Mass Effect 2 honest thoughts and opinions and gaming tips.

[kyuzo3567]

Snip

Since most of what I would say has been said alot in this thread I'll add 2 more points: Either take Armor-piercing ammo as a bonus power or bring Garrus along all the time and choose the final Tungsten ammo upgrade. This kills everything with armor and should be on at all times.

Second, for choosing power upgrades at level-up, plan things accordingly, you only get 51 points max and to level every one of your powers to max requires 60. Your squadmates get 30-31 depending who they are and they need 40 total to max everything, so plan accordingly once you start playing and figure out how the leveling system works

 

[Qabal]

Man that took a long time to write out, I sure hope you appreciate the effort.

I, at least, appreciate the effort. I played through multiple times and never did pick up on the dick joke...


As for the OP, I'll add my 2 cents to what everyone else has been saying:

1. If you play through ME1 first, you'll get more enjoyment out of ME2, but, if you're not enjoying ME1, it's not worth the commitment. ME1 is a much longer game, and, while it has a good story, the combat is pretty terrible.

2. ME2 is essentially a cover shooter. Regardless of what class you play, gameplay is essentially - get into cover - pop up to either shoot, use a tech skill, or use a biotic power - duck back into cover. The only exception to this is a well played Vanguard (my personal favorite). If you're only going to play through once, I recommend Vanguard. If you're going through multiple times while increasing the difficulty each time, I'd save Vanguard for your insanity run. Playing a Vanguard successfully through insanity is very satisfying.

3. Whoever mentioned the choice of sniper rifles is correct regarding the Infiltrator class. They benefit the most from high powered single shot rifles, so the Viper is a poor choice for them. However, the Viper is one of the best weapons in the game for a soldier using Adrenaline Rush.

4. As for DLC, they vary in quality. Overlord is ok. Stolen Memory is a little better, but, seeing as it adds Kasumi as another party member, I recommend it. The beginning of ME3 will make more sense if you get the Arrival dlc, but the dlc itself isn't very good. Lair of the Shadow Broker, on the other hand, is the best part of the series. This is all just my opinion, of course...

 

[votemarvel]

But even then, there were people who had their complaints about the rover/tank because almost every planet you land on, you'll land in the middle of a giant, jagged mountain range that makes navigating it rather tedious.

A complaint I honestly never understood.

Providing you used the map to plot your route, you could bypass almost all the tough terrain. Were people trying to drive in a straight line everywhere?

Mapping out a path could make sense but in some cases that meant driving in obscure directions and going completely around a large craggy mountain in a big barren area to another barren area just to get through to the next barren area that may have a pass to a barren area that will let you access the barren area where the way to the barren area you wanted to go for those Asari Writings. It was tedious either way and at least playing tumble-tank on a cliff-side was something marginally less tedious than repeatedly hitting hover out of boredom for the 10 minutes it took to figure out and navigate one's way through an array of exciting barren areas.

Yet if you used the map and drove in those obscure directions you'd reach your destination, whatever that may be, in a far quicker time than trying to force your way across the map in a straight line.

 

[votemarvel]

You have to admit that the combat in ME1 was very clunky, and that ME2 had some very smooth and fluid combat. Although ME2 also had some of the most unimaginative level design ever. However if you remember how many times ME1 combat situations happened in prefab space colonies or ships corridors during most of the side missions and a good deal of the main missions you can see that level design is a problem they had from the beginning. Granted some of the main missions like Ilos and Virmire were some of the best levels in the series.

I don't because to me it is the one where I always felt that something was happening. Bear in mind that I play mostly as an Adept.

I enter a room and shoot the explosive canister. I duck into cover and shoot the next guy to appear and use Singularity to snatch a sniper out from behind his cover. Throw gets rid of the Krogan who had decided to charge at me and I turn instantly to use Lift on the guy who worked his way behind. I then enter the room proper to take care of the last couple of enemies, damage taken is reduced with Shield Boost and Barrier, and watch happily as they shatter from my Cryo-Rounds.

That's Mass Effect 1.

Here's what happens in the second game. I enter the room and shoot the explosive cannister, my shields vanish instantly because every enemy can target and hit me perfectly. I then get the fun of sitting there and spamming the same handful of biotic combos over and over and over and over and over again from behind the comfort of my chest high wall. Why because now biotics do damn near nothing to enemies with protection and if you play on the higher difficulties everyone has them, including the Husks.

