They streamlined all the fun out of ME2. I'm probably skipping ME3. At least, at launch. So definitely ME1. I thought the story was compelling and the gameplay was more than "Generic Shooter But...."
Poll: Poll: Mass Effect 1 or 2? Which do you like better?
- Thread starter scorptatious
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I largely prefer the first one. Sure it wasn't perfect, but they turned it into a mediocre shooter. I found the combat to be more enjoyable in the original. The story was FAR more interesting.
I honestly don't understand what everyone sees in ME2. It's like I played a different game.
My anticipation for ME3 is quite low since I expect it to be more similar to ME2 rather than ME.
I honestly don't understand what everyone sees in ME2. It's like I played a different game.
My anticipation for ME3 is quite low since I expect it to be more similar to ME2 rather than ME.
To give a different viewpoint, here's what I see:Cursed Frogurt said:
- A more fleshed out and fully realized art design
- A substantially improved combat system (though I wish the chest-high walls would be more subtle).
- Storyline focus on the characters, rather than the Reapers, making it a more involving and personal story for Shepard.
- 12 fantastic squadmates, each developed far more than anyone in Mass Effect 1 (save maybe for Wrex).
- Introduction of many subplots that will require resolution in ME3 (genophage, Cerberus, quarian/geth war)
Mass Effect 2 is not without its faults, certainly, but it did a lot of things extremely well.
I thoroughly enjoy both games and play both frequently even now. The second is definitely superior overall in gameplay, albeit Biotics were severely underpowered if you pushed up above Veteran. In contrast, ME had a far superior main plot than its sequel. The character depth is debatable at times because while the loyalty missions of ME2 were nigh flawless in development. Some squad mates suffered horridly in lack of dialogue. None being more apparent than Mr. Calibrations. The lackluster continuity was slightly disappointing, as was no Mako/squad banter but not gamebreaking by any stretch.
for me it's a pick and mix of the two. 1 has the best RPG elements and story while 2 has the best combat system and squad controls.
hopefully 3 will have 1's story, variety of upgrades and inventory system (maybe fixed up a bit) and 2's combat. however i would bring back the feature in 1 that lets you carry all weapons but be crap with the untrained ones (though i would let you put up the scope on a sniper rifle, just with really bad steady hand issues) and NO MINING!
hopefully 3 will have 1's story, variety of upgrades and inventory system (maybe fixed up a bit) and 2's combat. however i would bring back the feature in 1 that lets you carry all weapons but be crap with the untrained ones (though i would let you put up the scope on a sniper rifle, just with really bad steady hand issues) and NO MINING!
I really enjoyed both but would put ME2 on top.
As wonky as the Mako could be I did find it to be the one aspect of ME1 that I really missed. Actually going down to the surface and exploring, plus the way it opened up side quests and more organic (if repetitive and boring) side quest areas just "felt" better than the teleport into the exact trouble spot way it was done in ME2.
I'm definitely hyped for ME3 but really am curious about how they will evolve the gameplay again (or if they'll keep it very similar to ME2).
As wonky as the Mako could be I did find it to be the one aspect of ME1 that I really missed. Actually going down to the surface and exploring, plus the way it opened up side quests and more organic (if repetitive and boring) side quest areas just "felt" better than the teleport into the exact trouble spot way it was done in ME2.
I'm definitely hyped for ME3 but really am curious about how they will evolve the gameplay again (or if they'll keep it very similar to ME2).
mass effect 1, i liked that fact that in ME1 you aren't FORCED to use cover (tho it is preferable in many cases). sometimes you'd be able to charge in without cover. but in ME2, you are basicly forced into taking cover, because if you so much take a step out of cover for 2 seconds, you get more holes in you than swiss cheese. cover-based shooters are so boring x_x
I beat Mass Effect 1 more times then I can count, but I played Mass Effect 2 with 2 different characters and never got passed the first set of Dossier files (Jack, Grunt, etc) I personally didn't think the game was fun. I missed the rpg elements from the 60 levels and more skills then you needed, to the large amount of equipment and crap piled on you hat you never needed. I also didn't care for the renegade paragon system in 2, on more occasion then one I would zone out, be doing something else, or just being clumsy and fumbling the controller when the prompt shows up and accidentally drop it when it caught me offguard and miss the prompts because it wasn't a simple option at the dialogue wheel. One thing that really upset me was the lack of exploring. with the lack of walking around on planets and fighting on them (I was a freak that actually liked the mako.) In 2 it felt like I would just be walking down a hallway and then I see a big room and say to myself "gunfight in 15 steps" then I knew it was over and I was mostly safe when I entered a hallway that just connected me to another big room for another gunfight. Sure it can be said of areas in Mass Effect 1, but it had exploring elements that broke up the formula which some people called time sinks or poor pacing, I found to be excellent pacing. The thing that drove me nuts was the mining game which I found boring an unimersive as opposed to dropping onto the planet in a tank and wrangling with giant space worm monsters, and occasional Geth and flagging ore while on the ground. Mass Effect 3 I'm not gonna by the day it comes out like I did with 2, I'm wanting to see first if it's a whole new way of doing things, or if it's going to be more of 2.
