This is a really hard one for me. I love ME1 for its RPG elements, awesome characters and well-structured and paced story; I love ME2 for its exciting combat, more complex environments and equally awesome characters.
They both had faults, too: ME1 had boring, repetitive bases and planets for the optional missions, and a really annoying upgrade/inventory system - ME2 accomplished these much better, especially with the far more interesting hacking/decoding minigames (excepting, of course, the dull planet-scanning). Plus, I played a vanguard in both games, and the Charge skill in ME2 is the best and most exhilarating skill I've seen in an Action/RPG for a long time ? it really captured the essence of the vanguard's in-your-face gameplay.
ME2, though, had a dumbed-down RPG system and an inferior morality calculator, which I enjoyed less than ME1. While I liked that your Paragon/Renegade scores were influenced almost entirely by your actions, it prompted me to metagame in order to get the best result, which I disliked. I played a mostly Renegade character, but not a complete bastard, about 2/3 Renegade 1/3 Paragon. I had to choose between losing some squadmates' loyalties due to my Renegade score being too low, or betraying the ideals of my character in order to get those extra Renegade points. I really dislike this ? I want to be able to play a balanced character and not be punished for it.
ME1 allowed me to do that, because as long as I had enough points in Intimidate, I didn't need to take every opportunity to be a dick to everyone in order to maxmise my renegade score. I could -choose- when to take the extreme hard line and when to leave someone be, and thus create a realistic character who cared about some people/causes, but not about others. ME2 seemed to think that if you didn't practice your dickishness enough on everyone, you couldn't intimidate people when you really needed to.
Overall: it's so very close for me, the strengths and weaknesses of each balance themselves out. Due to its superior villain and a greater sense of pacing and structure through its story, I think I have to choose ME1.
They both had faults, too: ME1 had boring, repetitive bases and planets for the optional missions, and a really annoying upgrade/inventory system - ME2 accomplished these much better, especially with the far more interesting hacking/decoding minigames (excepting, of course, the dull planet-scanning). Plus, I played a vanguard in both games, and the Charge skill in ME2 is the best and most exhilarating skill I've seen in an Action/RPG for a long time ? it really captured the essence of the vanguard's in-your-face gameplay.
ME2, though, had a dumbed-down RPG system and an inferior morality calculator, which I enjoyed less than ME1. While I liked that your Paragon/Renegade scores were influenced almost entirely by your actions, it prompted me to metagame in order to get the best result, which I disliked. I played a mostly Renegade character, but not a complete bastard, about 2/3 Renegade 1/3 Paragon. I had to choose between losing some squadmates' loyalties due to my Renegade score being too low, or betraying the ideals of my character in order to get those extra Renegade points. I really dislike this ? I want to be able to play a balanced character and not be punished for it.
ME1 allowed me to do that, because as long as I had enough points in Intimidate, I didn't need to take every opportunity to be a dick to everyone in order to maxmise my renegade score. I could -choose- when to take the extreme hard line and when to leave someone be, and thus create a realistic character who cared about some people/causes, but not about others. ME2 seemed to think that if you didn't practice your dickishness enough on everyone, you couldn't intimidate people when you really needed to.
Overall: it's so very close for me, the strengths and weaknesses of each balance themselves out. Due to its superior villain and a greater sense of pacing and structure through its story, I think I have to choose ME1.