If Mass Effect 1 is the clunky game, then I'll be taking that every time.

 

[Bocaj2000]

Simplified the mood and tone

I'm not actually sure what you mean by this.

I could go down the list one by one and counter your arguments, but this is where the problem is. Everything you discussed is about min-maxing, power gaming, and being munchkin. The fact you don't recognize what mood and tone are only proves that you don't understand what my complaints are in the first place. Mood and tone are about subtleties and how many parts work together as a whole. Also, based on what you have said, you seem not to care much for roleplaying; you see only one possibility based on stats, while I see many based on what kind of character I want Shepard to be.

I don't want to argue over opinions, so instead, I'm going to only talk about a few situations in which you are simply wrong:

Loyalty that makes sense
-If you get Wrex's family armor, you don't have to max your diplomacy stat. He is loyal to you and will back down. This is a direct logical conclusion to gaining his loyalty. Contrast that to how the loyalty in ME2 has an illogical indirect result of getting shot while trying to close a door.

Peaceful missions
-There are many side quests that can be resolved without violence. For example, how you handle the Salarian that gets thrown out of Flux for cheating. There's also the time in which I talked down a girl who was going to kill herself and/or C-SEC. There was also the time I talked down a cult leader. It's not huge, but it's nice to have diplomacy missions or at least diplomatic endings to missions. I can't name a single one in ME2 that ended diplomatically.

Terrorism
-You blew up an entire Batarian solar system!!!!! That's terrorism!

Like I said, I really don't want to go 100% tit for tat even though I could. It gets us no where. If you disagree, then disagree with the argument as a whole, not my details. Nitpicking gets you nowhere.

 

[Qabal]

You have to admit that the combat in ME1 was very clunky, and that ME2 had some very smooth and fluid combat. Although ME2 also had some of the most unimaginative level design ever. However if you remember how many times ME1 combat situations happened in prefab space colonies or ships corridors during most of the side missions and a good deal of the main missions you can see that level design is a problem they had from the beginning. Granted some of the main missions like Ilos and Virmire were some of the best levels in the series.

I don't because to me it is the one where I always felt that something was happening. Bear in mind that I play mostly as an Adept.

I enter a room and shoot the explosive canister. I duck into cover and shoot the next guy to appear and use Singularity to snatch a sniper out from behind his cover. Throw gets rid of the Krogan who had decided to charge at me and I turn instantly to use Lift on the guy who worked his way behind. I then enter the room proper to take care of the last couple of enemies, damage taken is reduced with Shield Boost and Barrier, and watch happily as they shatter from my Cryo-Rounds.

That's Mass Effect 1.

Here's what happens in the second game. I enter the room and shoot the explosive cannister, my shields vanish instantly because every enemy can target and hit me perfectly. I then get the fun of sitting there and spamming the same handful of biotic combos over and over and over and over and over again from behind the comfort of my chest high wall. Why because now biotics do damn near nothing to enemies with protection and if you play on the higher difficulties everyone has them, including the Husks.

If Mass Effect 1 is the clunky game, then I'll be taking that every time.

Biotics may be less godly in ME2 than they are in ME1, I definitely prefer the biotic explosion mechanics of ME2. Warp + Throw works just as well on protected enemies as it does on unprotected. I understand your point though. Biotic mechanics are more a matter of preference. Gun mechanics, however, are greatly improved. A headshot and a body shot did exactly the same damage in ME1. Not being able to headshot kind of kills the enjoyment of playing a sniper, at least for me. Of course, you could always turn your sniper rifle into a rocket launcher that overheats after every shot if you were so inclined...

 

[ShinyCharizard]

I really, really, really enjoyed Mass Effect 2. It just had a great atmosphere to it.

 

[votemarvel]

Biotics may be less godly in ME2 than they are in ME1, I definitely prefer the biotic explosion mechanics of ME2. Warp + Throw works just as well on protected enemies as it does on unprotected. I understand your point though. Biotic mechanics are more a matter of preference. Gun mechanics, however, are greatly improved. A headshot and a body shot did exactly the same damage in ME1. Not being able to headshot kind of kills the enjoyment of playing a sniper, at least for me. Of course, you could always turn your sniper rifle into a rocket launcher that overheats after every shot if you were so inclined...