I like them both for different reasons.
I like Mass Effect for the infinite ammo, the greater amount of choices in picking powers and abilities. I didn't like how the RPG choices were limited in ME2 and I liked the greater number of powers that I could choose from. I liked the Mako sections most of the time, it made the galaxy seem bigger and it was fun. I would rather drive around the planet searching for resources than spend time scanning over it from space. I liked the variety of choices in weapons and armor, and being able to choose the load-out for my party. I was a little cumbersome at times when I gathered a lot of items and had to wade through them all periodically so I didn't run out of space.
I liked Mass Effect 2 for the combat, by which I mean I liked that taking cover was a lot easier. I didn't like the heat sinks or lack of weapon choices. But being able to more easily command your squad was a nice improvement. I liked the variety in the squad for that matter, and the backstories for each were more involved and had more meaning for me. I liked that the Normandy had more stuff in it and felt more personal than previously. I also felt that the characters outside of my party looked better and the conversations didn't seem as awkward as some did in Mass Effect.
The stories for both were great for me and I got really into them each time. I hold both of these games in my Top 10 favorites. And I am super excited for Mass Effect 3 and can't wait for it to come out.
I like Mass Effect for the infinite ammo, the greater amount of choices in picking powers and abilities. I didn't like how the RPG choices were limited in ME2 and I liked the greater number of powers that I could choose from. I liked the Mako sections most of the time, it made the galaxy seem bigger and it was fun. I would rather drive around the planet searching for resources than spend time scanning over it from space. I liked the variety of choices in weapons and armor, and being able to choose the load-out for my party. I was a little cumbersome at times when I gathered a lot of items and had to wade through them all periodically so I didn't run out of space.
I liked Mass Effect 2 for the combat, by which I mean I liked that taking cover was a lot easier. I didn't like the heat sinks or lack of weapon choices. But being able to more easily command your squad was a nice improvement. I liked the variety in the squad for that matter, and the backstories for each were more involved and had more meaning for me. I liked that the Normandy had more stuff in it and felt more personal than previously. I also felt that the characters outside of my party looked better and the conversations didn't seem as awkward as some did in Mass Effect.
The stories for both were great for me and I got really into them each time. I hold both of these games in my Top 10 favorites. And I am super excited for Mass Effect 3 and can't wait for it to come out.
both are good games but my vote goes for ME1 because i enjoyed the variety of weapons/ armor better and the story was much better. ME2 had better combat and i felt more connected to the character and the skill tree was much better but i missed the variety ME1 offered. i just feel you have to get DLC in order to really have as much content as was available in ME1.
i remember going to planets in ME1 just for side quests but in ME2 it was always for either recruiting a player or getting their loyalty mission done. while i love that concept i just missed all of the side missions that were exactly what their name entailed, a mission you have to go to the side in order to accomplish. most side missions in ME2 were "pick up this data pad while running through a recruitment mission" and i hated that.
if i had to suggest something for ME3 i would say add more weapons (at least 8 for each type), weapon stats instead of "this weapon is good/ very good...", more side quests, and NO PLANET SCANS! im sure ME3 is going to be good but i want it to be amazing and these are just my biggest concerns
i just wanted a little more RPG'ness in ME2 and it would have been my pick for GoTY
i remember going to planets in ME1 just for side quests but in ME2 it was always for either recruiting a player or getting their loyalty mission done. while i love that concept i just missed all of the side missions that were exactly what their name entailed, a mission you have to go to the side in order to accomplish. most side missions in ME2 were "pick up this data pad while running through a recruitment mission" and i hated that.
if i had to suggest something for ME3 i would say add more weapons (at least 8 for each type), weapon stats instead of "this weapon is good/ very good...", more side quests, and NO PLANET SCANS! im sure ME3 is going to be good but i want it to be amazing and these are just my biggest concerns
i just wanted a little more RPG'ness in ME2 and it would have been my pick for GoTY
I'd have to go with ME2 for this one
It may hav been streamlined a bit too much, but I was happy not to have to put huge amounts of skill points into Electronics, First Aid and Deccryption (I'm a bit obbsessive when it comes to loot, and not being able to open containers displeases me). I also found that this made biotic classes much more fun. Maybe I was playing them completly wrong but in ME1 most of my abilities ended up being used as croud control while my squadmates had all the fun
I also enjoyed the way the Collectors were done. While in the first game, you fight the geth from the start and they never really pose much of a challenge. When you first fight the collectors, (especially the first time you encounter Harbinger) the way they force you to change from "Sit behind cover and shoot till nothing moves" to something a bit more mobile. The fact that you will almost certainly die on these sections on the harder difficulties makes claim of them being a threat to the galaxy viable.
