception of maybe two fights combat was WAY too easy, even on the highest difficulty, and the AI was super exploitable.

That's not to say that I hate it - far from it. But I don't think there's much argument that the combat only got better as the series went on.

It was also massively unbalanced. Biotics tore stuff up so there was little reason not to play one

To be fair, tech-based classes were just as overpowered: spam Overload + Sabotage + Damping = enemies with no shields, no guns and no powers to use against you = LOL win

 

[Professor Lupin Madblood]

In my opinion, the combat in Mass Effect 1 was absolutely terrible. It may have the most tactical options, but it just plain is not fun. The guns are pea shooters, movement is awkward, the lack of point specific damage (eg, headshots) makes aiming really easy, the a.i. is crap, and the levels have really basic design. Also, the upgrade system is dull, with most upgrades just being improve x ability by y percent.

Mass Effect 2 improves on this, making the guns really punchy and satisfying, improved level design, smarter and more varied enemies, and an overall faster and more fun pace.

For me though, Mass Effect 3 has the best combat in the series hands down. The movement is very slick, enemies are pretty damn smart, some really well designed levels, and the heavy melee makes close quarters combat much more interesting. In addition, the upgrade system is very satisfying, with your upgrade choices significantly altering the feel of combat.

Pretty much, though it's also worth mentioning that for every step forward ME2 made (punchier guns, less clunky movement, more balance between classes, better difficulty curves) it took one or two steps back (no gun customization, still-pretty-clunky movement, biotics got nerfed to hell, abilities were massively oversimplified). Plus, most of the combat areas were instantly recognizable as combat areas because of the massive increase in chest-high walls.

Also, the AI and enemy design improved immensely in ME3. You didn't have enemies divided between the number of health bars they had, but rather the role they filled. Like, Geth primes? The difference between an ME2 prime and an ME3 prime is night and day.

At the end of the day, though, the combat has improved throughout the series, going from a very detailed but cardboard flavour in ME1 to a great mix of visceral action and interconnected systems in ME3.

 

[Dansen]

In my opinion, the combat in Mass Effect 1 was absolutely terrible. It may have the most tactical options, but it just plain is not fun. The guns are pea shooters, movement is awkward, the lack of point specific damage (eg, headshots) makes aiming really easy, the a.i. is crap, and the levels have really basic design. Also, the upgrade system is dull, with most upgrades just being improve x ability by y percent.

Mass Effect 2 improves on this, making the guns really punchy and satisfying, improved level design, smarter and more varied enemies, and an overall faster and more fun pace.

For me though, Mass Effect 3 has the best combat in the series hands down. The movement is very slick, enemies are pretty damn smart, some really well designed levels, and the heavy melee makes close quarters combat much more interesting. In addition, the upgrade system is very satisfying, with your upgrade choices significantly altering the feel of combat.

Shrug. Its pretty much the same as far as abilities go for ME 2 as well. You just get to branch off into to two paths at the very end and even then it can simply be divided into; crowd control upgrade or burst damage upgrade. The guns feel like pea shooters? Not the shotgun or the pistol, the sfx really convey a sense of weight that each shot has. The only gun that I ever felt have kick in ME 2 was the Handflax cannon, which made it pretty fun to use admittedly. Its an old game, but at its core I feel like its more engaging experience over all, it just needs to be revamped. Yes the AI and enemy variety were kind of crap, wish it was better, but I've never got the same feeling of dread seeing a Krogan in 2, than 1.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

snip.

(if you haven't played alpha protocol, you should, it is a rpg/shooter alot like me1 in regards to how it works, it is a little bit buggier depending on who you talk to, but it should work fine and it is pretty cheap now too.)

i actually do prefer the me1 combat also, as it was an rpg first and a shooter second. also every single area felt designed not to be a hallway shooter but an actual area, even though it was cover combat based i still could play the way i wanted to play and was immersed in the world all the same.

and compared to the 2nd and 3rd game, i'll take my overly cluttered equipment and mako any day, fuck planet scanning and fuck the "lite" rpg feel of the 2nd/3rd one (yes powers were more up to snuff, but i didn't use them that much in the first one so it didn't affect me as much, i loved playing with the sniper as it didn't sit irritatingly still like it was a damn COD shooter.)

also with my first point, i felt actual progression throughout the game, at the beginning i sucked and was an average soldier, took alot more patience and guile to beat enemies, but by the end i was the god damn savior of the universe pulling off shots that would make a geth oil in its pants.

 

[thatonedude11]

snip

Shrug. Its pretty much the same as far as abilities go for ME 2 as well. You just get to branch off into to two paths at the very end and even then it can simply be divided into; crowd control upgrade or burst damage upgrade. The guns feel like pea shooters? Not the shotgun or the pistol, the sfx really convey a sense of weight that each shot has. The only gun that I ever felt have kick in ME 2 was the Handflax cannon, which made it pretty fun to use admittedly. Its an old game, but at its core I feel like its more engaging experience over all, it just needs to be revamped. Yes the AI and enemy variety were kind of crap, wish it was better, but I've never got the same feeling of dread seeing a Krogan in 2, than 1.

Okay, I'll fully admit that the upgrade system in Mass Effect 2 is pretty much crap (especially the weapon upgrades, though the 3rd game is much, much better). I also think that the 1st game did a pretty good job with the various ammo types, and the choices they offered.