I like the biotic explosions. I don't like being reduced to just relying on them in combat. Sure Warp and Throw works but when you've had to use it several times, on one enemy, to actually get to the point you can start reducing their health...then yes they start losing their appeal rather quickly.

Now I don't disagree completely with the shooting in Mass Effect 1. What I was hoping for the second was that they'd be taking into account where you hit on the body with the dice-roll, not just that you'd hit them. Instead they just removed the system entirely and to me that was a misstep.

 

[Qabal]

Biotics may be less godly in ME2 than they are in ME1, I definitely prefer the biotic explosion mechanics of ME2. Warp + Throw works just as well on protected enemies as it does on unprotected. I understand your point though. Biotic mechanics are more a matter of preference. Gun mechanics, however, are greatly improved. A headshot and a body shot did exactly the same damage in ME1. Not being able to headshot kind of kills the enjoyment of playing a sniper, at least for me. Of course, you could always turn your sniper rifle into a rocket launcher that overheats after every shot if you were so inclined...

I like the biotic explosions. I don't like being reduced to just relying on them in combat. Sure Warp and Throw works but when you've had to use it several times, on one enemy, to actually get to the point you can start reducing their health...then yes they start losing their appeal rather quickly.

Now I don't disagree completely with the shooting in Mass Effect 1. What I was hoping for the second was that they'd be taking into account where you hit on the body with the dice-roll, not just that you'd hit them. Instead they just removed the system entirely and to me that was a misstep.

I enjoyed the fact that the combat went more the way of a shooter and less rpg (dice roll) oriented. Don't get me wrong, I love a good dice roll, but I prefer it in a turn based environment. If I need to actually aim at something, I want the game to take in account my ability to aim as opposed to coming down to a random roll of the dice.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

Everything you discussed is about min-maxing, power gaming, and being munchkin.

Nope, my argument was predicated on the fact that the original's equipent and stats did not confer choice except in that there was always a most efficient choice. Take the skill system, for example. In the first game, you had to invest lots of points into a skill before it resulted in a meaningful difference. By that, I mean something you could note - how many bullets a weapon would take to get a kill, how many shots you could absorb, etc. In the second game you are given relatively few points to spend but each one produces a significant and notable effect on the game.

The fact you don't recognize what mood and tone are only proves that you don't understand what my complaints are in the first place.

I recognize what the are; however, you did not provide any example of difference in tone or mood. Nor did you describe how that difference was a net loss. Ergo, your argument has no basis.

Also, based on what you have said, you seem not to care much for roleplaying; you see only one possibility based on stats, while I see many based on what kind of character I want Shepard to be.

I'm perfectly fine with roleplaying. Nothing I stated indicated otherwise.

Loyalty that makes sense
-If you get Wrex's family armor, you don't have to max your diplomacy stat. He is loyal to you and will back down. This is a direct logical conclusion to gaining his loyalty. Contrast that to how the loyalty in ME2 has an illogical indirect result of getting shot while trying to close a door.

It really isn't illogical. A soldier who is not loyal might not move as fast when given an order or be so keen to put himself at risk to save a person they don't know they can trust. Indeed, loyalt (or, as it is otherwise known in this context, comraderie), is a fundamental trait of any army since the dawn of time. Without it, unit cohesion and effectiveness across the board suffer.

-There are many side quests that can be resolved without violence. For example, how you handle the Salarian that gets thrown out of Flux for cheating. There's also the time in which I talked down a girl who was going to kill herself and/or C-SEC. There was also the time I talked down a cult leader. It's not huge, but it's nice to have diplomacy missions or at least diplomatic endings to missions. I can't name a single one in ME2 that ended diplomatically.

Ah, yes, the "side quests". Sure, some of those end peacefully. There are a few along the main quest as well (Feros for example). You might think that suitable; however, the storylines presented in Mass Effect 2 simply did not offer scenarios were non-violence was likely. Sure, the was Jacob's loyalty mission resoultion or Miranda's or Mordus. But those don't count, right?

Terrorism
-You blew up an entire Batarian solar system!!!!! That's terrorism!