I can understand why people think the main storyline needed more attention, but I think this is mostly due to Bioware not using their usual formula. (Opening location,Second location, a series of 4 locations to be completed in any order, event after 3 have been completed, penultimate location, final battle) I was actually pleasantly surprised to find a different setup for ME2. Plus, what the game lacks in the main plotline it makes up for it in the character missions.
The boss fights were also a big thing for me. The Geth Collosus and the Thresher Maw fights were much more epic than anything in ME1 (the final fight was kinda a letdown though, because A, It looked like a giant terminator and B, I had enough ammo upgrades to make the Cain viable)
That said, I found that Harbinger was a much less impressive big bad for this game. Saren was a well written bad guy, he actually had a believable motivation, and Soveriegn, who had about 1 section of dialoge in the entire game, managed to set himself up as awesome incarnate. Harbinger never really has a moment like this until the very end of the game, and by then you have been annoyed by him constantly spouting "ASSUMING CONTROL, THIS HURTS YOU" all game. And I cant forgive the removal of the Mako
It may hav been streamlined a bit too much, but I was happy not to have to put huge amounts of skill points into Electronics, First Aid and Deccryption (I'm a bit obbsessive when it comes to loot, and not being able to open containers displeases me). I also found that this made biotic classes much more fun. Maybe I was playing them completly wrong but in ME1 most of my abilities ended up being used as croud control while my squadmates had all the fun
I also enjoyed the way the Collectors were done. While in the first game, you fight the geth from the start and they never really pose much of a challenge. When you first fight the collectors, (especially the first time you encounter Harbinger) the way they force you to change from "Sit behind cover and shoot till nothing moves" to something a bit more mobile. The fact that you will almost certainly die on these sections on the harder difficulties makes claim of them being a threat to the galaxy viable.
I can understand why people think the main storyline needed more attention, but I think this is mostly due to Bioware not using their usual formula. (Opening location,Second location, a series of 4 locations to be completed in any order, event after 3 have been completed, penultimate location, final battle) I was actually pleasantly surprised to find a different setup for ME2. Plus, what the game lacks in the main plotline it makes up for it in the character missions.
The boss fights were also a big thing for me. The Geth Collosus and the Thresher Maw fights were much more epic than anything in ME1 (the final fight was kinda a letdown though, because A, It looked like a giant terminator and B, I had enough ammo upgrades to make the Cain viable)
That said, I found that Harbinger was a much less impressive big bad for this game. Saren was a well written bad guy, he actually had a believable motivation, and Soveriegn, who had about 1 section of dialoge in the entire game, managed to set himself up as awesome incarnate. Harbinger never really has a moment like this until the very end of the game, and by then you have been annoyed by him constantly spouting "ASSUMING CONTROL, THIS HURTS YOU" all game. And I cant forgive the removal of the Mako
While I like how big Mass Effect feels, the game feels like a slog. The pacing is pretty bad, and the Mako sections make me want to avoid sidequests. Don't get me wrong, I still love the game, I just usually end up playing the main quest and that's it.
I prefer ME2, don't mind how they gutted some of the RPG features (don't get me wrong, I love those kinda things, but it really hurt ME1. They could've made a compromise without removing all of it entirely)
I prefer ME2, don't mind how they gutted some of the RPG features (don't get me wrong, I love those kinda things, but it really hurt ME1. They could've made a compromise without removing all of it entirely)
ME2 is simply more fun than ME1. I miss infinite ammo and sex without clothes on (seriously, who does it that way outside the movies?), but the loyalty missions are significantly more fun than any planet mission in ME1. Overall it just plays better. And, insanity actually feels like a test of my combat skills rather than just the sheer integrity of my build.
I say 1, the combat and gameplay mechanics were refined and (for the most part) improved in 2, but one had a better flowing story and a proper antagonist, you felt Saren's presence on every story mission, while the collectors just generally showed up as a faceless group and Harbinger, while interesting didn't leave as much of an impact as Saren did.
Plus ME1 actually had epic quests and missions that encompassed planets and took several hours to beat while ME2 had, well basically all the missions were levels, you completed them and moved on.
You got more indepth with the universe and all of the locales and the lore in Mass Effect 1, I feel that 2 was severely stripped of all this.
ME1 also ranks as my all time favorite game, so there's that.
Plus ME1 actually had epic quests and missions that encompassed planets and took several hours to beat while ME2 had, well basically all the missions were levels, you completed them and moved on.
You got more indepth with the universe and all of the locales and the lore in Mass Effect 1, I feel that 2 was severely stripped of all this.
ME1 also ranks as my all time favorite game, so there's that.