In the end though, it is really personal preference. I think the combat was better in 2 & 3, others say the combat was better in 1. Whatever floats your boat.

 

[Dansen]

snip

Shrug. Its pretty much the same as far as abilities go for ME 2 as well. You just get to branch off into to two paths at the very end and even then it can simply be divided into; crowd control upgrade or burst damage upgrade. The guns feel like pea shooters? Not the shotgun or the pistol, the sfx really convey a sense of weight that each shot has. The only gun that I ever felt have kick in ME 2 was the Handflax cannon, which made it pretty fun to use admittedly. Its an old game, but at its core I feel like its more engaging experience over all, it just needs to be revamped. Yes the AI and enemy variety were kind of crap, wish it was better, but I've never got the same feeling of dread seeing a Krogan in 2, than 1.

Okay, I'll fully admit that the upgrade system in Mass Effect 2 is pretty much crap (especially the weapon upgrades, though the 3rd game is much, much better). I also think that the 1st game did a pretty good job with the various ammo types, and the choices they offered.

In the end though, it is really personal preference. I think the combat was better in 2 & 3, others say the combat was better in 1. Whatever floats your boat.

Totally, I just made the title contraversial so I could actually get a discussion going
The two approaches are both perfectly valid it's just that I wished the strong RPG aspect had been focused on rather than the shooter side.
ME 1 is really the odd one out in both game play and story, which makes it unfortunate for me because its the one I enjoyed the most.

 

[The_Lost_King]

No, Mass Effect 3 had the best combat, it was amazingly good. Mass Effect 1 automatically fails for not having the Vanguard's charge. Mass effect 1 had the best story though with Mass Effect 3 lagging behind because of that which shall not be named and then Mass Effect 2's crappy story coming in last.

 

[Spectrum_Prez]

No, Mass Effect 3 had the best combat, it was amazingly good. Mass Effect 1 automatically fails for not having the Vanguard's charge. Mass effect 1 had the best story though with Mass Effect 3 lagging behind because of that which shall not be named and then Mass Effect 2's crappy story coming in last.

For me though, Mass Effect 3 has the best combat in the series hands down. The movement is very slick, enemies are pretty damn smart, some really well designed levels, and the heavy melee makes close quarters combat much more interesting. In addition, the upgrade system is very satisfying, with your upgrade choices significantly altering the feel of combat.

The one thing I really disliked about combat in Mass Effect 3 is the lack of humanoid enemies you fight and that they seem to have taken away the mirror enemies that Mass Effect 2 had (where they used abilities that the player character also had). The Cerberus guys were pretty boring to fight, and the Reaper ones were even worse.

I miss fighting pirates and mercs as in the first two games. That was much more satisfying for some reason.

Mass Effect 1 definitely had the weakest combat for all of the reasons people have mentioned already. For me, the biggest problems were the cumbersome movement and only half-there cover mechanics. I do miss the armor classes and the individual recharge timers for the abilities, though. I was amused (and disappointed) that Ashley went from a natural heavy-armor wearing tank in ME1 to a light-armor wearing character in ME3.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Really? I think I'm in shock.

I have to admit that even after so many years on the internet, I did not see this one coming. So let's get straight to it:

1) Combat has no weight

I don't understand how anyone would think it did. Firing a gun in mass effect is not like firing a gun, it's like playing laser tag, and there are a couple of very simple reasons why.

Firstly, the way the game simulates recoil is completely abstract, you can spray away and really not feel any noticeable effect beyond your weapon becoming less accurate. Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, noone reacts to being shot.

I'm not saying every game has to fully simulate the effects of bullets on human (or alien) tissue, but a very basic reaction animation or even a grunt of pain would far more effectively convey a sense that shooting these guns is actually having some effect beyond depleting a healthbar.

2) Rubbish game balance

Seriously, this may as well be a video of me playing Mass Effect.


Okay, in any RPG it's inevitable that people will develop "optimal" and semi-exploitative strategies over time. In Mass Effect, however, you can figure those strategies out without even trying. The soldier class is by the far the worst offender here, it's hilariously easy to just get to the point where you have 80% damage resistance at all times without even factoring armor, and at that point the game may as well be over.

Not only is this kind of unfun, but it also means there's actually very little customization despite the larger range of abilities on offer, because half of them are related to playstyles which are completely useless. The most glaring example is the medical abilities, which are just pointless.. utterly pointless.

Okay, Mass Effect 3 had terrible game balance too, but it has improved slightly since release, and 2 was generally pretty good with just one glaring problem (certain classes being advantaged or disadvantaged by playing on particular difficulty levels).

3) Power spam

Because Mass Effect didn't use universal cooldowns, the opening seconds of combat would always degenerate into a process of spamming all of your powers just to get them on cooldown as quickly as possible so as to use them again. There's no real context sensitivity to it, you're very seldom going to be making tactical choices whether to use one power or another because, fuck it, you can just use them both.

The restriction of only being able to use one power at a time definitely made power using classes more fun because it gave them actual tactics beyond "acquire levels to deliver the thunderous biotic salvo of God in the first few seconds of each fight".

Really, I think all 3 games had elements in the combat system which were particularly strong but overall the original is by far the weakest (2 and 3 it's kind of a toss up. 2 had better balance, but 3 is probably more fun).