No, actually it isn't. You blew up a solar system in order to deny an avenue of advance to the enemy. That's just plain ol' warfare. Terrorism, by definition involves directing force with the aim of using fear to affect a political process. It also happened as a request of the alliance rather than Cerberus.

 

[SanguiniusMagnificum]

Honest opnion? It's the best Star Trek game that has absolutely nothing to do with Star Trek. You get your own ship, a crew and a basic mission, which equals to "gather a badass crew of different humans, aliens and robot(s) and kick ass", and all of that with some great atmosphere and gameplay (even though it was a little bit too streamlined). It's a simple formula, but goddamn, I had so much fun with it, just faffing about in space, blowing shit up and basically behaving like Dirty Harry IN SPESS!!!

 

[votemarvel]

I enjoyed the fact that the combat went more the way of a shooter and less rpg (dice roll) oriented. Don't get me wrong, I love a good dice roll, but I prefer it in a turn based environment. If I need to actually aim at something, I want the game to take in account my ability to aim as opposed to coming down to a random roll of the dice.

What you don't like about the shooting is exactly what I do.

I liked that stats were just as important as my ability to place a cross-hair. I liked that the enemies were constrained by the same system and didn't have the perfect accuracy that they gained in the two sequels.

Was the system perfect? No of course not. But it needed to be improved, not removed.

 

[Mikeyfell]

Hello fellow Escapist, I just recent brought Mass Effect 2 and wanted to experience first hand what the series was about and looking to get Mass Effect 3 once i have complicated this game.

I like the typo, but I would recommend not playing Mass Effect 3. The story is a complete mess, the writing is tacky as fuck and the controls are so bad the game is borderline unplayable for anything but a biotic class.
Ending the series with ME2 is the best possible outcome.

Four hours in already and I am really liking the feel and story of the game and characters background. I'm a huge fan of RPG and Third person gaming with a great story behind it and I was wondering for those who have played ME2, what are your honest thoughts and opinions about the game. Also if or any tips and pointers you can give me about the gameplay I would really appreciate it.

Note I havent played ME1 as I haven't gotten a copy of that for my PS3.

Thank you all.

My opinion on ME 2 is that it's the best in the series over all, but mostly because of the wildly improved gameplay streamlined leveling system.

ME 1's shooting was stogy, and the powers for Tech and Biotic classes were useless. and the leveling system was a nightmare.

ME 2 fixed those things they made the run and gun parts a lot smoother, (Weapons besides the starting pistol mattered)
Thermal Clips were stupid and putting sprint and take cover on the same button is the kind of thing developers should get their thumbs cut off for, but I had too much fun arcing incinerate over cover and popping invisible headshots to be too cross about it (Infiltrator was my favorite class). The leveling system was better too. every upgrade I spent points on actually made the character better. where in ME 1 I had to get 4 or 5 upgrades at a time to even notice the boost, if that.
Gameplay wise Mass Effect 2 is awesome

Writing between the two games is more split ME 1 is better by a bit in my opinion, mostly because you only have 5 characters and you get to talk to them a lot. You got a pretty big conversation section in between every mission

In 2 you have 12 characters and you get to talk to them 3 or 4 times each (Unless you're trying to romance them then you get a lot more chances to talk to them)
But with like 24 main missions and 4 conversations per team mate there's a lot of quiet time "Can it wait for a bit- I'm in the middle of some calibrations" You will hear that a lot. And there are a couple of dead weight characters in ME 2, but the good ones more than make up for it.


In terms of story and plot.... well Mass Effect 2 doesn't do it very well at all.
You're enjoying the story right now so I don't want to rain on your parade. If you ever want to see a very good clinical analysis of the ME 2 story (Or lack there of) watch Smudboy's video on the subject If you don't like that sort of thing I'll just say ME 1 had a much better plot and leave it at that.

 

[Bocaj2000]

The fact you don't recognize what mood and tone are only proves that you don't understand what my complaints are in the first place.

I recognize what the are; however, you did not provide any example of difference in tone or mood. Nor did you describe how that difference was a net loss. Ergo, your argument has no basis.

I haven't expanded my points, because I didn't know if I'd have to. But so far, I'm the only one who has an argument. What are you trying to prove? All you're doing is going tit-for-tat, and I refuse to continue a conversation in that format. I have given you plenty of material, and you are well aware of my opinion. You know my thesis, main points, and conclusion. But all I have from you are counter-points. From my perspective, you're arguing for the sake of arguing. Sorry that I made false assumptions, but you have given me nothing to work with. So I ask kindly: What do you think about this topic as a whole?

 

[Inferus Eques]

I had a lot of fun in ME2. That being said I hated how they nerfed the Adepts for the combat system. Singularity was USELESS. I know it was insanely overpowered in ME1 but the power in ME2 was useless against all enemies in higher difficulties. I had a lot of fun as an infiltrator though. If you do get ME1, play as an Adept and put a lot of points in Singularity. Almost breaks the combat but it's hilarious as heck in some fights. The atmosphere in both games was top notch. The mako in ME1 you'll both love and hate, but the planet scanning was just as annoying in some cases. I can't say anything about ME3 though. I'm trying to save money, which is a cruel thing in the middle of the Steam summer sale.

 

[O maestre]

if you can remember, could you give some example of the stories subtleties?

You mean including or excluding the dick joke?

Spoiler: Mass Effect 2 Spoilers

First and foremost the one that most people miss is the Legion having emotions thing, it gets brought up regularly that Mass Effect 3 crams him full of emotion with no real reason despite the fact that the very first thing in the game is say something that lends itself to emotion.
Him saying 'Shepard Commander' instead of 'Commander Shepard' is interesting since he understands the concept that Titles go before Names, and follows this with everyone else (Creator Tali) but doesn't do that with the Commander, because the Commander part is irrelevant to the Geth as he's the best at killing the old machines.
When inquired as to why he's wearing your N7 armor on his chest his response is "There was a hole" fitting with the robot logic, if there is a problem (hole), make a solution (armor). So to Legion the idea is that he's already solved that issue so it logically can't be a problem. However as we all know he's got that huge gaping hole in his chest still since the armor was not sufficient to cover it, so Shepard probes for further information as to why did he use the N7 armor instead of something more sufficient, which gets the response of "No data is available at this time." as he doesn't understand why he didn't use something else, but the audience is supposed to know, as it's rather obvious that he's a Shepard fanboy, essentially cosplaying as Shepard by using his armor. Hell, he went on a tour of the galaxy following where Shepard went despite knowing where the end was, why not just go straight there instead of touring the galaxy following the footsteps?
That's also not even mentioning the fact that the opposing Geth get referred to as Heretics.
Heretics are those that commit heresy, or the act of perverting the religious doctrine or belief. This is an emotional term prescribed to an emotional event, though the Geth don't understand that because they've never experienced what emotion is.

Now onto Miranda. Right after you escape from the initial Cerberus base you can learn from her that she was actually planning on putting a control chip into Shepard to make them obedient, but the Illusive man did not let her. Given some time and having her warm up to you somewhat later in the story, she tells you about her father and how much he just wants to control her, completely missing the part where she was willing to do the exact same as him. Shepard's too nice to point it out to her that she's just like her father, but since so few people actually got that they made it into an actual plotpoint in ME3 specifically for her telling you that and apologising.

As for the dick joke, if you go to the Flotilla and talk to Admiral Bla de Blah Vas Quib Quib, Tali will tell you not to ask about the Quib Quib. But of course since she told you to not talk about the Quib Quib, Shepard obviously is going to ask about the Quib Quib, so you proceed to ask about the Quib Quib, to which the Admiral goes on this long rant about how names are hard to change on some ships so they end up just keeping weird names on their vessels.
"Sure, I'd like to serve on a more dignified vessel, like the Ichtomy or the Deferens, but I'm proud of the Quib Quib."
Because as the naming conventions of the Quarians go, that would make his name Vas Ichtomy and Vas Deferens. Vasectomy or Vas Deferens. (don't google Vas Deferens, it's a part of the penis)

Man that took a long time to write out, I sure hope you appreciate the effort.

Spoiler: I do not think that spoiler tag is necessary after so long, but ok

Thanks man, I didn't catch the Miranda's hypocrisy bit. I do remember the vasectomy thing though, now that you mention it Legion being a fanboy was a given if any interest was shown to the bot(s), hell he even had some "facial" expressions due to his head flaps.

 

[Radoh]

if you can remember, could you give some example of the stories subtleties?

You mean including or excluding the dick joke?

Spoiler: Mass Effect 2 Spoilers

First and foremost the one that most people miss is the Legion having emotions thing, it gets brought up regularly that Mass Effect 3 crams him full of emotion with no real reason despite the fact that the very first thing in the game is say something that lends itself to emotion.
Him saying 'Shepard Commander' instead of 'Commander Shepard' is interesting since he understands the concept that Titles go before Names, and follows this with everyone else (Creator Tali) but doesn't do that with the Commander, because the Commander part is irrelevant to the Geth as he's the best at killing the old machines.
When inquired as to why he's wearing your N7 armor on his chest his response is "There was a hole" fitting with the robot logic, if there is a problem (hole), make a solution (armor). So to Legion the idea is that he's already solved that issue so it logically can't be a problem. However as we all know he's got that huge gaping hole in his chest still since the armor was not sufficient to cover it, so Shepard probes for further information as to why did he use the N7 armor instead of something more sufficient, which gets the response of "No data is available at this time." as he doesn't understand why he didn't use something else, but the audience is supposed to know, as it's rather obvious that he's a Shepard fanboy, essentially cosplaying as Shepard by using his armor. Hell, he went on a tour of the galaxy following where Shepard went despite knowing where the end was, why not just go straight there instead of touring the galaxy following the footsteps?
That's also not even mentioning the fact that the opposing Geth get referred to as Heretics.
Heretics are those that commit heresy, or the act of perverting the religious doctrine or belief. This is an emotional term prescribed to an emotional event, though the Geth don't understand that because they've never experienced what emotion is.

Now onto Miranda. Right after you escape from the initial Cerberus base you can learn from her that she was actually planning on putting a control chip into Shepard to make them obedient, but the Illusive man did not let her. Given some time and having her warm up to you somewhat later in the story, she tells you about her father and how much he just wants to control her, completely missing the part where she was willing to do the exact same as him. Shepard's too nice to point it out to her that she's just like her father, but since so few people actually got that they made it into an actual plotpoint in ME3 specifically for her telling you that and apologising.

As for the dick joke, if you go to the Flotilla and talk to Admiral Bla de Blah Vas Quib Quib, Tali will tell you not to ask about the Quib Quib. But of course since she told you to not talk about the Quib Quib, Shepard obviously is going to ask about the Quib Quib, so you proceed to ask about the Quib Quib, to which the Admiral goes on this long rant about how names are hard to change on some ships so they end up just keeping weird names on their vessels.
"Sure, I'd like to serve on a more dignified vessel, like the Ichtomy or the Deferens, but I'm proud of the Quib Quib."
Because as the naming conventions of the Quarians go, that would make his name Vas Ichtomy and Vas Deferens. Vasectomy or Vas Deferens. (don't google Vas Deferens, it's a part of the penis)

Man that took a long time to write out, I sure hope you appreciate the effort.

Spoiler: I do not think that spoiler tag is necessary after so long, but ok

Thanks man, I didn't catch the Miranda's hypocrisy bit. I do remember the vasectomy thing though, now that you mention it Legion being a fanboy was a given if any interest was shown to the bot(s), hell he even had some "facial" expressions due to his head flaps.

Ah yes, the adorable little head flap things.
But I feel as the context for this thread would make sense to have the spoiler tags since the OP clearly has yet to play it.
Not so much for the people in general as much as it was a courtesy to someone getting into the series.

 

[O maestre]

You have to admit that the combat in ME1 was very clunky, and that ME2 had some very smooth and fluid combat. Although ME2 also had some of the most unimaginative level design ever. However if you remember how many times ME1 combat situations happened in prefab space colonies or ships corridors during most of the side missions and a good deal of the main missions you can see that level design is a problem they had from the beginning. Granted some of the main missions like Ilos and Virmire were some of the best levels in the series.

I don't because to me it is the one where I always felt that something was happening. Bear in mind that I play mostly as an Adept.

I enter a room and shoot the explosive canister. I duck into cover and shoot the next guy to appear and use Singularity to snatch a sniper out from behind his cover. Throw gets rid of the Krogan who had decided to charge at me and I turn instantly to use Lift on the guy who worked his way behind. I then enter the room proper to take care of the last couple of enemies, damage taken is reduced with Shield Boost and Barrier, and watch happily as they shatter from my Cryo-Rounds.

That's Mass Effect 1.

Here's what happens in the second game. I enter the room and shoot the explosive cannister, my shields vanish instantly because every enemy can target and hit me perfectly. I then get the fun of sitting there and spamming the same handful of biotic combos over and over and over and over and over again from behind the comfort of my chest high wall. Why because now biotics do damn near nothing to enemies with protection and if you play on the higher difficulties everyone has them, including the Husks.

If Mass Effect 1 is the clunky game, then I'll be taking that every time.

Fair enough, no body has the same experience or interests and if anyone got hit hard by the gimp stick between ME1 and ME2 it was the adept. Most people however agree that the intention of ME1 was a cover based tactical shooter, since most of the other classes, at least on the higher difficulties had to get to cover one way or another. I may not have a picture perfect recall of ME1's combat gameplay but I do remember it being more of a chore than actual fun. Adhering to a chest high wall or a wall sometimes failed miserably in ME1, but often enough you didn't even really need to protect yourself, all you had to do was min-max your equipment and let the numbers do the work for you. ME2 brought player skill to the combat and the adrenaline of being vulnerable at every engagement. What I miss about ME1 is the exploration aspect and the illusion of not being linear and giving you some choice in where and how to approach combat. In ME2 and 3 you don't get rewarded for exploring, instead it rewarded you with tactical thinking as enemies actually used the environment for protection or tried to flank you collectively, in ME1 enemies just wandered around like a shooting gallery unless they got glitched on a wall. ME2 was also faster and more fluid in accessing your powers and executing them, despite the awful global cool down.

In the end it is all opinion, and most people agree that combat was not as enjoyable in the first game, and if you are bored than something is wrong. I feel for you man the Sentinel got the gimp stick in ME3 as well due to changes, and the changes to the adept between 1 and 2 was the worst,since the adepts powers were not "adapted" to being useful for a shooter.

 

[O maestre]

You have to admit that the combat in ME1 was very clunky, and that ME2 had some very smooth and fluid combat.

Well, I don't disagree that the shooting aspect of the shooty bits could have used some polish and that accuracy could have been divorced from the weapon skill (though, I actually *liked* the sniper rifle sway), I disagree with your assessment of ME2's smoothness and fluidity.

The scarcity of ammo, despite ammo being unlimited in ME1. The shared power timer, despite them being independent in ME1. The rather unreliable cover button, that would just as likely cause you to dive for cover as well as vault over the cover to die in a hail of bullets. The insistence of suck your thumb in a corner to fully recover your wounds, instead of using Medigels.

Although ME2 also had some of the most unimaginative level design ever. However if you remember how many times ME1 combat situations happened in prefab space colonies or ships corridors during most of the side missions and a good deal of the main missions you can see that level design is a problem they had from the beginning.

But, you also had combat planet side. Where as an Infiltrator I could wipe out an entire legion of Geth, including their heavies, from the next atop the next hill over.

Line up shot. Inhale. Exhale. Bang. One shot, one kill.

I thought the cover worked pretty well in ME2 and most animations flowed well into each other, and powers could be fired efficiently without slowing things down, while ME1 felt disjointed. I missed the disc grenades though and the overheating system though. To be fair sucking your thumb in a corner where actual danger was around said corner was better than being indestructible, I didn't use medi-gel in either game, in ME3 they corrected this through health bars which is a lot like the first games system, but combined with the punishing fast paced combat of the second. I just remember combat being on the boring side in ME1.

I agree on the level design, some few ME1 levels rewarded you for exploring and finding novel places to engage enemies, while ME2 was brutally linear. I even mentioned that in my first post, Ilos and Virmire are good examples and your own of the ability to get out of the mako, and it is a shame that they threw out this aspect. On the other hand your sniping example is highlighting some of the problems in ME1. Why would anyone let alone machines stand still while a sniper picks the off 1 by 1? the AI was really dumb in the first game. BTW kudos on the "legion of geth" pun

But overall I didn't snooze through combat in ME2 like I did in ME1 even on the higher difficulties.